UKBouldering.com

the shizzle => shootin' the shit => Topic started by: petejh on November 05, 2016, 10:31:38 pm

Title: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: petejh on November 05, 2016, 10:31:38 pm
In case anyone hasn't heard the 'You've Been Trumped Too' documentary is available to watch on facebook here: -

https://www.facebook.com/youvebeentrumpedtoo/videos/1207455525956400/


There's a 15 minutes interview with the director at the beginning. The film itself starts around 18 mins.


 :worms:


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 06, 2016, 06:06:11 pm
I have a ringside seat at this election and it is very, very ugly. Everyone here is on edge and I think people are fearful about both what might happen on Tuesday itself and in the aftermath, whatever the result. I can't wait for it to be over (not that it will be over).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 06, 2016, 10:20:50 pm
They've just announced the FBI's retraction of allegations against HRC, here, this Sunday evening. Pretty scary that they seem to be doing Trumps bidding. He has his Gestapo all ready and Comey is playing Himmler.
Anschluss of Canada by 2018?

"Sound of music" this is not.

Mind you, here we have:

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161106/fd84f5c423dd58b3ec8c5c2f741cd3ef.jpg)

So the right is rising across the Western world.

Melodramatic? Possibly, but if I'd written the same things in 1935/36ish, you'd have said the same.

Edit:

That photo contrasts a 1933(ish) headline in Hitlers pet paper, a Daily Fail piece from the same period and last weeks headlines.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 07, 2016, 07:32:00 am
They've just announced the FBI's retraction of allegations against HRC, here, this Sunday evening. Pretty scary that they seem to be doing Trumps bidding. He has his Gestapo all ready and Comey is playing Himmler.

And lets not forget in the week while that "scandal" was live a lot of the early voting was going on.

Bookies are still giving it to H-dawg comfortably.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tommytwotone on November 07, 2016, 08:47:57 am
Bookies are still giving it to H-dawg comfortably.


I may be being excessively paranoid but don't forget the bookies all called Brexit (and to a certain extent the UK General Election 2016) wrong as well.


Trump still available in and around 4/1 if you're looking for an emotional hedge bet.



Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 07, 2016, 08:58:28 am
Bookies are still giving it to H-dawg comfortably.


I may be being excessively paranoid but don't forget the bookies all called Brexit (and to a certain extent the UK General Election 2016) wrong as well.

Don't remind me.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 07, 2016, 10:15:41 am
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161107/be89991fef1ddc1763adc543345a49a6.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 07, 2016, 02:08:28 pm
Bookies are still giving it to H-dawg comfortably.


I may be being excessively paranoid but don't forget the bookies all called Brexit (and to a certain extent the UK General Election 2016) wrong as well.

Don't remind me.

This thought haunts me pretty much constantly.

This whole phenomenon is both deeply disturbing and deeply confusing. I'm living in the 3rd largest city in Pennsylvania. This place has lost a lot of manufacturing jobs in the last thirty years. But it is not a basket case and regeneration is starting to happen. The (largely white) suburbs look like the American dream personified: substantial detached homes, everything neat and orderly, lawns all kept mown etc. Trump yard signs dot these neighbourhoods. These people are not suffering - for the most part they're not the poorly educated blue collar workers left behind by deindustrialization. But they seem to feel oppressed and paranoid. Downtown is overwhelmingly Puerto Rican, a population change that didn't start happening until the 1970s (at that point the place was 99% white) - they will vote Clinton, as will the city as a whole. The rural areas are deeply conservative and Trump signs abound. But again, this is not dirt poor Appalachia, these people have seen no meaningful threat or change to their way of life.

I think Clinton will shade it but I'm counting no chickens. People are seriously on edge. The potential for trouble tomorrow is real and in the aftermath, assuming Trump loses, there is going to be very widespread refusal to acknowledge the outcome. His most committed supporters are absolute zealots. They live in a world in which up is down and black is white.

In the meantime, we're going to take our daughters down to Philadelphia this evening for a rally featuring Hillary and Bill, Obama and Michelle, Bruce Springsteen and Jon Bon Jovi! Here's hoping for an historic day tomorrow.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tommytwotone on November 07, 2016, 03:12:44 pm
Hate the guy but I think 4/1 is value considering 538 are giving him a much better chance (approx half those odds) of the win.


Many, many undecideds, general rightwards sentiment trending worldwide, Republican party experience in getting the win at all costs (Florida for Dubya anyone?)...think I'll stick a £20 I'd be happy to lose on it.


Will be plenty to be made by those that know what they're doing spread betting the markets as well. Mate of mine made about £3k Brexit night after the slide to a Leave vote became inevitable.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: al on November 07, 2016, 04:47:00 pm
listened to this today, seems relevant in a tenuous way
http://www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episode-757-sam-quinones (http://www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episode-757-sam-quinones)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 07, 2016, 04:49:49 pm
It seems as though so many Westerners are deeply troubled by the idea that erstwhile 3rd world countries (read: Colonies) could be drawing level. As if the only thing that made the inequality in the west tolerable, was the knowledge that the lowest strata were still "superior" (please read that with a spitting sound at the end) to those "foreign Johnies" (substitute with racist epithet of choice) and reality is giving that world view a serious dose of laxative.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 07, 2016, 04:54:26 pm
Republican party experience in getting the win at all costs (Florida for Dubya anyone?).

Except that he has thoroughly alienated much of the Republican party machine and hasn't bothered building his own ground game. Like I said, I live in the third largest city in a state he has to win and he has literally no organization on the ground here. That is not true of the Democrats.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on November 07, 2016, 07:21:22 pm
Trump's voters are richer than Hillary's voter. Always were, always will be.

I've never before invested myself in the outcome of USA's presidential election, and I've always thought that most europeans who do are a bit daft. This time it feels much more important, and whatever the results will turn out to be this election will change the global politics.

E.g. we know that the american world order rest on a wafer-thin 50/50 margin. Europe will probably break away from letting US lead the free world. Japan will almost surely re-arm, as they have surely lost their fate in US's protection against their near threats.

(In France, the presidential election will probably be between Juppé and Le Pen, which Juppé should win handily, or between Sarkozy  and Le Pen which probably—nay, almost surely—will be won by Marine.)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 08, 2016, 09:09:30 pm
Well, here we go.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Doylo on November 08, 2016, 09:20:18 pm
At least Dense and PeteJh can't vote for Trump  :lol:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 08, 2016, 09:45:30 pm
I thought Dense was Trump?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 08, 2016, 09:52:48 pm
At least Dense and PeteJh can't vote for Trump  :lol:

Don't tar people with that brush Doylo just becasue they don't follow the majority ukb view on Brexit.

Trump's a fascist sociopathic total cunt and I wish people weren't so easily hoodwinked by that fascist demagogue.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Doylo on November 08, 2016, 10:16:52 pm
At least Dense and PeteJh can't vote for Trump  :lol:

Don't tar people with that brush Doylo just becasue they don't follow the majority ukb view on Brexit.

 :P I was being facetious, I didn't think you'd vote Trump. Dense on the other hand....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on November 08, 2016, 10:17:35 pm
Trump's voters are richer than Hillary's voter. Always were, always will be.

Really? That is quite an odd assertion. Everything else I have read contradicts that.

Alas, a lot of nonsense is written about this. GOP voters have high wages, Democrats low wages.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/

Better data will be available from exit polls, but I would be shocked if they showed that average salary for GOP voters and Democrats have switched in this election.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on November 08, 2016, 10:30:49 pm
Yes. The median is the best descriptive parameter for wages (I was sloppy above, sorry). This is clear from looking at real income distributions (which are heavily right skewed due to people selling the family-farm, and a fairly big bunch of extraordinarily productive people like Gareth Bale etc).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 08, 2016, 11:28:30 pm
The (largely white) suburbs look like the American dream personified: substantial detached homes, everything neat and orderly, lawns all kept mown etc. Trump yard signs dot these neighbourhoods.

Driving through Washington state and Oregon en route to Smith last month, we saw no Clinton signs but plenty for Trump. We felt that we couldn't infer anything from that observation - no one seriously thinks Trump has a hope in either state.

No, he's not going to win here either. But there is a serious constituency willing to listen to and support him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on November 09, 2016, 01:59:24 am
This is looking very bad. It seems HRC not getting the turn out required, I'm calling it for Trump and for once hoping I'm totally wrong. Unbelievable that so many of the poor and dispossessed believe he is going to do something for them when his entire life has been dedicated to to accumulating personal wealth and he has never done anything for anyone. The only silver lining is that I don't believe he is idealogically motivated really and there'll be little change unless he gets a bit trigger happy but he seems more isolationist than most.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 04:22:05 am
Thanks to the youngest mini OMM having a nightmare, I am now awake and also having a nightmare. At least at 04:21 HRC was slightly ahead.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Duma on November 09, 2016, 04:26:09 am
Oh fuck, please no. Knew I shouldn't have looked
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on November 09, 2016, 04:32:17 am
Fuck, they've just projected Florida for Trump - it's all over isn't it?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on November 09, 2016, 05:46:55 am

trumper

A person whose beliefs are mostly based on half-truths, lies and misconceptions put forth by others they admire and choose to follow instead of relying on their own intellect.
My co-worker's rigid and shallow opinions show what a trumper he is becoming.
#uneducated #informed #naive #knowledgeable #ignorant #erudite #dogmatic
by lifeonearth October 18, 2016


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=trumper

 :ohmy:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 09, 2016, 05:59:10 am
Oh. Fuck.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on November 09, 2016, 06:09:28 am
Oh dear, not looking good.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Duma on November 09, 2016, 06:12:29 am
Surely it's over now, can't see how Clinton can win PA, and she need(ed) to.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 09, 2016, 06:19:19 am
Still, citizens of the USA get to elect a different president if they don't like this one in four years time.....

Unlike Brexit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 06:53:31 am
Old but apt:

http://newsthump.com/2016/07/16/the-winchester-now-full/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on November 09, 2016, 06:54:15 am
As long as the Republicans don't get the House and the Senate it'll be ok......... Oh.......
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kelvin on November 09, 2016, 06:56:01 am


Unlike Brexit.

It's been such an odd year, I'm 3.64% clinging to the hope that Brexit won't happen...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 09, 2016, 07:03:25 am
May I be the first to congratulate Vladimir Putin on a stunning victory.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 07:24:20 am
So, investment advice needed.
I'm thinking Brick and Concrete manufacturers?
Barbwire and possibly tattoo ink makers?
US Engineering companies that can build large, hermetically sealed rooms?
Who makes that Zyklon shit these days?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SamT on November 09, 2016, 07:37:32 am
Pitch forks has to be a good bet...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 09, 2016, 07:40:21 am
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161109/f9db0c4f93df46730b9f9aa4bb32e2ae.png)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on November 09, 2016, 07:56:53 am
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161109/f9db0c4f93df46730b9f9aa4bb32e2ae.png)

Every cloud i guess......
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: 36chambers on November 09, 2016, 08:00:53 am
please don't bring her into this
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 09, 2016, 08:10:36 am
OK can anyone with a better understanding of the merican system clarify whether he's actually be able to do all the crazy things he's promised? I'm thinking building the wall, kicking out muslims, free guns for sex offenders, free limousines for sociopaths etc? What power does he actually have, don't these things have to get through house of reps/congress or some shit?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 08:15:10 am
OK can anyone with a better understanding of the merican system clarify whether he's actually be able to do all the crazy things he's promised? I'm thinking building the wall, kicking out muslims, free guns for sex offenders, free limousines for sociopaths etc? What power does he actually have, don't these things have to get through house of reps/congress or some shit?

I believe the lunatics are on the grass in both houses.
Might one suggest:

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161109/8b6d0cd0f3673695555d70810ef8ab6e.jpg)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 09, 2016, 08:16:11 am
Yeah but don't at least half the GOP hate him?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 08:20:28 am
My take from more informed commentators, is that he will be domestically limited, but that his impact in the wider world could be potentially devastating.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 09, 2016, 08:24:36 am
Think happy thoughts. In four years it'll probably all be over...

(http://bjstlh.com/data/wallpapers/193/WDF_2314265.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 08:28:58 am
This has to be the best indication of the future:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/canadas-immigration-website-crashes_uk_5822afeae4b0c2e24ab15a28?26ow93a62mp6fajor


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 09, 2016, 08:46:23 am
I can't believe that asshole won. :no:


Think happy thoughts. In four years it'll probably all be over...

(http://bjstlh.com/data/wallpapers/193/WDF_2314265.jpg)

Did you not get the memo. Trump ordered the gassing of all cute puppies. Fighting dog breeds only from now on.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on November 09, 2016, 08:49:56 am
OK can anyone with a better understanding of the merican system clarify whether he's actually be able to do all the crazy things he's promised? I'm thinking building the wall, kicking out muslims, free guns for sex offenders, free limousines for sociopaths etc? What power does he actually have, don't these things have to get through house of reps/congress or some shit?

The channel I'm watching have just said he's limited to where he fires missiles and Supreme Court appointment. Plenty of scope to duck things up, his iolationism/friendship with Putin is the biggest foreign policy problem. I expect Russia to be more overt I their actions in Stria and Ukraine
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 09, 2016, 09:23:31 am
This image is quite handy.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1a/Political_System_of_the_United_States.svg/1280px-Political_System_of_the_United_States.svg.png)

Lots of power. Controls the military (with approval of the senate), can veto or repeal legislation, appoints the supreme court who interpret the constitution, appoints the cabinet.
I imagine there's some caveats in there but much more personal political power than we give to our PM.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 09, 2016, 09:30:53 am
We're fucked then.

Still trying to get my head round a system where someone with no political experience whatsoever can be made a head of state. Just a chancer with some cash will do.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fatneck on November 09, 2016, 09:40:15 am
 :agree:

Looking forward (kind of) to hearing from our own correspondent in Philly...

Have gangs of right wingers starting lining up "foreigners" and deporting them yet?  :'(
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 09, 2016, 09:50:09 am
One of the twitter highlights yesterday was this thread: make sure you scroll down to some of the methods :)

https://twitter.com/i/moments/796072650225438722
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 09:53:54 am
In a moment, Jeremy Beadle is going to rise from the dead and in a sinister, echoing voice cry "You've beeeeen Frraaammmmed"!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 09:56:45 am
:agree:

Looking forward (kind of) to hearing from our own correspondent in Philly...

Have gangs of right wingers starting lining up "foreigners" and deporting them yet?  :'(


I have heard from a friend over there that there were crowds chanting "We hate blacks, we hate Muslim's, throw them out" in NY.
Which she'd picked up from her Twitter feed. Anyone else heard anything similar?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 09, 2016, 10:11:30 am
Still trying to get my head round a system where someone with no political experience whatsoever can be made a head of state. Just a chancer with some cash will do.

Ronald Reagan & (to a lesser extent) The Governator?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: A Jooser on November 09, 2016, 10:12:09 am
Still trying to get my head round a system where someone with no political experience whatsoever can be made a head of state...

 :slap: Whereas under our system it would only take the deaths of three people for the UK to have a head of state with no political experience who was barely out of nappies!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 09, 2016, 10:21:24 am
Still trying to get my head round a system where someone with no political experience whatsoever can be made a head of state. Just a chancer with some cash will do.

Ronald Reagan & (to a lesser extent) The Governator?

Exactly.

Still trying to get my head round a system where someone with no political experience whatsoever can be made a head of state...

 :slap: Whereas under our system it would only take the deaths of three people for the UK to have a head of state with no political experience who was barely out of nappies!

Well luckily our head of state has basically no real political power. At least cunts like Cameron, Osborne, Johnson, Gove and May have to at least get elected in as MPs first, albeit in safe seats. This at least seems to act to filter out the genuinely criminally insane sociopaths and flagrant fascists.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: cheque on November 09, 2016, 10:31:18 am
Still trying to get my head round a system where someone with no political experience whatsoever can be made a head of state. Just a chancer with some cash will do.

Ronald Reagan & (to a lesser extent) The Governator?

Reagan had been governor of California before he was elected president.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 09, 2016, 10:58:44 am
Indeed. Parliament can get rid of a PM at any time they like as long as they all act (fairly) collectively...

Will Trump be as bad as many (including me) feared? Thats the Q everyone will be asking - from Russia to China, from Wall street to some other street etc..

As a sociopath has only been saying these things to get where he is? And don't forget it has worked.... Doesn't mean he's actually going to do any of what he has promised... If you cover your eyes and forget that he's a lying sex pest many of his views (for a republican) are pretty moderate (compared to Cruz anyway..).

Maybe its self delusion.... (on my part)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: chris j on November 09, 2016, 11:08:03 am
As long as the Republicans don't get the House and the Senate it'll be ok......... Oh.......

Be kind of interesting to see how Trump works with the Republican party in Congress etc given how many disowned him at one point or other in the campaign...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 09, 2016, 11:11:49 am
Sex pest is 'preferable but not essential' for this job.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 11:45:36 am
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161109/a3976c75f531d37dd3cd38f81c1d19f9.png)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on November 09, 2016, 11:49:12 am
As an aside from the grim result, what is the deal with US presidents and external interests, i.e. Trump's business empire?

I've heard about "blind trusts" but don't really understand them / haven't read about them much.

I guess being president will take up a lot of his time now and there may be many conflicts of interest...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 12:16:31 pm
Never a publication to pull punches, this is nevertheless rather direct even by NS standards:

http://www.newstatesman.com/world/2016/11/president-trump-promises-be-part-clown-part-bigot-and-all-authoritarian


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on November 09, 2016, 12:45:33 pm
my thoughts exactly....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWphqA1Slrw&feature=youtu.be&t=66 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWphqA1Slrw&feature=youtu.be&t=66)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 09, 2016, 01:16:18 pm
Looking forward (kind of) to hearing from our own correspondent in Philly...

I have nothing to say right now. I feared this might happen, but hoped and believed it might not.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 09, 2016, 01:25:56 pm
It looks like she won the popular vote.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on November 09, 2016, 02:11:01 pm
Shirlye Bassey (https://medium.com/@theonlytoby/history-tells-us-what-will-happen-next-with-brexit-trump-a3fefd154714#.y42irh7q4)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: A Jooser on November 09, 2016, 02:32:15 pm
Dr Jill Stein's pre-election opinions on her fellow presidential candidates may provide a little comfort. Anyone who can't sit through 2:35 can watch from 1 min or 1:40...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OGPuqLe3mg

In four years time Trump can be judged on what he did while in office (rather than what he said during the campaign). Clinton's record counted against her.

I'm happy to say I'm comfortable with my own disinterest at the result.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 09, 2016, 06:38:28 pm
Still trying to get my head round a system where someone with no political experience whatsoever can be made a head of state. Just a chancer with some cash will do.

Ronald Reagan & (to a lesser extent) The Governator?

Reagan had been governor of California before he was elected president.

And is on record as saying 'the biggest source of pollution in California is trees'

Trump is the logical evolution, more extreme and populist in more extreme times. Look to Gert Wilder and Marine Le Pen next.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 07:17:47 pm
Given the number of drought induced wildfires in California; he was probably right...

Chicken, egg, chicken ad infinitum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2016, 07:22:26 pm
So, off to a great start:

https://www.facebook.com/Channel4News/videos/10154230093651939/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 10, 2016, 08:09:23 am
Some sickening facts:

Trump overall got fewer votes than Hillary.

Trump overall got fewer votes than the last two Republican candidates who lost.

Turnout was only a shade over 50%. Basically a shit load of Obama voters didn't vote for Hillary (presumably didn't bother to vote), and that sealed the deal for Clownface Von Fuckstick.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on November 10, 2016, 08:20:21 am
Good to know its not just the UK that has a farcical voting system then.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: cheque on November 10, 2016, 10:02:16 am

Turnout was only a shade over 50%. Basically a shit load of Obama voters didn't vote for Hillary (presumably didn't bother to vote), and that sealed the deal for Clownface Von Fuckstick.

Clinton seems to occupy the same position in the US that Blair does here, for many of the same reasons. My mates over there (Democrat voters obviously) were basically like "I can't believe Trump's driven me to vote for her". Seems many many more tuned out of the whole thing weeks ago and took the "wake me when it's over" approach, assuming Clinton would make it over the line without them sullying their conscience. That's what you get for not voting I suppose.

Trump won Florida by about 130,000 votes- "third party" candidates got 300,000. I wonder how many of those were protest votes from people who similarly thought that Hillary would get in anyway?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on November 10, 2016, 10:26:20 am

Turnout was only a shade over 50%. Basically a shit load of Obama voters didn't vote for Hillary (presumably didn't bother to vote), and that sealed the deal for Clownface Von Fuckstick.

Seems many many more tuned out of the whole thing weeks ago and took the "wake me when it's over" approach, assuming Clinton would make it over the line without them sullying their conscience. That's what you get for not voting I suppose.

Summarised nicely....

(https://i.imgur.com/TOGIbcP.jpg)

I continue to be amazed at peoples irrational logic and apathy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fultonius on November 10, 2016, 10:52:13 am
I think it is an eternal shame that they didn't allow Bernie to run against Trump.... who knows, maybe the anti-establishment vote would have stayed blue?  Who knows.

After waking up this morning I decided to read a chapter of Life and Fate, the one where a Jewish mother writes her last letter to her some from inside a compound. With brexit, trump, my dad passing away I felt so sad for the world and for myslef, fir the first time in my 33 years a book made me cry out loud on my own.   :'(

I can only hope that this lurch to the right doesn't go too far and people are not persecuted for their birthplace. My biggest hope is that the world wakes up and realises that they're looking the wrong with when they're blaming others for their problems, rather than at the true proponents, the money mad puppet-masters.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Duma on November 10, 2016, 04:25:01 pm
They took it down, but I this made me laugh last night
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161110/bd59c8c70477f93621f7063d8a869f7e.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: creedence on November 10, 2016, 04:46:14 pm
http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls

Tells a divisive and slightly depressing story
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 10, 2016, 06:16:24 pm

Turnout was only a shade over 50%. Basically a shit load of Obama voters didn't vote for Hillary (presumably didn't bother to vote), and that sealed the deal for Clownface Von Fuckstick.

Clinton seems to occupy the same position in the US that Blair does here, for many of the same reasons. My mates over there (Democrat voters obviously) were basically like "I can't believe Trump's driven me to vote for her". Seems many many more tuned out of the whole thing weeks ago and took the "wake me when it's over" approach, assuming Clinton would make it over the line without them sullying their conscience. That's what you get for not voting I suppose.

Trump won Florida by about 130,000 votes- "third party" candidates got 300,000. I wonder how many of those were protest votes from people who similarly thought that Hillary would get in anyway?


Where have I head this song before?


I think the title was Refer-something?

A friend of mine is (was, now) a Democrat activist in New Hampshire, she reckoned it was an uphill battle to get Dems to vote for HRC; even there.
She's quit the party.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 10, 2016, 06:29:45 pm
I think it is an eternal shame that they didn't allow Bernie to run against Trump.... who knows, maybe the anti-establishment vote would have stayed blue?  Who knows.

Jesus the alt-right arsewipes would have had all their christmases at once with that. Trump up against a jewish guy. Fuck me that would have been an even uglier campaign than you've seen with Hillary.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Three Nine on November 10, 2016, 07:11:08 pm
I think it is an eternal shame that they didn't allow Bernie to run against Trump.... who knows, maybe the anti-establishment vote would have stayed blue?  Who knows.

Jesus the alt-right arsewipes would have had all their christmases at once with that. Trump up against a jewish guy. Fuck me that would have been an even uglier campaign than you've seen with Hillary.

Trump's son-in-law is Jewish, his daughter converted to judaism, and he's hugely pro-Israel. I don't think he's an anti-semite, whatever else he may be. But then i suppose we mustn't let these things get in the way of our internet hand-wringing!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 10, 2016, 07:15:33 pm
I thought it was pretty clear I was talking about his far right followers.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 10, 2016, 07:38:38 pm
I think it is an eternal shame that they didn't allow Bernie to run against Trump.... who knows, maybe the anti-establishment vote would have stayed blue?  Who knows.

Jesus the alt-right arsewipes would have had all their christmases at once with that. Trump up against a jewish guy. Fuck me that would have been an even uglier campaign than you've seen with Hillary.

Trump's son-in-law is Jewish, his daughter converted to judaism, and he's hugely pro-Israel. I don't think he's an anti-semite, whatever else he may be. But then i suppose we mustn't let these things get in the way of our internet hand-wringing!

To be fair, Dave said "the Alt-right" not Trump. Given the unprecedented coverage this guy has had, it's surprising that wasn't more widely known.
Time will tell how much of his rhetoric was hollow bluster, for me (unless it's not) that's far less of a problem than the dregs who feel empowered and emboldened by both this and the referendum.
I'm quite sure many people have perfectly reasonable positions that led them to vote the way they did; what we all need now is to find a way to put the bigots back in their box.

Put it this way, how many people do you think vote Democrat because they have a deep abiding hatred of another race/gender/religion/nationality/sexuality etc etc etc?
Seems unlikely to be any of them, to me.

Can you say the same about Republican voters?

I can't imagine many paid-up Clansmen voting Dem.

And, to some extent (a fairly large one, it seems to me) the same can be said about the referendum. Why the Leavers can't understand that pointing out the large body of their support that fit that category, is not the same thing as "tarring them with the same brush"; is a mystery to me.

I'd be far more likely to believe people if they were a little less, I don't know, vehement? So quick to deny that any of "their side" could possibly have such base motives.

 Yes, I find it irksome that extremists of all stripes and either end of the political spectrum, have as much say as the more moderate/considerate (could we not just ignore them, like statisticians do with outliers? (Joke)), but such is democracy.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Baron on November 10, 2016, 09:01:43 pm
Looked like The Donald shat his pants after meeting Obama and discovered there's more to being president than he'd seen in the news. Jacks it in before HE can be called the worst president ever?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on November 10, 2016, 09:08:59 pm
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lIiJc7uKiXs (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lIiJc7uKiXs)
Even Barack appears lost for words...
You've got to laugh :)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 10, 2016, 09:41:40 pm
Looked like The Donald shat his pants after meeting Obama and discovered there's more to being president than he'd seen in the news. Jacks it in before HE can be called the worst president ever?

Having never held elected office before he will probably have no idea whatsoever about how things work...

Still he's promised to drain the swamp. And fill it with his own alligators... (shit, I've almost gone a bit Cantona there!)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: benno on November 10, 2016, 10:44:35 pm
This is a bit close to the bone, but I can't fault the reasoning:
https://www.facebook.com/JonathanPieReporter/videos/1044777035645189/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 11, 2016, 07:02:30 am
Garrison Keillor (Lake Wobegon etc) in the WP.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-voters-will-not-like-what-happens-next/2016/11/09/e346ffc2-a67f-11e6-8fc0-7be8f848c492_story.html?postshare=7581478820090923&tid=ss_fb


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 13, 2016, 09:44:54 pm
Aaaagaaainn....
I confess, I've never seen the original.
Still funny though.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2YEhNHNydIs


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: chris j on November 14, 2016, 08:05:15 am
This is a bit close to the bone, but I can't fault the reasoning:
https://www.facebook.com/JonathanPieReporter/videos/1044777035645189/

I saw this on facebook this morning. It's hard to disagree with any of it really. I can't think of a recent issue where the 'liberal left' has put up an enthusiastic argument for something rather than predominantly dissing the other side. If you think the system needs change and one guy promises it (however mad) while the other side's argument is "I'm not the first guy and everyone who agrees with him is scum", who are you going to vote for?

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 14, 2016, 08:59:01 am
Looks like Chump is picking some proper premium grade white-supremacist pieces of shit for his top advisors, uuggghhh.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 14, 2016, 11:52:03 am
And, to some extent (a fairly large one, it seems to me) the same can be said about the referendum. Why the Leavers can't understand that pointing out the large body of their support that fit that category [racist, bigoted, xenophobic], is not the same thing as "tarring them with the same brush"; is a mystery to me.

Pretty sweeping statement that OMM. How do you know 'the  leavers' can't understand that and which ones?

What are you really trying to say? It sounds a little bit like:
'Given a binary yes/no choice, 'leavers' shouldn't have voted for something they believed in because xenophobic bigoted dickheads were lining up to vote the same way; and if they did vote that way then they should be made to feel guilty by association.'

Dragged down with the overtly fascist scum / or aloft in an ivory tower. I'm uncertain which is worse.


Perhaps it's exactly this sort of divisive, judgmental atmosphere that put off many younger people from voting in either the referendum or the US election - maybe they don't want to feel judged and pigeonholed by the self-righteous left, centre or right.

Speaking only for myself, which is all any of us really can do - I know I didn't vote for Farage, or anything to do with disingenuous statistics.


I'd be far more likely to believe people if they were a little less, I don't know, vehement? So quick to deny that any of "their side" could possibly have such base motives.

You can come across as a bit vehement yourself. And I don't feel I'm on any 'side' in any but the loosest possible terms.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 14, 2016, 09:28:57 pm
I sometimes forget you and people like you, Pete. Those that have not been "vehement" as I put it. I'll cop to verbose, (unintentionally) condescending or even dogged, but my caps lock is firmly off.

As regards your point, no; I meant what I wrote. That I don't tar everyone with the same brush, with the rider that many people I have discussed this with; assume they are being judged (by me) as being part of that group, when I mention that that group exists.

I also intended to write a line about how only the moderate/sensible/thoughtful people on that side (I didn't make it binary, that sucks) are the only ones who might be able to reach out to the shallower end of the black lagoon and calm it. They're not going to listen to anyone from the other side (even if you don't see it as sides, I guarantee they do in the lagoon).

Verbose again.
Sorry.
Sorry you feel judged, must be the low PPO2 up here in my Ivory tower, heady self-righteous loftiness and the blinding red of the flag I'm waving; that twisted my words...

Or it could just be that bloody forums and other social media platforms, lead to misunderstandings as we try to convey our thoughts and feelings in a thoughtless, faceless, intonation free and body language omitting format. Half cooked, hastily tapped out, unedited and easily misconstrued.
Some people are better at this than others. I'll cop to being an "other".
Verbose again.

Bollocks.

I enjoy and am edified by debate but, this kind of shit is what I was actually thinking of:



(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161114/d487dbaeb127fa65b3a77d3433a7635f.jpg)

Which is facist shit. Hopefully, unintentionally so.
However, there will be some dick out there who will take such writings as motivation and justification to act out their violent little fantasies.
I think it's already happening, I fear it will get worse. Why is that wrong?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 14, 2016, 09:33:47 pm
Well, fair points.

However there have always been dickheads in the world and there always will be. The internet just makes them more visible.

Probably wise not to sit in front of a direct portal into the world of dickheads - ie social media and over-watching news.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 14, 2016, 10:35:45 pm
Or it could just be that bloody forums and other social media platforms, lead to misunderstandings as we try to convey our thoughts and feelings in a thoughtless, faceless, intonation free and body language omitting format. Half cooked, hastily tapped out, unedited and easily misconstrued.
Some people are better at this than others. I'll cop to being an "other".
Verbose again.

Bollocks.

I enjoy and am edified by debate but, this kind of shit is what I was actually thinking of:



(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161114/d487dbaeb127fa65b3a77d3433a7635f.jpg)

Which is facist shit. Hopefully, unintentionally so.
However, there will be some dick out there who will take such writings as motivation and justification to act out their violent little fantasies.
I think it's already happening, I fear it will get worse. Why is that wrong?


Probably only the most outrageous examples are getting reported in the UK but there are many, many very ugly events taking place here right now on a daily basis. People are genuinely frightened. And this shit has barely even begun.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on November 15, 2016, 08:09:18 am
Calm down guys, Nigel Farage has assured us "the whole thing is being exaggerated" as he briefly came up for air during an intensive Trump brown-nosing session.

Seems that fucking chancer Farage is trying to install himself as unofficial UK envoy to the USA, whilst still collecting his MEP paycheque nodoubt. Seems his line on unelected representatives has softened a little.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 15, 2016, 09:25:38 am
Dare I say Nasty Nige can't be any worse at it that Brainless Boris? Or can he?

I'm concerned Trump is going to go a war mongering and drag the UK in with him as per previous conflicts.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 15, 2016, 09:36:26 am
The question surely is not the merits of Farage vs Johnson, but US/UK government and diplomatic services communicating or not.

If the answer is unofficial Farage DIY diplomacy then government is simply not functioning.

Do you really want the UK's interests represented by one man, his whims and prejudices and no policy or diplomacy worthy of the name?

As for warmongering, I don't see evidence of that directly in what he says. I do think a narrow and short term perception of American economic interest may produce a weakening of international accords and Putin and Xi Jinping ready to exploit it. I also believe longer term we are in deep trouble with climate change denial in the White House. Conflict will certainly be a by-product if we don't properly address that.


edit - comment about war added
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 15, 2016, 09:44:03 am
It was a spurious comment, pointing out our foreign minister's inadequacies, I'd trust either of them as far as I can throw them.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 15, 2016, 09:45:16 am
Fair enough. We're in trouble, either way.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 15, 2016, 09:47:39 am
Yep, stuck between Dwayne Johnson and some frozen flat fish.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 15, 2016, 12:10:17 pm
Open defiance already:

http://laist.com/2016/11/14/lapd_will_not_deport.php

I'd put money on full science denial. Fortunately, the individual states have a large say in their school curriculum, so I'd  guess at further degradation of education in the already weak regions, along with the poverty that brings. With commensurate rise in standards and concentration of industry in the already rich (and blue) regions.

A few days reading has left me stunned by the Electoral College system and it's blatant inequality.
A single vote, in California (accounting for more than 10% of the total US population and the single most populous state in the Union) is worth 0.37 on the voter value index. A vote in Arizona (one fifth the population of California and less than 2% of the total US) is worth over 200 on the index. To put it another way, one vote in Arizona is worth 540 votes in California.

Not too surprising people are upset. Shall we give it a go? One vote in West Penwith could be worth 540 in any of the Greater London constituencies?
I know our boundaries are pretty unfair but their system is nuts.

https://wallethub.com/edu/how-much-is-your-vote-worth/7932/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 27, 2016, 01:07:13 pm
Well, there goes the planet, any chance of Saudi surviving  another decade and Trump probably safe for a second term...

http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/11584/nearly-a-trillion-dollars-worth-of-oil-was-just-discovered-in-texas/



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 28, 2016, 10:04:23 am
Well, there goes the planet, any chance of Saudi surviving  another decade and Trump probably safe for a second term...

http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/11584/nearly-a-trillion-dollars-worth-of-oil-was-just-discovered-in-texas/



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Maybe it's good to explore the facts behind the blazing headline though, O&G people are good at conveniently providing limited facts;

http://oilpro.com/post/28773/permian-giant-oil-field-would-lose-500-billion-todays-prices?utm_source=DailyNewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter&utm_term=2016-11-22&utm_content=Article_2_txt
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bonjoy on November 28, 2016, 02:00:16 pm
Open defiance already:

http://laist.com/2016/11/14/lapd_will_not_deport.php

I'd put money on full science denial. Fortunately, the individual states have a large say in their school curriculum, so I'd  guess at further degradation of education in the already weak regions, along with the poverty that brings. With commensurate rise in standards and concentration of industry in the already rich (and blue) regions.

A few days reading has left me stunned by the Electoral College system and it's blatant inequality.
A single vote, in California (accounting for more than 10% of the total US population and the single most populous state in the Union) is worth 0.37 on the voter value index. A vote in Arizona (one fifth the population of California and less than 2% of the total US) is worth over 200 on the index. To put it another way, one vote in Arizona is worth 540 votes in California.

Not too surprising people are upset. Shall we give it a go? One vote in West Penwith could be worth 540 in any of the Greater London constituencies?
I know our boundaries are pretty unfair but their system is nuts.

https://wallethub.com/edu/how-much-is-your-vote-worth/7932/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It sounds like a fucked up system. It's a shame that parties wait until they lose by it to start complaining and demanding action. Like the other side is really going to go along with them having their cake and eating it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on November 28, 2016, 02:49:28 pm
A few days reading has left me stunned by the Electoral College system and it's blatant inequality.
A single vote, in California (accounting for more than 10% of the total US population and the single most populous state in the Union) is worth 0.37 on the voter value index. A vote in Arizona (one fifth the population of California and less than 2% of the total US) is worth over 200 on the index. To put it another way, one vote in Arizona is worth 540 votes in California.

Not too surprising people are upset. Shall we give it a go?

(https://arnoldplaton.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/electoral-college-eu2.png?w=1300) (https://arnoldplaton.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/electoral-college-eu2.png?w=1300)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 28, 2016, 03:09:18 pm
Well, there goes the planet, any chance of Saudi surviving  another decade and Trump probably safe for a second term...

http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/11584/nearly-a-trillion-dollars-worth-of-oil-was-just-discovered-in-texas/



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Maybe it's good to explore the facts behind the blazing headline though, O&G people are good at conveniently providing limited facts;

http://oilpro.com/post/28773/permian-giant-oil-field-would-lose-500-billion-todays-prices?utm_source=DailyNewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter&utm_term=2016-11-22&utm_content=Article_2_txt

That certainly colours it somewhat differently, however, if you consider some expect a short boom in the near term:

http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21710634-glimpse-post-oil-era-when-oil-no-longer-demand?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/whenoilisnolongerindemand

That changes the colour again, though it doesn't invert it back.

Also, with the Canadian shale fields scaling back there is a glut of potential equipment on the horizon, which is also expected to lower extraction costs from present.
Add in the returning swarms of oil workers, desperate for income and willing to work for a fraction of current rates (possibly)...

So extraction costs could see a nose dive from those used in the calculations.
Or not.

Pretty turbulent times all round, really.

I'd be surprised if there weren't some "subsidies" on offer from the President Elect and his administration; though. It has yuuge, biggly potential to be the best oil, everyone says and he's just the man to get it and make the Mexicans pay for it too!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 28, 2016, 05:13:36 pm
Well, there goes the planet, any chance of Saudi surviving  another decade and Trump probably safe for a second term...

http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/11584/nearly-a-trillion-dollars-worth-of-oil-was-just-discovered-in-texas/



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Maybe it's good to explore the facts behind the blazing headline though, O&G people are good at conveniently providing limited facts;

http://oilpro.com/post/28773/permian-giant-oil-field-would-lose-500-billion-todays-prices?utm_source=DailyNewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter&utm_term=2016-11-22&utm_content=Article_2_txt

That certainly colours it somewhat differently, however, if you consider some expect a short boom in the near term:

http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21710634-glimpse-post-oil-era-when-oil-no-longer-demand?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/whenoilisnolongerindemand

That changes the colour again, though it doesn't invert it back.

Also, with the Canadian shale fields scaling back there is a glut of potential equipment on the horizon, which is also expected to lower extraction costs from present.
Add in the returning swarms of oil workers, desperate for income and willing to work for a fraction of current rates (possibly)...

So extraction costs could see a nose dive from those used in the calculations.
Or not.

Pretty turbulent times all round, really.

I'd be surprised if there weren't some "subsidies" on offer from the President Elect and his administration; though. It has yuuge, biggly potential to be the best oil, everyone says and he's just the man to get it and make the Mexicans pay for it too!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Good to see a bit of balance SA C.

Mining/O+G's notorious for inferred and indicated resources mysteriously failing to turn into money-making product on the surface. Long after wall street have left the scene after pocketing nice returns on the hype. At least if the last ten years of trying to make money from N.American mining stocks are anything to go by.


Don't let that spoil a good reason to despair though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 28, 2016, 07:10:27 pm
Relentlessly up-beat as always Pete.
I envy you.

To be fair, I wasn't expecting Al-Falih to back off the OPEC production cut when I posted the O&G link, nor did I know he was doing just that as I posted the whole "colour" thing above; which of course changes the hue again.

So I'm sticking with "Turbulent" and still moderately convinced that the new administration will manage several miles-worth of political capital (post factual era n'all that).

Not to mention, we only need to reach $67pb for the whole thing to make sense again or $70+ for real boom.

Not beyond the realms etc.

Yep, Habrich, but thats still 5+ years off surely? There is rumour of reaching deficit by late 2017, is there not?

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/Goldman-Sachs-Turns-Bullish-On-Oil.html

With the proviso as stated in the opening paragraph of that article.

Since my investment exposure consists of fuckallandfairydustontoast, I speak with the authority of a small wheel of cheddar in a new system of the future (I just let predictive text handle the last sentence, since it makes as much sense as anything else).

Damn, I learn a lot here.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 29, 2016, 08:33:35 am
Oh yes, the long term looks good. Oil is, probably, done. Environmentally, I still have high hopes that technology will save the day.
I think the rise of the right is going to prove to be a short term, reactionary, flash-in-the-pan by those struggling to cope with change (not many totalitarian/right wing regimes last beyond a half century or so).
Yes the reports are intriguing, no I haven't got through all of them yet...
I wasn't intending to challenge anything you said, I just think those fields had a high chance of being developed, had OPEC cut production this week. I wonder if Saudi's change of heart there is, in part, related. It seems their only hope for the next couple of decades is to keep the oil money flowing and hope to restructure their economy with the proceeds. You know what their work ethic is like, they're not going to effect change quickly, so a short term boost of higher income, that makes other energy sources even more attractive and would hasten the end, is probably what they're seeing.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 29, 2016, 08:36:24 am
About time we had another war to get prices up again? non?

*moderate sarcasm
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 29, 2016, 01:01:30 pm
Relentlessly up-beat as always Pete.
I envy you.


I wouldn't say that. But I do think posting predictions on ukb of future doom (or paradise, but doom's so much more compelling) after reading current events articles on the internet is a mug's game. See Habrich's comment ref brainy people and oil predictions. Professionals do this for a living and fuck it up regularly.
I also don't really get some people's determination that things *will* be shit. I mean, I know plenty is shit but...
In the Texas oilfield example, if it really was that simple a path from huge resource being discovered - drilling starting - everyone making money (and the planet sweating to death) then everyday people like you and me would make fortunes from investing in opportunities like this. But it isn't. There exist vast oil/gas reserves and precious/rare mineral resources which can't economically be extracted. Northern Alberta,Saudi and the North Sea are operating fields but are barely economical! It takes years of economical production to re-coup initial exploration and extraction costs. And in the meanwhile no-one is standing still, technology progresses and we'll all be going electric (for domestic transport) very soon in the long view.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 29, 2016, 01:29:39 pm
Relentlessly up-beat as always Pete.
I envy you.


I wouldn't say that. But I do think posting predictions on ukb of future doom (or paradise, but doom's so much more compelling) after reading current events articles on the internet is a mug's game. See Habrich's comment ref brainy people and oil predictions. Professionals do this for a living and fuck it up regularly.
I also don't really get some people's determination that things *will* be shit. I mean, I know plenty is shit but...
In the Texas oilfield example, if it really was that simple a path from huge resource being discovered - drilling starting - everyone making money (and the planet sweating to death) then everyday people like you and me would make fortunes from investing in opportunities like this. But it isn't. There exist vast oil/gas reserves and precious/rare mineral resources which can't economically be extracted. Northern Alberta,Saudi and the North Sea are operating fields but are barely economical! It takes years of economical production to re-coup initial exploration and extraction costs. And in the meanwhile no-one is standing still, technology progresses and we'll all be going electric very soon in the long view.

I have to say I agree with a lot of this. Posting a link to one article and forecasting from it the end of human civilisation, the imminent downfall of a wealthy state, and the propagation of far right politics might look great as a prophetic forum post, but it comes up a little short on detail. Looking past any sort of nuance, or anything other than the side of the story that matches your prejudice, is one of my pet hates at the moment. Social media is full of it. For instance, the best evidence that I can think of that categorically proves the BBC to be impartial in it's reporting is that commentators on the left AND the right are equally vehement in their insistence that the BBC is biased against their point of view.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 29, 2016, 02:12:47 pm
Ummm... It wasn't meant to be that serious chaps, please read the signature n'all..
The rest of the debate was edifying, for me at least.
Please stop picturing me in my bunker with a tin foil hat, I'm not expecting to need either before Easter at the earliest.
Glib, throw away comments on the forum are just that; mildly surprised by the response.

Still, it's all part of the inevitable road to Zorg, mark my words.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLbIIAqiI9gDGwvTFU8mqdLzHFonc65ubj&params=OAFIAVgB&v=UkFAcFtBD48&mode=NORMAL


I shall be putting that rider back on my Taptalk post again, just in case anyone actually thinks I'm being serious (it's not actually something I do often, serious, I mean).


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on November 29, 2016, 02:27:13 pm
Ummm... It wasn't meant to be that serious chaps, please read the signature n'all..

Which one?  Oh they're both the same ;)

Trouble with such things is that no one reads them so they're (doubly) redundant :kiss2:

Emoticons/smileys aren't that hard to use (unless you're on Crappatalk).


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 29, 2016, 02:32:11 pm
Or you just, plain, forget.

\_[emoji53]_/

(My 11 year old keeps texting me that, along with kk (how the fark is that easier the typing ok?)).


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. Looking at you, here, Dense; I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 29, 2016, 02:34:49 pm
Where is Dense nowadays? Has been squirted deep under the North Sea as part of some carbon capture experiment?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 29, 2016, 02:41:33 pm
Ummm... It wasn't meant to be that serious chaps, please read the signature n'all..
The rest of the debate was edifying, for me at least.
Please stop picturing me in my bunker with a tin foil hat, I'm not expecting to need either before Easter at the earliest.
Glib, throw away comments on the forum are just that; mildly surprised by the response.

....

I shall be putting that rider back on my Taptalk post again, just in case anyone actually thinks I'm being serious (it's not actually something I do often, serious, I mean).


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


So nothing you say is serious. Doesn't that make you some sort of current events troll? 

:fishing:



Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 29, 2016, 02:43:07 pm
Thought I'd removed the Dense reference, must have forgotten to save the changes. That was also not serious. I'd removed the whole thing from Tapatalk and hardly ever use a browser so didn't notice. I do hope he didn't take offence (like f#%k he would (based on my massive knowledge of him gleaned from his candid posting here)).


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. Looking at you, here, Dense; I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 29, 2016, 02:47:16 pm
Ummm... It wasn't meant to be that serious chaps, please read the signature n'all..
The rest of the debate was edifying, for me at least.
Please stop picturing me in my bunker with a tin foil hat, I'm not expecting to need either before Easter at the earliest.
Glib, throw away comments on the forum are just that; mildly surprised by the response.

....

I shall be putting that rider back on my Taptalk post again, just in case anyone actually thinks I'm being serious (it's not actually something I do often, serious, I mean).


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


So nothing you say is serious. Doesn't that make you some sort of current events troll? 

:fishing:
Yep.

Sort of.  ish.

Mainly expect everyone else to "get" my humour, which I then forget doesn't convey well without the facial/body language to go with it.

Still, the response has been worth the misunderstanding. 

Edit:
Shit! It won't delete the Dense bit. Sorry, I'll keep trying.

All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. Looking at you, here, Dense; I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 29, 2016, 02:47:19 pm
Where is Dense nowadays? Has been squirted deep under the North Sea as part of some carbon capture experiment?

I heard he was recruited by 8a.nu as their bouldering correspondent.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 29, 2016, 03:14:55 pm


So nothing you say is serious. Doesn't that make you some sort of current events troll? 

:fishing:
Quote
Yep.

Sort of.  ish.

Mainly expect everyone else to "get" my humour, which I then forget doesn't convey well without the facial/body language to go with it.

Still, the response has been worth the misunderstanding. 



Playing the news-troll role does of course make it convenient for you to be able to talk as much bollocks as you like, safe in the knowledge that you can just retract anything you wrote as 'not serious' when someone bothers to counter. Devalues your currency somewhat though; brexit hey!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 29, 2016, 03:21:22 pm
Not at all. Read the other posts.

Edit:

I re-read. Point, counter point, response to counter point, and so on, followed by adjustment of position based on evidence presented.
Seems to be all there.
Rather than continuing to focus on the initial, glib, post.

Obviously, not everything I ever post is tongue in cheek. As you yourself pointed out, there really is some shit out there.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Doylo on November 29, 2016, 05:12:41 pm
Where is Dense nowadays? Has been squirted deep under the North Sea as part of some carbon capture experiment?

He packed his bags after Slackline called him a cunt.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on November 29, 2016, 05:36:31 pm
He packed his bags after Slackline called him a cunt.

I can't check as shark edited my post (1 (http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,26815.msg529453.html#msg529453) and 2 (http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,26815.msg529456.html#msg529456)) after Lee reported me.

Nor can I remember exactly what I wrote but I very much doubt I would have used 'cunt' to insult him as its not a word I regularly use when insulting people 'fucking twat' is more likely what I wrote and Jaspers post (http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,26815.msg529483.html#msg529483) suggests that is what I used (and he not I suggested Dense was being a 'cunt').
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Doylo on November 29, 2016, 05:46:34 pm
You definitely did.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 29, 2016, 05:55:33 pm
Where is Dense nowadays? Has been squirted deep under the North Sea as part of some carbon capture experiment?

He packed his bags after Slackline called him a cunt.

He's been making guest appearances on your board hasn't he?
He has always struck me as thick skinned.
Was it the Brexit thing? It's been charged, but surely no one takes it that seriously?

Sorry, didn't see slackers post in time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 29, 2016, 06:42:49 pm
So is Dense a cunt or just a fucking twat?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 30, 2016, 12:15:45 pm
I love it when all of us cunts get along.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on December 01, 2016, 08:51:51 am
I don't give a fuck what you think.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on December 01, 2016, 09:21:14 am

Mining/O+G's notorious for inferred and indicated resources mysteriously failing to turn into money-making product on the surface. Long after wall street have left the scene after pocketing nice returns on the hype. At least if the last ten years of trying to make money from N.American mining stocks are anything to go by.


Bit like the "newly discovered" resources near Gatwick.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36069751

Economically recoverable? Hmm, might have to wait for price to double.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on December 05, 2016, 11:32:36 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q__bSi5rBlw
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 06, 2016, 09:22:41 am
An interesting take on US attitudes, that rings some bells (for me) about attitudes here too.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/how-baby-boomers-became-the-most-selfish-generation-2016-11?utm_content=buffer4d564&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer&r=US&IR=T


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Evil on December 06, 2016, 11:35:57 am
The mention of Keynes and Milton Friedman in that article reminded me of a very good FT podcasts about Keynes and Hayek I listened to recently. I think that although the FT is firewalled, you can still listen to the podcasts on ACast https://www.acast.com/ft-alphachat/keynesvshayek-nowwhoswinning- (https://www.acast.com/ft-alphachat/keynesvshayek-nowwhoswinning-) (and maybe on iTunes too as the host always mentions reviewing them on iTunes)
He makes the point that Keynes always said you had to choke off the money at the top of the cycle after pumping money in via investments otherwise it would just end up in the hands of the rich... ::)
Also interesting that Hayek advocated socialised healthcare, even though he thought city states (and pretty much everything else) should be privatised.
Best point is 'the adherence to a strict dogma has proven to be inadequate'. Politicians do seem to have a tendency to get hold of one idea and hang onto it like it's some divine truth...I suppose people don't vote for compromise type politics.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 14, 2016, 04:54:28 pm
Garrison Keillor sums up Trump.

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161214/dde8f7cfc04f029dda8411d39d081b00.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 11, 2017, 12:27:03 pm
Anyway, having a slow day I decided to read through the contentious fake/real dossier on Trump. So summarise the selacious bit and save people reading it in detail, in 2013 Trump stayed in the same hotel room as Obama did in a previous Moscow visit and ordered a 'number' of prostitutes to perform golden showers on the bed where Obama slept...

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/10/buzzfeed-publishes-donald-trump-russia-documents-ethics-questions

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 11, 2017, 07:53:36 pm
He seems quite pissed about it, doesn't he...

I see he tweeted "are we living in Nazi Germany?"... I thought, "not yet mate, that's after the inauguration".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 11, 2017, 08:05:28 pm
Just watched the press conference (his first in roughly six months). He has horrific, of course. But more than anything I was left just speechless by the absolute inadequacy of the plans proposed for dealing with his business interests. I don't know what to say.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on January 11, 2017, 08:10:53 pm
The whole thing is almost unbelievable.  Madness..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 11, 2017, 08:42:09 pm
I feel he will be very hard to dislodge. I half imagine an unending Trump dictatorship, with some constitutional amendment, of course.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on January 11, 2017, 08:56:50 pm
If he was half the patriot he clams to be he'd be paying AMERICAN hookers to piss AMERICAN piss onto an AMERICAN hotel bed.

I just hope Obama trolls him big time by leaving a Quran and a Kenyan passport hidden somewhere in the whitehouse.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 12, 2017, 08:07:09 am
I love this in the Groany-ard this am:

“If Putin likes Donald Trump, guess what folks, that is called an asset, not a liability,” Trump said. “Do you honestly believe that Hillary would be tougher on Putin than me? Give me a break.”

Yes, Mr President-elect. The intelligence reports are indeed calling you an asset in the context of Russia. You may keep using that word but, as in the Princess Bride, I do not think it means what you think it means."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/11/trumps-trainwreck-press-conference-ushers-in-a-clueless-presidency


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 12, 2017, 08:48:51 am

I just hope Obama trolls him big time by leaving a Quran and a Kenyan passport hidden somewhere in the whitehouse.

Or a prayer mat laid out under one of the rugs, with a note in Arabic next it which, when translated says " gotcha you orange faced wig headed spunktrumpet".
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: shurt on January 12, 2017, 10:06:35 am
Just watched the press conference (his first in roughly six months). He has horrific, of course. But more than anything I was left just speechless by the absolute inadequacy of the plans proposed for dealing with his business interests. I don't know what to say.

He consistently does what he wants and seems to get away with it. Anyone who challenges him is as liar, on a witch hunt, a liberal movie type etc. etc. It just gets worse week on week. I dread to think whats going to happen when he's in?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 12, 2017, 01:55:06 pm
Pertinent...

How Blackmail Works in Russia (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/01/kompromat-trump-dossier/512891/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mark s on January 12, 2017, 05:43:53 pm
i watched the conference today online.
i am no public speaker but i am not going to be running america but i find him hard to listen to. he just rambles,talks about nothing and doesnt come across as very competent.

the way he goes on about fake news after the crap he said in the run up to the vote.
anti vax lies, global warming lies, pizza gate, birth certificates .....he is a fucking loon. complete narcissist 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 12, 2017, 07:00:25 pm
Not exactly unbiased, since it's a Gay site; but they shared some great memes about the Great man...
I quite like the "PEEOTUS" tag.

https://www.queerty.com/goldenshower-memes-jokes-flood-internet-thanks-peeotus-elect-donald-trump-20170111?utm_source=bb82&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=artname&utm_content=inf_11_80_2&tse_id=INF_8f3c80c0d8eb11e6a03c354c456e1db2



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 13, 2017, 08:19:36 am
Does anyone else wonder about the "Leak" (pun intended)?
I find it incredibly hard to believe that an "Ex" SIS operative, with extensive experience in the field (so privy to God-knows-what etc), who now works for a very respected (read Gov approved) international security consultancy firm; is not so closely monitored by his former employer, that he cannot fart without it being recorded.
That this dossier should have been made public and that it was somehow an "accident", seems both unlikely to happen and BS in the extreme respectively.
If I were of a more conspiracy theory bent, I'd wonder if this wasn't the British Gov. deliberately undermining the Pres. Elect?



All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 13, 2017, 08:33:56 am

If I were of a more conspiracy theory bent, I'd wonder if this wasn't the British Gov. deliberately undermining the Pres. Elect?

Why the UK Gov?  They seem unable to organise a piss-up in a brewery at the moment and have a lot of other crap to keep them occupied.  If going for a conspiracy theory surely its more likely to be Russians (see Kompromart article linked below).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tommytwotone on January 13, 2017, 08:57:30 am

If I were of a more conspiracy theory bent, I'd wonder if this wasn't the British Gov. deliberately undermining the Pres. Elect?



Or, as I was thinking the other day - hot(ish) take:


Think reports that this intel was briefed to both Obama and Trump a few days ago are credible enough to believe.


Potential that Trump himself engineered the leak so that a) he would have opportunity to overtly deny the allegations / claim as "fake news" in press conference and b) mitigate any possibility of The Kremlin having anything on him?

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on January 13, 2017, 09:44:24 am
Potential that Trump himself engineered the leak so that a) he would have opportunity to overtly deny the allegations / claim as "fake news" in press conference and b) mitigate any possibility of The Kremlin having anything on him?

Or just to give him another chance to talk about himself. He's turned the presidency in to the X-factor.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 15, 2017, 06:13:45 pm
Scottish Evening Herald TV guide:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170115/9372a2ffa55b2f2a5ee9ee1e520132f8.jpg)


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: battery on January 17, 2017, 08:54:30 am
Genius!

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 19, 2017, 10:31:25 am
What will Donald Trump's presidency mean for health? A scorecard (http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(17)30122-8/fulltext)

The US signed up to the United Nations' 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) listed in the right-hand column.

(http://www.thelancet.com/cms/attachment/2081022906/2072322774/gr1_lrg.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 19, 2017, 11:02:27 am
I'd be interested to see that list in the context of all the major economies to see how the US compares.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 19, 2017, 11:13:41 am
I'd be interested to see that list in the context of all the major economies to see how the US compares.

The goals were only set in 2015 and came into force in 1st January 2016 so there is little evidence on any countries progress towards achieving them.  The paper sets out possible threats to the US achieving them.  I can't find anything on how other current policies in other countries line up with achieving them at the moment (might be something in the references section perhaps, not looked), but the second Article listed on the right hand side of the linked Lancet page for the article is....

Measuring the health-related Sustainable Development Goals in 188 countries: a baseline analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015 (http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(16)31467-2/fulltext)

...which would show how they compare at the outset.

If you want to keep track then you could use the "Create Citation Alert" to be notified when the article is itself cited, no doubt in related work.  Probably worth keeping an eye on the website too (http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 19, 2017, 01:03:44 pm
Here's how they currently compare (from that report).

Some interesting info on those tables. The correlation between affluence and poor diet/obesity is stark to see if you look at the 5th column ('Overweight) and scroll through all 170-odd countries in the report (http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(16)31467-2/fulltext). The poorest-performing countries (in terms of the other health indicators) tend to be the poorest in terms of economy. But 'Overweight' looks like an inverse trend - the poorest countries have better stats, with a few exceptions (e.g. Japan).

Also 'air pollution' is hard to say for a whole country. If you live in London or Beijing you're breathing poison compared to living in rural north Wales/rural China.

(http://www.thelancet.com/cms/attachment/2079084517/2071220916/gr1a.jpg)


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 20, 2017, 08:28:09 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNgkgZ0eOMs

 :lol:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 21, 2017, 06:20:51 pm
So the empty seat thing is real. Even close to the Whitehouse private stand, as the cavalcade passed, there was almost no one there.
Given that a large number of people in Washington that day were there to protest the man, it seems like his Nuremberg moment fell a little flat.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/01/20/inaugural-parade-crowd-size/96855252/

It's also been highly amusing as my U.S. friends share screen caps of FB and Twitter posts of their friends/relatives who supported trump; but are only now realising that the "Affordable Care Act" IS Obama Care! The panic! Some genuinely believed the ACA was a Republican  introduced alternative and have only just realised what they're losing.


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 22, 2017, 05:14:23 pm
Reporting from the frontline: I was privileged to be able to attend the march in Washington yesterday, alongside six "nasty" women friends. It was a phenomenal day - yuuuuge numbers, much great good humour, brilliant homemade signs (one favourite: "If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a senator"). Its important to stress that this was not an anti-Trump protest per se, so much as a rallying cry around a series of issues seen now to be in critical danger under the new dispensation (reproductive rights being central amongst them). It was a demonstration that voices will not be silenced and that changes will not be steamrollered through without resistance. People are determined to not simply roll over and give up. The fight back starts here.

If these words sound over dramatic, then its important to stress that this is not a normal transition in government. The stakes are very high First, there are to my mind important questions about the legitimacy of the election. There seems little doubt there was Russian interference, largely through propaganda and disinformation. Second, the actions of FBI director James Comey 11 days before the election undoubtedly had a significant impact. Moreover, Trump's moves to deal with his conflicts of interest were utterly inadequate and, I think, place him in breach of the constitution. More importantly, this deeply compromised election - and president - is serving as a vehicle for governmental capture, as demonstrated by Trump's cabinet choices. What those now in power want to achieve would see a deeply radical transformation of American society and would also carry profound implications for international relations.

Its important to stress that the Trump presidency and the Republican congress/government are two almost completely separate things - their interests and priorities are very different (in so far as its actually possible to determine what his interests and priorities are). No doubt that during the primaries Republicans viewed Trump as joke, along with the rest of us, and were dismayed when he was picked. Now, I suspect, they can't believe their luck. They've managed to ride the populist tide he created to control of both houses. He has been a very useful idiot for them. But now he has probably pretty much served his purpose for them. If Trump doesn't serve a full term - and odds are already being given - then any impeachment process is probably as likely to be initiated by Republicans as it is by Democrats. Certainly, Republicans will be very happy to collude in an impeachment. Both Trump and his press secretary have told blatant lies since the inauguration (in other words, during the presidency). Its kind of incredible that senior Republicans are not reining him in; but perhaps they're simply giving him enough rope?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fried on January 22, 2017, 05:23:52 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/21/letter-to-donald-trump-president-armando-iannucci

As you'd expect. I won't make the usually apology for pasting Guardian articles.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 22, 2017, 07:21:30 pm
More importantly, this deeply compromised election - and president - is serving as a vehicle for governmental capture, as demonstrated by Trump's cabinet choices. What those now in power want to achieve would see a deeply radical transformation of American society and would also carry profound implications for international relations.



Exactly so.
cf Brexit. Who does it serve?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on January 22, 2017, 08:15:46 pm
Did a minor new boulder problem today and called it United Hates. So yeah, that'll show him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 22, 2017, 08:34:07 pm
Dan Rather has produced some of the most profound commentary of this debacle.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170122/00c90d3d0ec1418b8fe7820eb62f53f0.png)

Not surprising considering this shit:

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/conway-press-secretary-gave-alternative-facts-860142147643


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 22, 2017, 09:24:30 pm
The Guardian commentator who termed the press briefing more 'Pyongyang than Washington' summed it up well I thought.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 23, 2017, 05:47:21 pm
Change thread title to just "Donald Trump"?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 24, 2017, 03:48:46 pm
When I read the article, I thought it was probably partisan bunk and wilfully misinterpreted.
Then I listened to his speech. The bloke's a nut Job. He's fucking crazy. Rambling like a loon. "America never lost a war, when I was young" he says. So what the fuck was Korea? Vietnam? I mean, I know they managed to beat Panama and Grenada fairly soundly, but given the size of the US military; that's not a huge surprise... like France invading Monaco or Russia invading Shetland.

http://www.ifyouonlynews.com/politics/trump-tells-cia-staff-they-may-get-another-chance-to-invade-iraq-room-falls-dead-silent-video/


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 25, 2017, 04:44:51 pm
Things look pretty black in the US right now.

Imagine this:

http://www.iflscience.com/environment/trump-administration-orders-communications-blackout-for-us-scientists/

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/donald-trump-environmental-protection-agency-website-climate-change-global-warming-a7544621.html

http://www.iflscience.com/environment/trumps-freeze-on-epa-grants-leaves-scientists-wondering-what-it-means/

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/01/national-park-service-defies-trump-gag-order-tweets-climate-change-facts

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/24/journalists-charged-felonies-trump-inauguration-unrest?CMP=share_btn_tw

Happening here...


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 25, 2017, 04:56:51 pm
US Defense Department (https://twitter.com/DeptofDefense/status/823515639302262784) seem on the ball though...

Quote
Social media postings sometimes provide an important window into a person’s #mentalhealth. Know what to look for. https://go.usa.gov/x9yVB

...although its not actually aimed at who you might think it is.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 25, 2017, 05:31:44 pm
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/01/national-park-service-defies-trump-gag-order-tweets-climate-change-facts

Not all of BadLands NP tweets were deleted...

Fun Fact: In the Cretaceous Period, BadlandsNP was covered by a shallow sea. Our New Prez' climate policies will RESTORE them to that state! (https://twitter.com/BadIandsNPS/status/824090477641302020)

There is also now @AltNatParkSer (https://twitter.com/AltNatParkSer)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 25, 2017, 05:36:07 pm
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/01/national-park-service-defies-trump-gag-order-tweets-climate-change-facts

Not all of BadLands NP tweets were deleted...

Fun Fact: In the Cretaceous Period, BadlandsNP was covered by a shallow sea. Our New Prez' climate policies will RESTORE them to that state! (https://twitter.com/BadIandsNPS/status/824090477641302020)

There is also now @AltNatParkSer (https://twitter.com/AltNatParkSer)

Golden Gate NPS were also tweeting climate change facts earlier today.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 25, 2017, 05:36:31 pm
Things look pretty black in the US right now.

Imagine this:

http://www.iflscience.com/environment/trump-administration-orders-communications-blackout-for-us-scientists/

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/donald-trump-environmental-protection-agency-website-climate-change-global-warming-a7544621.html

http://www.iflscience.com/environment/trumps-freeze-on-epa-grants-leaves-scientists-wondering-what-it-means/

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/01/national-park-service-defies-trump-gag-order-tweets-climate-change-facts

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/24/journalists-charged-felonies-trump-inauguration-unrest?CMP=share_btn_tw

Happening here...


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...

You have no idea ...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 25, 2017, 06:10:26 pm
It's just bat shit! Just been messaging a retired US Army Colonel, people are genuinely starting to panic.
See the senators who have brought the bill to prevent Trump authorising a Nuclear first strike (she just told me about it, I'll find a link) and the growing suspicion that his new "investigation " into voter fraud will result in him being cemented into office a la Putin...

Then Radio 4 were talking about reinstating rendition and Black Sites etc and how it all feels like a bad episode of Homeland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 25, 2017, 06:16:29 pm
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/democrats-introduce-bill-to-curb-trumps-ability-to-launch-a-nuclear-strike-2017-1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 25, 2017, 06:25:57 pm
people are genuinely starting to panic.

People are very frightened. Day to day life is going on, of course, but this does not feel normal, very far from it. But I think there is going to be resistance.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 25, 2017, 06:42:09 pm
I was thinking about you Andy, thinking it must feel like a pretty bad thing to be living there right now, but then I thought it must also be (morbidly) fascinating to see all this unfolding first hand?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on January 25, 2017, 07:53:32 pm
The voter fraud thing is weird. As someone said in twitter, Trumpolini is implying the Democrats organised 5million illegal votes, yet they didn't bother to get 77000 of them into the right states to win it. Fucking bollocks. My guess is the whole thing is to justify some kind of dubious "voting security" initiative, i.e. armed voter suppression by security forces/police/millitia going on next election.

This cunt needs impeaching tout suite, or he's going to win again in 2020 with 105% of the vote.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 25, 2017, 07:58:21 pm
On the subject of resistance:

http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/national-park-service-creates-unofficial-twitter-account-that-donald-trump-cant-touch/1159/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 25, 2017, 08:11:33 pm
On the subject of resistance:

http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/national-park-service-creates-unofficial-twitter-account-that-donald-trump-cant-touch/1159/



There is also now @AltNatParkSer (https://twitter.com/AltNatParkSer)

Although I can't take credit for 'discovering' it first, Will Hunt re-tweeted them.

I'll throw in these too...

@AltMtRainierNPS (https://twitter.com/AltMtRainierNPS)
@BadHombreNPS (https://twitter.com/BadHombreNPS)
@AltUSFWS (https://twitter.com/AltUSFWS)

Whilst useful to combat what sounds like censorship they're likely all 'preaching to the converted' (or making noises in echo chambers) and after the initial furore dies down will end up in slanging matches with those who believe "alternative facts".
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 25, 2017, 09:08:05 pm
Looks like the resistance is paying off:

 http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/01/trump-officials-suspend-plan-delete-epa-climate-web-page?utm_source=newsfromscience&utm_medium=facebook-text&utm_campaign=suspendepa-10685


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on January 25, 2017, 10:34:28 pm
Anyone catch the 3 Trumpettes singing Woody Guthrie's " This is my land, this is your land"
Then going on about praying to god to keep the immigrants out.
If it wasn't for his impact on the rest on the world. You could say they have got what they deserve.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 25, 2017, 10:55:48 pm
The voter fraud thing is weird. As someone said in twitter, Trumpolini is implying the Democrats organised 5million illegal votes, yet they didn't bother to get 77000 of them into the right states to win it. Fucking bollocks. My guess is the whole thing is to justify some kind of dubious "voting security" initiative, i.e. armed voter suppression by security forces/police/millitia going on next election.

This cunt needs impeaching tout suite, or he's going to win again in 2020 with 105% of the vote.

This undoubtedly a prelude to regulations that will make voting harder (though the root cause is probably Donny's bottomless depths of vanity). That is bad enough, but the repeated questioning of the electoral process, without a shred of evidence, by a sitting president who actually won the election threatens to do irreparable damage to confidence in the US democracy. It is reckless in the extreme.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on January 25, 2017, 11:13:46 pm
Anyone catch the 3 Trumpettes singing Woody Guthrie's " This is my land, this is your land"
Then going on about praying to god to keep the immigrants out.

Saw that, proper creepy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 26, 2017, 06:37:41 am
This'll cheer y'all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gneBUA39mnI
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 26, 2017, 08:21:40 am
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170126/b8de257537817a7aaa36173abb7d6d0d.jpg)


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 26, 2017, 08:46:42 am
Anyone catch the 3 Trumpettes singing Woody Guthrie's " This is my land, this is your land"
Then going on about praying to god to keep the immigrants out.

Saw that, proper creepy.

Woody Guthrie (one of the original protest singers) must have turned in his grave.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 26, 2017, 08:52:01 am
Prof. Smith Goes to Washington (https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/thanks-to-trump-scientists-are-planning-to-run-for-office/514229/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 27, 2017, 08:27:52 am
It is worth trying to persevere though this, just to truly get an insight to how confused this man is. I pity the reporter (never thought I'd say that):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/26/donald-trumps-brazen-first-interview-as-president-annotated/?utm_term=.3aed35123c88

I imagine Kim Jong-un would be a more coherent dinner guest. Put them in a room together and they could argue all night about which of them invented Oxygen and was the best Neurosurgeon, or which was the first to play 18 holes in 7 strokes...


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on January 27, 2017, 08:41:54 am
Tried to read that but have to walk away at sentences like:

"The bigness also hits because the — the size of it. The size."

The guy is a fucking lunatic. The Republicans have got a lot to answer for by putting this imbecile on the ballot paper.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fatneck on January 27, 2017, 10:11:55 am
 :agree:

Insane....  :blink: :shit:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 27, 2017, 04:20:29 pm
people are genuinely starting to panic.

People are very frightened. Day to day life is going on, of course, but this does not feel normal, very far from it.

Counterpoint: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/27/donald-trump-michigan-voters-media
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 27, 2017, 07:02:58 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170127/865d937ba49241d234eab3e865bd1fe0.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170127/d3b5e8a7959fe1d0d9e1f10faedde28c.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 27, 2017, 11:31:54 pm
Erika.
Professor of Education (Retired) Col. Us Army (retired), now living in  Vermont.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170127/a81a50fc86fcfd04aace46a030d67c20.jpg)


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 28, 2017, 08:22:01 am
I was half way through writing a post about his latest exec orders on immigration from Muslim (but not muslim as that violates the constitution etc..) countries..

And gave up as it made me feel really quite sad.

Who knows whats going to happen next...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 28, 2017, 08:25:12 am
A friend, in California, wrote yesterday "I dread waking up each day and wondering "what the fuck will he do today"".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 28, 2017, 01:31:58 pm
Lying in bed this morning, the house is full of the sounds of the seven member, three generation Pakistani refugee family who arrived last night. They'll be with us for the next few days until a more permanent home is found. We are also helping with the resettlement of four Eritrean refugees who similarly stayed with us for a few days before Christmas.

Our newest guests pretty much made it in at the last hour. People are already being turned away at airports, including Green Card holders.

I am sickened to my stomach. I have nothing to say.

Well, maybe one thing: that's 11 refugees in.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 28, 2017, 03:11:18 pm
Y'know, we really need that "like" button.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 28, 2017, 05:05:36 pm
Turning away existing green card holders (there were 500k green cards given to people from the now banned countries in the last ten years) is a level of cruel higher than I thought...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 28, 2017, 05:05:55 pm
And we'll done ANDY and Christine.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on January 28, 2017, 08:31:38 pm
Nice one Poppstar.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on January 28, 2017, 09:00:11 pm
I don't want to sound overly dramatic, but this is scarily looking like the start of a proper Fascist regime. It is genuinely terrifying. Apparently a Texan mosque went up in flames hours after the order to ban muslims entering was signed, which scarily harks back to Kristalnacht. https://thinkprogress.org/islamic-center-of-victoria-fire-8a683f632a7a#.cxg5ry6de (https://thinkprogress.org/islamic-center-of-victoria-fire-8a683f632a7a#.cxg5ry6de)

Also he has been calling the Washington Post and New York Times #FAKENEWS, which might just sounds like rhetoric but is actually effective at undermining journalism.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on January 28, 2017, 11:11:22 pm
Scary times.... Trump is behaving like a man who read lots of old 2000AD Judge Dredd as a teen but didn't realise that the walled world, fascist "justice" etc was satirical not instructional.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on January 28, 2017, 11:46:51 pm
Seriously the good folk of the US need to rise up and do something. What's Trump's support like within the military, any chance of a coup?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 29, 2017, 12:13:15 am
Seriously the good folk of the US need to rise up and do something. What's Trump's support like within the military, any chance of a coup?

I don't know about the army, but the many of the police are solidly pro-Trump. They will be thinking their chance has come.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 29, 2017, 12:16:12 am
Seriously the good folk of the US need to rise up and do something.

Breaking news: expedited court case being held in Brooklyn this evening to decide the cases of the 11 detained at JFK today ... being held simply because of the huge protest that is threatening to shut the airport. Standing up can work.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 29, 2017, 08:16:34 am
https://www.autostraddle.com/i-was-trained-for-the-culture-wars-in-home-school-awaiting-someone-like-mike-pence-as-a-messiah-367057/

Now, a month ago, I would have classed that in with "Alien Lizards rule the world".
Now?
Um, maybe?


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 29, 2017, 08:22:52 am
And, as for the May woman; pathetic.

Theresa May does 'not agree' with US ban on refugees
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38786576



All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 29, 2017, 09:19:16 am
Even Outside magazine is railing against him!

https://www.outsideonline.com/2153151/trumps-war-environment-has-started?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=facebookpost


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 29, 2017, 09:42:38 am
1941 cartoon by Dr Seuss, note the slogan on the shirt:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170129/b27243cfbdeae74854b64744f0854645.jpg)


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fiend on January 29, 2017, 02:49:02 pm
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 29, 2017, 03:03:26 pm
http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/01/29/california-just-threatened-stop-paying-taxes-trump-cuts-federal-funding-sanctuary-city-status/

And we thought Brexit was divisive...

I signed that petition. I can't see it making any difference though. I'm afraid May (and all of us) are stuck with him and dependent on the US for our future, if we turn our backs on Europe.
Anyone remember "Oceania"?
We can be "Air strip one" for real! I'm sooooo excited!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 29, 2017, 05:42:09 pm
And could things get stranger than this unlikely protest...?
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170129/c6be1531034c1af93d2cdf706fb8143c.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 29, 2017, 06:52:25 pm
Falling off your bandwagon in amazement +1
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 29, 2017, 06:56:29 pm
Facts are facts, regardless of who brings them to your attention.

The full graphic which includes the sources cited is...

(https://i.imgur.com/XuPhr3F.jpg)


I'm amazed that anyone pays any attention to such "celebrities" and somewhat cynically suspect their manager/publicist suggested they use the graphic.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 29, 2017, 08:28:58 pm
I know, I know, but this is darkly fascinating to watch. Someone pressed the self destruct button:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170129/7b9d2ac7bb027ee85bcce9671a5ff47c.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170129/9d4bc017e035a35ce80ccfd8ede1c3f0.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170129/e43d2c333b4c575c91d00e9d666d595b.jpg)


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 30, 2017, 07:52:55 am
Resize?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 30, 2017, 07:59:34 am
Resize?
?
How?


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 30, 2017, 08:13:29 am
Resize?
?
How?



Use the 'width=' argument to the BBCode...

Code: [Select]
[img width=768]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170129/7b9d2ac7bb027ee85bcce9671a5ff47c.jpg[/img]

My desktop is 1920x1080 so plenty of real estate, the images as you post them go off the page and are unreadable without going to the bottom of your post, scrolling right, then back up the page to read the half that is now revealed, repeat ad-nauseum for each and every image, resizing avoids this...

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170129/7b9d2ac7bb027ee85bcce9671a5ff47c.jpg)

Or just not bother reading them at all as the scrolling around wastes time.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on January 30, 2017, 08:19:30 am
This is an interesting twitter account to keep an eye on - apparently whitehouse staff running it from the inside:

https://twitter.com/RoguePOTUSStaff
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 30, 2017, 08:25:29 am
Or just follow Spicer, who appears to be actually as dumb as portrayed:

http://usuncut.news/2017/01/30/sean-spicer-retweeted-the-onion-and-the-internet-will-never-let-him-live-it-down-screenshots/


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 30, 2017, 08:35:47 am
How's this Slackers?

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170130/55920e4d2217abe7ca1dee63680e0c3a.jpg)


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 30, 2017, 08:38:58 am
Its been under the radar due to the (dead cat?) immigration story - but he's also changed how the military brief/report to him/heads of staff - which has got a few people worried too...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 30, 2017, 08:52:32 am
How's this Slackers?

Fits on one page and is readable.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 30, 2017, 12:55:40 pm
Worrying conmentary https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/trial-balloon-for-a-coup-e024990891d5#.2c1hsc8iu
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 30, 2017, 01:49:44 pm
In summary:

"This is not normal. This is not America. Are you paying attention yet?

• Step one for Hitler was to discredit the media.
• Step two was to silence scientists and government employees.
• Hate crimes against minorities grew to the highest in their country’s history. Clashes between parties became so extensive that Hitler ended civil liberties (Step three), giving “law and order” as the cause. Those who opposed Hitler were ridiculed and threatened.
• In Step Four wealthy supporters purchased media outlets, employing only those faithful to the ruling party.
• In his final step (Step Five) Hitler declared that the only way the country could be unified was to restore traditional values. Minorities including gays, the disabled, Jews, Roma, and people of color were considered “inferior” and sent to death camps for slaughter.
We're between Step 2-4.
This is in case you were always confused by how so many people could go along with Hitler's Final Solution, this is exactly how it happened. Cannot even believe that this shit is happening in this country, in our time."

Simon Helberg.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 30, 2017, 03:36:29 pm
If any of you read the Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal strip, the cartoonist penned this in response to current events:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xLndd-U4pAwdvGKGkZif96BQLE_t0tVnGbNHBubisyQ/mobilebasic


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on January 30, 2017, 08:48:14 pm
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/donald-trump-fascist-video-mp-dennis-skinner-boris-johnson-a7553881.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/donald-trump-fascist-video-mp-dennis-skinner-boris-johnson-a7553881.html)
At last some backbone and opposition.
Fortunately I have a "cupboard underneath the stairs."
So if Trump sets off the nukes I be alright.
If anybody needs refuge just let me know...
 :blink:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 30, 2017, 09:41:28 pm
Trumps corporate Twitter trolling tapped to support puppies (https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/01/30/trumps_corporate_twitter_trolling_tapped_to_support_puppies/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on January 31, 2017, 08:12:42 am
More purging of opposition. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38805944
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 31, 2017, 10:17:15 am
He thinks he's still on the Apprentice.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on January 31, 2017, 11:13:46 am
Worrying conmentary https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/trial-balloon-for-a-coup-e024990891d5#.2c1hsc8iu

Worth reading in conjunction with that:

https://tompepinsky.com/2017/01/30/weak-and-incompetent-leaders-act-like-strong-leaders/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 31, 2017, 11:51:47 am
^^ well worth a read for an alternative view...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nails on January 31, 2017, 02:25:45 pm
Very much hoping that Pepinsky is right.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: r-man on January 31, 2017, 02:25:54 pm
Political scientist?

Is that American for "historian"?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 31, 2017, 02:50:02 pm
Its English for political scientist  ;)

I'm not sure I find Pepinsky's analysis any more reassuring than the alternatives.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: duncan on January 31, 2017, 02:53:26 pm
Trump's Muslim ban 'A shock event'. (https://thewayofimprovement.com/2017/01/29/historian-heather-cox-richardson-on-trumps-muslim-ban-its-a-shock-event/)

In other words, keep your eye on the ball.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 31, 2017, 03:22:03 pm
I suspect both opinions were formed and articles drafted without the sacking of Yates in mind. That feels more ominous than inept, though as Andy says; which is worse?


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on January 31, 2017, 04:50:42 pm
"2016 Presidential Shitshow" is used on another forum I use and seems to fit the bill.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 31, 2017, 04:52:41 pm
Rise of the Fourth Reich?

Sorry, too melodramatic?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 31, 2017, 04:57:15 pm
Or, borrow Roth's title "The plot against America"?

Strangely similar opening scene...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 31, 2017, 05:06:11 pm
Shall I rename this thread? If so, any suggestions?

"President Trump"  :sick:

"Trump" would be quite sufficient.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 31, 2017, 06:47:57 pm
Very much hoping that Pepinsky is right.


Rings more true to me. The footage of the speech he gave to the CIA doesn't show a powerful force but someone out of their depth talking gibberish. Likewise the May visit - it looked to me like he relished being associated with a *competent respected politician becasue it made him look more respectable and important than he can achieve by himself.

I'd put money on him being shown up as out of his depth and the public turning against him within two years.


*whatever your political views, May is deemed by most a competent and respected political leader. At least compared to a Corbyn or a Trump.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 31, 2017, 07:05:16 pm
Very much hoping that Pepinsky is right.


Rings more true to me. The footage of the speech he gave to the CIA doesn't show a powerful force but someone out of their depth talking gibberish. Likewise the May visit - it looked to me like he relished being associated with a *competent respected politician becasue it made him look more respectable and important than he can achieve by himself.

I'd put money on him being shown up as out of his depth and the public turning against him within two years.


*whatever your political views, May is deemed by most a competent and respected political leader. At least compared to a Corbyn or a Trump.


God I hope it's incompetence.

I think the implication of the "coup" theory is that Bannon constitutes the power, not Trump.
Bannon is not the crazed "Rush Limbaugh" character I first thought him to be. Former Naval officer and highly successful businessman, movie producer etc etc.
Classic senior Nazi material by the standards of the 1930's; so why not now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 31, 2017, 07:14:26 pm

I think the implication of the "coup" theory is that Bannon constitutes the power, not Trump.


So it is suggested. I think Trump lacks skill and competence but by driving a coach and horses through constitutional safeguards society could be more at risk from éminences grises than éminences oranges.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 31, 2017, 07:47:46 pm
society could be more at risk from éminences grises than éminences oranges.

Ooo..  I like that line.🤡[emoji12]


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 31, 2017, 11:12:58 pm
Very much hoping that Pepinsky is right.


Rings more true to me. The footage of the speech he gave to the CIA doesn't show a powerful force but someone out of their depth talking gibberish. Likewise the May visit - it looked to me like he relished being associated with a *competent respected politician becasue it made him look more respectable and important than he can achieve by himself.

I'd put money on him being shown up as out of his depth and the public turning against him within two years.


*whatever your political views, May is deemed by most a competent and respected political leader. At least compared to a Corbyn or a Trump.


God I hope it's incompetence.

I think the implication of the "coup" theory is that Bannon constitutes the power, not Trump.
Bannon is not the crazed "Rush Limbaugh" character I first thought him to be. Former Naval officer and highly successful businessman, movie producer etc etc.
Classic senior Nazi material by the standards of the 1930's; so why not now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, Bannon is very, very crazed. He wants to plunge the world into what he believes will be a cleansing chaos.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Duma on February 01, 2017, 07:48:35 am
Read somewhere yesterday (sorry can't find link now) that Brannon would need Senate confirmation for the NSC, hope they take him apart.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 01, 2017, 08:23:54 am
Yes, didn't mean to imply he wasn't crazed but point out he is truly a "Bond villain"; in as much as there is a sharp intellect behind the lunacy.


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fried on February 01, 2017, 09:32:23 am
Rise of the Fourth Reich?

Sorry, too melodramatic?

It certainly feels like that's a possible path.

Good long-form article in The Atlantic on that topic: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/03/how-to-build-an-autocracy/513872/ (from a former Dubya speechwriter, which shows how far we have travelled.)

"What happens in the next four years will depend heavily on whether Trump is right or wrong about how little Americans care about their democracy and the habits and conventions that sustain it. If they surprise him, they can restrain him."

Excellent article. Lots of good stuff. Keep linking them up people
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Duma on February 01, 2017, 09:59:01 am
Read somewhere yesterday (sorry can't find link now) that Brannon would need Senate confirmation for the NSC, hope they take him apart.

Snopes says he won't (palmer reports was what I saw yesterday)

http://www.snopes.com/steve-bannon-need-senate-confirmation-hearing-sit-nsc/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 01, 2017, 10:16:40 am
🤡

https://www.outsideonline.com/2152476/everything-thats-wrong-billionaires-doomsday-survival-plan?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=facebookpost


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 01, 2017, 12:46:15 pm
I would assume this could be taken as the Royal Family's position on Trump. The second veiled repudiation in as many days.
This republican is pleasantly surprised.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/prince-charles-donald-trump-warning-right-populism-dark-days-thought-for-the-day-a7489876.html?cmpid=facebook-post


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on February 01, 2017, 01:16:02 pm
Unfortunately that's a month old now, but obviously still relevant.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on February 01, 2017, 02:23:47 pm
Yes, didn't mean to imply he wasn't crazed but point out he is truly a "Bond villain"; in as much as there is a sharp intellect behind the lunacy.


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...

You may enjoy this piece on Bannon

http://crookedtimber.org/2017/01/11/the-political-thought-of-stephen-k-bannon/#more-41389

"Putting it all together, his worldview comes across as a fairly incoherent hodge-podge of incompatible ideologies whose common thread is hatred of elites. One can speculate that Trump was drawn to Bannon because Bannon shared Trump’s sense of the political opportunities ripe to be exploited of European-style right-wing populism... Beyond this strategic instinct or insight, neither of them seems to have any particularly coherent idea of what they believe in, apart from the notion of a conspiracy on the part of a sinister liberal-cosmopolitan elite...

"As the statement of a political philosophy, one has to say that it is pretty shallow and poorly thought-through... It suggests to me that people whose whole life revolves around the making of money and the consolidating of power (including media power)—and this is true of Bannon no less than Trump—haven’t had the time to reflect on what their actual political principles are, or didn’t think it was worth bothering about."

Do I need to point out the similarity between this and Brexit, which has been so carefully thought through that barely a single supporter can point to the unjust laws we are labouring under, and none of the higher-ups seems to have had a clear post-referendum plan...?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on February 01, 2017, 03:22:47 pm

Do I need to point out the similarity between this and Brexit, which has been so carefully thought through that barely a single supporter can point to the unjust laws we are labouring under, and none of the higher-ups seems to have had a clear post-referendum plan...?

<Off topic.> If you want to build flimsy straw-men and then knock them down them then that's your choice but I don't think it helps your case. Because I don't think it's correct to say most brexiters thought the laws made by the EU were 'unjust'. More that they simply didn't want to be subject to laws made by the EU nor governed by the EU. Understandable motives, which are harder to attack than attacking a belief that EU laws are 'unjust'.

As to a plan, it's hard to have a clear detailed plan for something as dynamic and inter-tangled as leaving the EU (which has never been done before). That's why negotiations happen and why they take years - the plan will change a thousand times between now and the end of talks. As anyone who's done much planning knows, any 'plan' doesn't survive first contact with reality. But again don't let that stop you using the lack of a detailed plan in your case against brexit.

In other news it'll be interesting to see what the BofE growth forecast is in their quarterly report released tomorrow.. August forecast: 0.8% growth for 2017. November forecast: revised to 1.4% growth for 2017. February forecast for 2017 growth: could it actually more than double the forecast made post brexit - a forecast out by 100%? It's looking likely.
Again, don't let the economy's unforeseen strong performance and the Bank of England's new cautiously upbeat outlook fool you. Clearly the governor is either wrong (quite possible, given their pre and immediate post-brexit forecasts), or dancing to the tune of his political masters, (also quite possible, given their behavior pre referendum ).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 01, 2017, 09:27:48 pm
edit: deleted as totally off topic
Title: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 01, 2017, 09:49:59 pm
Is it me - or maybe the bit of Manchester I live in - or does everything seem to have got a fair bit more expensive recently?

Pete - that paragraph on planning..... really?

Edit. Piss - thought this was the EU thread. Sorry folks... carry on tangerine man.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on February 01, 2017, 10:23:54 pm
Is it me - or maybe the bit of Manchester I live in - or does everything seem to have got a fair bit more expensive recently?

Pete - that paragraph on planning..... really?

Edit. Piss - thought this was the EU thread. Sorry folks... carry on tangerine man.
The grey area between Trump and Brexit!
Trumps immigration policy pales into insignificance when compared to Brexit immigration blue sky thinking, I won't use the term plans as Pete has said there isn't a need for one. I am sure mega companies around the world are taking notes about how to do business without a plan, sorry with blue sky thinking. When I am next asked at work for planning I'll use the phrase, "I don't plan because it won't survive first contact"- this is a real tangible Brexit positive.

Tomtom the price of things look at petrol. Gone up a lot since Christmas.
Got some genius climbing shoes, wrong size, sent back, new shoes were an extra 10er.
Could be 101 reasons why, but did cost me more.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on February 01, 2017, 11:12:19 pm
won't use the term plans as Pete has said there isn't a need for one. I am sure mega companies around the world are taking notes about how to do business without a plan, sorry with blue sky thinking. When I am next asked at work for planning I'll use the phrase, "I don't plan because it won't survive first contact"- this is a real tangible Brexit positive.

This isn't what Pete said. I don't agree with Pete's viewpoint but if you're going to argue with him then do it properly.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 01, 2017, 11:28:07 pm
I won't use the term plans as Pete has said there isn't a need for one. I am sure mega companies around the world are taking notes about how to do business without a plan, sorry with blue sky thinking. When I am next asked at work for planning I'll use the phrase, "I don't plan because it won't survive first contact"

I have a friend and colleague who wrote a book called Strategy without Design that, in essence, argued this - that companies should forget about trying to strategise and employ a 'wayfaring' mindset instead (OK, I know planning and strategy aren't synonymous). A consultant in one of the Nordic countries got hold of it and became totally enamoured. He started telling all his clients that they should just rip up all their strategies. It'll come as no surprise to hear he got the axe pronto.

In any case, Will is right that this was a misrepresentation of what Pete was saying.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on February 01, 2017, 11:29:12 pm
won't use the term plans as Pete has said there isn't a need for one. I am sure mega companies around the world are taking notes about how to do business without a plan, sorry with blue sky thinking. When I am next asked at work for planning I'll use the phrase, "I don't plan because it won't survive first contact"- this is a real tangible Brexit positive.

This isn't what Pete said. I don't agree with Pete's viewpoint but if you're going to argue with him then do it properly.
Not wanting to argue with Pete or anybody else . ;)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 01, 2017, 11:35:58 pm
Trumps immigration policy pales into insignificance when compared to Brexit immigration blue sky thinking

This is to woefully underestimate what is happening in the US.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on February 02, 2017, 06:34:28 am
Trumps immigration policy pales into insignificance when compared to Brexit immigration blue sky thinking

This is to woefully underestimate what is happening in the US.

It is terrible what is happening in America, and I am worried about the way things will go in the future. The point I'm trying to make is that Trump has restricted movement on religious grounds to eight countries for the next 3 months.. Where as Brexit wants to stop the free movement of people from across the EU - 28 countries to U.K. Brexit could be a more extreme version of what is happening in America.

The "first contact" idea was spun earlier in the week/last week by politicians, probably David Davies (ex military). Yes Pete is right that things will change a lot as things proceed. I hope that once sabre rattling is out of the way that compromise can be found and the result a good one for all involved.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on February 02, 2017, 06:50:47 am
Trump to focus counter-extremism program solely on Islam - sources (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-extremists-program-exclusiv-idUSKBN15G5VO)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on February 02, 2017, 08:01:25 am
Quote from: jfdm
The point I'm trying to make is that Trump has restricted movement on religious grounds to eight countries for the next 3 months.. Where as Brexit wants to stop the free movement of people from across the EU - 28 countries to U.K. Brexit could be a more extreme version of what is happening in America.

I'll just quickly point out that this is completely untrue, the UK doesn't want to stop free movement of people any more than do Canada, New Zealand, Chile or any number of other countries want to stop the free movement of people from the EU27 (not 28).
When you go on holiday to Canada do you think they're being xenophobic racists by asking you to fill out a 3-month visitor visa and to see your passport? Likewise when you work in a foreign country, as I have (Canada and NZ), do you think it's xenophobic and racist when they ask you to apply for a work visa?

That's very very different from a complete ban on movement based on religion.

I know it's the Trump thread but less hot air please.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 02, 2017, 08:07:17 am
So Pete - if we look at working rather than jollies..

my Kiwi cousins pay c.£10k each for a visa to work in the U.K.  But it's no cost for anyone in the EU bloc. Trying to read the Brexit runes it looks highly likely that something similar will happen...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on February 02, 2017, 08:17:17 am
When you go on holiday to Canada do you think they're being xenophobic racists by asking you to fill out a 3-month visitor visa and to see your passport?

Canada don't require UK citizens to have a Visa to visit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 02, 2017, 08:20:12 am
I've been veering off topic. But dragging it back - did anyone else see C4 news last night talking to voters in Stoke? A few there who wanted Trump in charge in the U.K... [emoji33]
Title: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 02, 2017, 08:22:57 am
From http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/a-full-transcript-of-donald-trumps-black-history-month-1791871370?utm_medium=sharefromsite&utm_source=The_Concourse_facebook

February is Black History Month. This morning, Donald Trump held a White House event to mark the occasion. Below is an accurate transcript of his remarks.

[Daniel Dale of the Toronto Star published the first transcript of this on Twitter; we re-transcribed the president’s remarks from video for this transcript.]

Well, the election, it came out really well. Next time we’ll triple the number or quadruple it. We want to get it over 51, right? At least 51.

Well this is Black History Month, so this is our little breakfast, our little get-together. Hi Lynn, how are you? Just a few notes. During this month, we honor the tremendous history of African-Americans throughout our country. Throughout the world, if you really think about it, right? And their story is one of unimaginable sacrifice, hard work, and faith in America. I’ve gotten a real glimpse—during the campaign, I’d go around with Ben to a lot of different places I wasn’t so familiar with. They’re incredible people. And I want to thank Ben Carson, who’s gonna be heading up HUD. That’s a big job. That’s a job that’s not only housing, but it’s mind and spirit. Right, Ben? And you understand, nobody’s gonna be better than Ben.

Last month, we celebrated the life of Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., whose incredible example is unique in American history. You read all about Dr. Martin Luther King a week ago when somebody said I took the statue out of my office. It turned out that that was fake news. Fake news. The statue is cherished, it’s one of the favorite things in the—and we have some good ones. We have Lincoln, and we have Jefferson, and we have Dr. Martin Luther King. But they said the statue, the bust of Martin Luther King, was taken out of the office. And it was never even touched. So I think it was a disgrace, but that’s the way the press is. Very unfortunate.

I am very proud now that we have a museum on the National Mall where people can learn about Reverend King, so many other things. Frederick Douglass is an example of somebody who’s done an amazing job and is being recognized more and more, I noticed. Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, and millions more black Americans who made America what it is today. Big impact.

I’m proud to honor this heritage and will be honoring it more and more. The folks at the table in almost all cases have been great friends and supporters. Darrell—I met Darrell when he was defending me on television. And the people that were on the other side of the argument didn’t have a chance, right? And Paris has done an amazing job in a very hostile CNN community. He’s all by himself. You’ll have seven people, and Paris. And I’ll take Paris over the seven. But I don’t watch CNN, so I don’t get to see you as much as I used to. I don’t like watching fake news. But Fox has treated me very nice. Wherever Fox is, thank you.

We’re gonna need better schools and we need them soon. We need more jobs, we need better wages, a lot better wages. We’re gonna work very hard on the inner city. Ben is gonna be doing that, big league. That’s one of the big things that you’re gonna be looking at. We need safer communities and we’re going to do that with law enforcement. We’re gonna make it safe. We’re gonna make it much better than it is right now. Right now it’s terrible, and I saw you talking about it the other night, Paris, on something else that was really—you did a fantastic job the other night on a very unrelated show.

I’m ready to do my part, and I will say this: We’re gonna work together. This is a great group, this is a group that’s been so special to me. You really helped me a lot. If you remember I wasn’t going to do well with the African-American community, and after they heard me speaking and talking about the inner city and lots of other things, we ended up getting—and I won’t go into details—but we ended up getting substantially more than other candidates who had run in the past years. And now we’re gonna take that to new levels. I want to thank my television star over here—Omarosa’s actually a very nice person, nobody knows that. I don’t want to destroy her reputation but she’s a very good person, and she’s been helpful right from the beginning of the campaign, and I appreciate it. I really do. Very special.

So I want to thank everybody for being here.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on February 02, 2017, 12:26:06 pm
I've been veering off topic. But dragging it back - did anyone else see C4 news last night talking to voters in Stoke? A few there who wanted Trump in charge in the U.K... [emoji33]

You were being very naive if you were under the impression that the sort of cunts who support Trump are confined to the USA. For me the worst of what he is doing is not the immigration policy (that can be easily reversed) but his undermining of institutions, and by extension democracy, in the USA but I dare say that's lost on your man in Stoke (and strangely lost on a lot of the second ammendmenters in the States who always cite exactly what Trump is doing as the reason for needing to bear arms.).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 02, 2017, 12:55:14 pm
How dark can it get...?

If your Gay or Female?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-executive-order-christian-pre-marital-sex-same-sex-marriage-abortion-wrong-religious-a7558691.html?cmpid=facebook-post

Have a different political view?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-breitbart-news-remove-federal-funding-berkeley-university-california-milo-yiannopoulos-a7558946.html


World war 3?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-tweet-iran-on-notice-after-ballistic-missile-test-a7559001.html

Will they resist?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-general-strike-us-president-day-when-activists-national-facebook-twitter-a7558851.html?cmpid=facebook-post


Anschlus?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-tells-mexico-to-take-care-of-bad-hombres-or-america-will-a7558496.html

Pretty dark, possibly.

Reckon the editor of the Independent is currently cacking bricks, or at least thinks we should be.
I'm inclined to agree, I suppose. It might all fizzle out and he might settle down, or it could all go a long way south very rapidly.


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on February 02, 2017, 12:59:39 pm

World war 3?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-tweet-iran-on-notice-after-ballistic-missile-test-a7559001.html


Mikhail Gorbachev: 'It All Looks as if the World Is Preparing for War' (http://time.com/4645442/gorbachev-putin-trump/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on February 02, 2017, 01:02:13 pm
I've been veering off topic. But dragging it back - did anyone else see C4 news last night talking to voters in Stoke? A few there who wanted Trump in charge in the U.K... [emoji33]

You were being very naive if you were under the impression that the sort of cunts who support Trump are confined to the USA. For me the worst of what he is doing is not the immigration policy (that can be easily reversed) but his undermining of institutions, and by extension democracy, in the USA but I dare say that's lost on your man in Stoke (and strangely lost on a lot of the second ammendmenters in the States who always cite exactly what Trump is doing as the reason for needing to bear arms.).

 :agree:

When you read online comments on the BBC news website and various local area Facebook discussion groups etc it is shocking how many people support Trump's actions. The justification is always that he's making his country safer. Obviously if he really wanted to make the country safer then he need only introduce some sensible restrictions on gun ownership, but we all know how that would go down.
I think we on the "left" of the argument often rush too much to defend complete free movement of people in an effort to distance ourselves from those on the "right" of the argument who are manifestly racist. However I don't disagree that applying vetting procedures to visa applications should be a necessary part of maintaining national security. But a blanket ban based on nationality or religion? Such a blunt instrument serves only to be divisive, a recruitment message for ISIS, and blocks entry to would-be model citizens, some of whom are desperately trying to escape the worst conditions imaginable.
With regard to Brexit I think that having control (not necessarily much more than we already do) over our borders could be similarly desirable. But I think that we on the "left" of the argument refused to have the debate because all we could see on the other side of it was bigots - to our cost now. Is free movement of people in the EU the greatest threat to our national security and our prosperity? No. Is it worth leaving the EU over? Obviously not. But that's not to say that a little reform could have gone a long way in the minds of many Leave voters.

I went off on a bit of a tangent there. I think the really scary thing is, as Teaboy said, the loss of faith in institutions - particularly the judiciary but also the Commons. I never hear a good word said about an MP but I do believe that most of them, for all that it might be a position of privilege and involve some sticky decision making along the way, are working hard to do their best by those they represent. I really mean that. But a widespread knee-jerk mistrust of our institutions and political establishment is exactly what has fuelled the rise of dangerous populists like Farage, Trump and Corbyn.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on February 02, 2017, 01:03:36 pm
When you go on holiday to Canada do you think they're being xenophobic racists by asking you to fill out a 3-month visitor visa and to see your passport?

Canada don't require UK citizens to have a Visa to visit.

I didn't mean 'fill out' so wrote it in about 20 seconds before dashing off - the point is Canada don't allow a U.K. Citizen to remain indefinitely. Is this xenophobic and racist? I'd hazard a guess you think it isn't.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on February 02, 2017, 01:08:16 pm
he might settle down

This isn't going to happen. People uttered these four words like a prayer over and over in the run up to the inauguration. There's no evidence for it yet. He's made good on everything he said he would do. Time to stop hoping and start resisting!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 02, 2017, 01:09:45 pm
Will, I'm so glad you included Corbyn in that list.


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 02, 2017, 01:23:16 pm
he might settle down

This isn't going to happen. People uttered these four words like a prayer over and over in the run up to the inauguration. There's no evidence for it yet. He's made good on everything he said he would do. Time to stop hoping and start resisting!

My daughter is currently playing Anne Frank in a local production, picked her up from her opening night last night. She was so excited, clutching a bouquet and laughing with the other cast members.
When we got to the car, she went quite for a minute and then said "It's happening again, isn't it? I mean Donald Trump?"
I couldn't say "no", I said I think it might be.
I wish I was convinced May is not in his "Club".


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on February 02, 2017, 01:37:02 pm
Can't see Trump being reigned in by his right-hand man Bannon who nine months ago suggested war with China and again in the Middle East (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/02/steve-bannon-donald-trump-war-south-china-sea-no-doubt)



 :no: :no: :no:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 02, 2017, 01:39:31 pm
Can't see Trump being reigned in by his right-hand man Bannon who nine months ago suggested war with China and again in the Middle East (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/02/steve-bannon-donald-trump-war-south-china-sea-no-doubt)



 :no: :no: :no:

No hope of moderation, it seems...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/ivanka-trump-jared-kushner-control-donald-trump-us-president-white-house-adviser-a7557436.html?cmpid=facebook-post


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on February 02, 2017, 04:31:38 pm
I think the really scary thing is, as Teaboy said, the loss of faith in institutions - particularly the judiciary but also the Commons. I never hear a good word said about an MP but I do believe that most of them, for all that it might be a position of privilege and involve some sticky decision making along the way, are working hard to do their best by those they represent. I really mean that. But a widespread knee-jerk mistrust of our institutions and political establishment is exactly what has fuelled the rise of dangerous populists like Farage, Trump and Corbyn.

Fine sentiments Will, but look to the words of many people over on the Brexit thread who explicitly express that they don't trust the UK government and would rather it was overseen by the EU governance and laws. I call that exactly what you're talking about - mistrust in institutions.
I find it a bit sad that ABarrows and others feel they have no trust in their own country's elected government to deal with domestic problems, and that they think looking beyond the shores of the UK for the answer is a preferable situation.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on February 02, 2017, 05:08:33 pm

Fine sentiments Will, but look to the words of many people over on the Brexit thread who explicitly express that they don't trust the UK government and would rather it was overseen by the EU governance and laws. I call that exactly what you're talking about - mistrust in institutions.
I find it a bit sad that ABarrows and others feel they have no trust in their own country's elected government to deal with domestic problems, and that they think looking beyond the shores of the UK for the answer is a preferable situation.

I was actually talking about US institutions in my other reply (nor was I talking about people losing faith in them,I was talking about Trump *actually* undermining them or destroying them) but as we seem to have moved back to the UK/Brexit.........

Yes Pete, you are correct, people in the UK have lost faith in UK institutions but why is that sad? They are only 'ours' in terms of physical proximity. By most other measures they are not 'mine', I have very little in common with govt ministers or the higher levels of the civil service. I might not have language in common with the apparatchiks of the EU but from what I've seen we do have common values so from that PoV it seems more mine than a Tory led govt.

Nationality is only one of the ways we define our tribe, for some (most) it's the overriding one. Even for me it still is but I've seen enough for the pull of nationality to be overridden by the revulsion I feel towards the govt. I know govts are transitory but for one I don't see things changing soon. Secondly, it's not even about this govt, it's about the inability of this and successive govts to address the gulf between rich and poor. Those are the real tibes to which people belong and what the Brexiters did so well was to convince large swathes of the poor that:
a. Being nationalistic was sticking up for tribe poor
b. Gove, Johnson and Farage were also for tribe poor!
c. Voting Remain was a vote for the elites and therefore a vote for tribe rich.

anyway, back to Trump. What an absolute cu.....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fried on February 02, 2017, 05:09:46 pm
https://twitter.com/search?q=trump+national+prayer+breakfast&ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Esearch

Another crazy day at the office
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 02, 2017, 06:56:31 pm
he might settle down

This isn't going to happen. People uttered these four words like a prayer over and over in the run up to the inauguration. There's no evidence for it yet. He's made good on everything he said he would do. Time to stop hoping and start resisting!

My daughter is currently playing Anne Frank in a local production, picked her up from her opening night last night. She was so excited, clutching a bouquet and laughing with the other cast members.

You probably know already - but Anne Franks family tried to emigrate (as refugees) to the USA in 1941 - but that was after the US had changed its rules to restrict Jewish refugees from Europe.. Resulting in her eventual death in a concentration camp in 1944...

Same type of rule as Trump - different religion...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: A Jooser on February 02, 2017, 08:38:22 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=su8YlKeCJ98

Quote
The wall just got ten pound dearer!
  :lol:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on February 02, 2017, 09:02:42 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=su8YlKeCJ98

Quote
The wall just got ten pound dearer!
  :lol:

Fantastic, love the lip sync. :smart:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on February 02, 2017, 10:16:53 pm
he might settle down

This isn't going to happen. People uttered these four words like a prayer over and over in the run up to the inauguration. There's no evidence for it yet. He's made good on everything he said he would do. Time to stop hoping and start resisting!

The guy who cuts my hair (I know what you're thinking. "The guy" is a real human, not a pudding bowl) is a fantastic socialist but also one of the populist crew. He plainly stated to me tonight that he would rather have a principled party that didn't take power than a pragmatic one that did. He thinks Blair is worse than Thatcher for his centralising of the Labour party. He says he doesn't trust politicians any more.
I asked him, "Who's the most trustworthy politician on the planet right now?"
"Eeerrr. <Insert name, can't remember who it was>?"
"No. The world's most trustworthy politician is Donald Trump. He made a tonne of campaign promises and he is fulfilling every last one of them, regardless of his tanking approval ratings and whether they may be pragmatic or workable. Build a wall, tick. Repeal the ACA, tick. Stop immigration from muslim majority countries, tick."

Let's have a bit more pragmatism shall we? Sorry, that was a continuation of my earlier post but I thought it worth posting.


I think the really scary thing is, as Teaboy said, the loss of faith in institutions - particularly the judiciary but also the Commons. I never hear a good word said about an MP but I do believe that most of them, for all that it might be a position of privilege and involve some sticky decision making along the way, are working hard to do their best by those they represent. I really mean that. But a widespread knee-jerk mistrust of our institutions and political establishment is exactly what has fuelled the rise of dangerous populists like Farage, Trump and Corbyn.

Fine sentiments Will, but look to the words of many people over on the Brexit thread who explicitly express that they don't trust the UK government and would rather it was overseen by the EU governance and laws. I call that exactly what you're talking about - mistrust in institutions.
I find it a bit sad that ABarrows and others feel they have no trust in their own country's elected government to deal with domestic problems, and that they think looking beyond the shores of the UK for the answer is a preferable situation.

I think you know you're misrepresenting the issue. The EU does not replace our parliament, it is an addition to it. Our government can and still does legislate independent of the European parliament. We influence EU legislation as it is being written, vote on it along with our neighbours, and then enact the directives which the EU decrees. I don't see what's so disagreeable about that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fultonius on February 03, 2017, 11:23:12 am
Brexit, Trump, Big Data?  What's the link? 

https://youtu.be/n8Dd5aVXLCc

How much impact it had who knows. Very clever, very scary and very important to understand the impact it could have on future elections.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Paul B on February 03, 2017, 11:35:24 am
Unexpectedly there are many counter pieces to the Cambridge Analytica story (which I found very interesting on first read).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fultonius on February 03, 2017, 11:59:40 am
Care to share them? I'm sure if I google
Quote
counter pieces to the Cambridge Analytica story
I'll get a lot of hits, most of which will be nonsense. Any reliable ones?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fultonius on February 03, 2017, 12:38:11 pm
It did seem a little "too good to be true" (or too bad).

The only counter arguments I've so far read seem to state "they can't have had the influence they say they had because of X,Y and Z" but X, Y and Z are not that convincing either. Jury's out both ways.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 03, 2017, 12:40:30 pm
Its an idea rather too like one of the plot lines from the last season of House of Cards to be 100% plausible...

But, I guess in politics the game of incremental gains is relevant ~ so every 0.1% counts.. or can count.

Interesting that Facebook posted record ad revenue in the last quarter. $10Bn Profit (thats profit not turnover) on Ads last year...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Paul B on February 03, 2017, 12:48:01 pm
Care to share them? I'm sure if I google
Quote
counter pieces to the Cambridge Analytica story
I'll get a lot of hits, most of which will be nonsense. Any reliable ones?

Sorry I'm at work which prevents me doing so.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 03, 2017, 12:52:00 pm
And trying to work out where the Futon we're heading (being dragged) here is getting tiresome.
Did I hear "He" has been threatening Iran again overnight?

Surprising to see who are aligning themselves against him:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/koch-brothers-donald-trump-clash-resistance-conservative-billionaires-network-us-president-charles-a7560706.html?cmpid=facebook-post

So, I rather enjoyed staying on Ascension, but I was wondering if my acquaintances better versed in Climate science could advise me as to the future habitability of the Falkland islands? I also rather liked it there, but it can be a tad bleak of a winter. Any chance of a more Mediterranean climate there in a decade or so? Should I pack Lettuce seeds (if I can find any, of course)?


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on February 03, 2017, 01:00:44 pm
Brexit, Trump, Big Data?  What's the link? 

...

How much impact it had who knows. Very clever, very scary and very important to understand the impact it could have on future elections.

Some background on the development of the work here (https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/big-data-cambridge-analytica-brexit-trump).  Penultimate paragraph has statement from Cambridge Analytica that they do not use data from Farcebook.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on February 03, 2017, 01:47:12 pm
Brexit, Trump, Big Data?  What's the link? 

https://youtu.be/n8Dd5aVXLCc

How much impact it had who knows. Very clever, very scary and very important to understand the impact it could have on future elections.


My partner works on this. She's a data analyst working with Hadoop, big data etc. In her words:
''So i build the big data connections between cable info and household data. Funny to see Nielsen and Experian logos in the presentation...i'm working on them now! ....Experian data is scary...household files that provide address, no.of people in a house, their age, salary, debt, pets, no.of cars, if they're expecting a baby...when its due...if they've applied to move house...the details are scary!! We then match it to media data, the cookies associated to that house, sites and pages visited, their cable TV viewings...its a full behavioral catalogue built up by matching huge, expensive datasets....and its really scary!''


I try to have a lo-profile.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on February 03, 2017, 03:46:32 pm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/38853850/did-donald-trump-adviser-kellyanne-conway-just-invent-a-massacre

When I was a kid and I read 1984 I remember thinking it ludicrous that the party could say something had happened when it actually hadn't and people would believe unquestioningly.

What the fuck is going on?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on February 03, 2017, 04:29:56 pm
Ties in quite well to this (from Mick on FB)

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/feb/02/amusing-ourselves-to-death-neil-postman-trump-orwell-huxley

I think I need to seek out the book
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 03, 2017, 04:34:37 pm
Ties in quite well to this (from Mick on FB)

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/feb/02/amusing-ourselves-to-death-neil-postman-trump-orwell-huxley

I think I need to seek out the book

Only available as an audio book on iTunes, annoyingly.
I read that article over breakfast; worryingly on the money.
You can pick up "Brave New World" for 1.49 FA's in iBook...

Oh my God! The Fu%#ing irony!


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on February 03, 2017, 04:38:13 pm
I read both at high school, is that likely to happen now? I'd like to think so.

Feel the bitter taste of irony on your tongue.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 03, 2017, 06:49:24 pm

So, I rather enjoyed staying on Ascension, but I was wondering if my acquaintances better versed in Climate science could advise me as to the future habitability of the Falkland islands? I also rather liked it there, but it can be a tad bleak of a winter. Any chance of a more Mediterranean climate there in a decade or so? Should I pack Lettuce seeds (if I can find any, of course)?


Not a climate scientist - but I bit at this thought :)

Falkands are at pretty much the same lattitude as Devon/Cornwall - but no gulf stream to keep them warm. So similar length days/nights as you have - but given the size/proximity/amount of cold shit (ice etc..) in Antarctica what goes on there will have a pretty profound influence on life. From memory and reading (probably Shackleton!) there is a strong atmospheric circulation pattern around Antarctica - which drives the very strong winds through the Capes - Also less/no continental intrusion on these circulations (aside from the bottom of S.America) so they can whistle around and around with no obstructions. Maybe it can get a bit more like Faroes/Shetlands with less of a seasonal day/night imbalance... Though its probably not that far off Faroes already.

From a global warming perspective - its bits of Greenland/Arctic that have seen massive (4-5 degree) rises in the last 50 years - I don't think the Antarctic is affected anything like as much (please correct me if wrong).. So I'd suggest buying up some land in Greenland if you want somewhere getting warmer.

The furthest south I've been is Invercargil on S.Island New Zealand and that was a reasonably uninspiring place (and only 46deg south)..

My Climate change business investment tip - would be to buy a chunk of presently average South facing farmland on the East Yorkshire Wolds. This will make EXCELLENT vineyard land in 10-20 years time.. Chalky soil, bit of relief, South facing, 600mm rainfall a year... got all the right numbers for some viticulture...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 03, 2017, 08:12:44 pm
Rather fell in love with the Falklands, though I think the lack of trees might grate eventually.
Spent a month living rough on Weddle island. Just stunning:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170203/c7e616322734e4f0abaabd96bc2f7b66.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 03, 2017, 09:08:54 pm
Back on topic and from idle dreams of surviving the coming apocalypse...

They love him in Europe, don't they?

Ummm...

Cover of Der Spiegel

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170203/f3804612292d7d60a4afa71e3155d561.jpg)

And May must have felt positively cozy:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/03/francois-hollande-attacks-donald-trump-eu-summit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 03, 2017, 10:38:59 pm
Although it is blindingly obvious I have not it commented upon America First vs Britain First ..similar ideology...but different haircuts.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 04, 2017, 09:33:21 am
I'm wondering if the Orange Fuckwit is enjoying his Presidency?
I expect he's unaware of the massive outpouring of love across the world though, unfortunately.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/us-radio-stations-hacked-to-play-yg-s-fuck-donald-trump-a7561156.html


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fried on February 04, 2017, 03:17:13 pm
https://www.bowlinggreenmassacrefund.com/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 04, 2017, 04:22:28 pm
And (possibly) military intimidation of the populace. Though my US military friends all seem to be anti-Trump, both retired and serving.
 I thought my acquaintances spanned the political spectrum as they include card carrying Reps and Dems, devout Christians, Atheists, Muslims and several Jews (British, Yank and Israeli), but only my mate Gav in Inverness seems pro-Trump and one UKB poster (though there it's (I think) an understandable stance on abortion, I don't agree but I understand).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/02/03/a-special-warfare-unit-was-spotted-flying-a-trump-flag-in-public-now-the-navy-is-investigating/?utm_term=.4535d3ef86aa


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 05, 2017, 05:55:18 pm
Interesting piece in the Grauniad about Trump's appeal. A bit free with the word 'elite' but worth reading.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/trump-not-fascist-champion-for-forgotten-millions (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/trump-not-fascist-champion-for-forgotten-millions)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bubba on February 05, 2017, 06:40:12 pm
Thought this was quite amusing: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/us-radio-stations-hacked-to-play-yg-s-fuck-donald-trump-a7561156.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 05, 2017, 09:08:12 pm
I give you the Hoofing Wank-bucket Spangle Monkey of the century's latest piece of staggering wisdom and insight:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-muslim-travel-ban-judge-blame-court-immigration-syria-terrorism-a7564316.html


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fatneck on February 06, 2017, 10:55:28 am
Quote from: Bubba
Thought this was quite amusing: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/us-radio-stations-hacked-to-play-yg-s-fuck-donald-trump-a7561156.html

Brilliant!!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on February 06, 2017, 06:12:15 pm
BRILLIANT!!!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/06/donald-trump-should-not-be-allowed-to-speak-in-westminster-hall-says-speaker (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/06/donald-trump-should-not-be-allowed-to-speak-in-westminster-hall-says-speaker)
At last backbone from the most unlikeliest of places John Bercow  :great:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on February 06, 2017, 08:15:47 pm
BRILLIANT!!!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/06/donald-trump-should-not-be-allowed-to-speak-in-westminster-hall-says-speaker (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/06/donald-trump-should-not-be-allowed-to-speak-in-westminster-hall-says-speaker)
At last backbone from the most unlikeliest of places John Bercow  :great:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QP0c6smM_NM (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QP0c6smM_NM)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on February 06, 2017, 09:08:07 pm
You've got to laugh, taken from Guardian article,

The itinerary for Donald Trump’s visit has just been rewritten. Monday: arrive at Heathrow, economy class. Get taxi to Premier Inn in Euston. Spend afternoon shopping at Harrods. Have a not-sso-Happy Meal with Theresa May at McDonald’s. Tuesday: two hour guided tour of London, taking in views of Buckingham Palace and Houses of Parliament. Lunch with Nigel Farage and his French au pair at a pub in Chelsea. Watch them get pissed before taking them to see Brexit: the Musical. Wednesday: Stay indoors and tweet about BAD PEOPLE! TV dinner with Piers Morgan to watch repeats of The Apprentice USA. Thursday: Check waxwork likeness at Madame Tussauds. Go home.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on February 06, 2017, 09:19:30 pm
Not usually a Bercow guy but jeez, good speech.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on February 06, 2017, 09:41:27 pm
Yep, he's cunted off both him and Theresa May because whilst she's cosied up to him he's called him a misogynist and racist on behalf of parliament. More of this please.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 07, 2017, 08:45:46 am
<chortle>

http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2017/02/07/donaeld-the-unready-tweets-as-if-trump-is-a-mad-medieval-king/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 08, 2017, 02:24:05 pm
Have just seen that the US visa waiver application form now asks you to list your social media profiles. Optional ... for now.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on February 08, 2017, 03:06:07 pm
Have just seen that the US visa waiver application form now asks you to list your social media profiles. Optional ... for now.

Do you mean the landing card or the ESTA form?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: bigtuboflard on February 08, 2017, 03:33:52 pm
Have just seen that the US visa waiver application form now asks you to list your social media profiles. Optional ... for now.

Do you mean the landing card or the ESTA form?
Pretty sure it was on the ESTA, I filled one out for the first time only a month ago and remember it as an option.

I thought I was going to get refused entry too at JFK, had problems with my name generating a "DO NOT BOARD" message at both Manchester and Brussels airports for my flight there, and on arrival at immigration I got carted off to the holding room for further "processing". Can only assume there is another BTOL somewhere with a murky(ier) past...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on February 08, 2017, 03:49:17 pm
Can only assume there is another BTOL somewhere with a murky(ier) past...

Roy Hattersley?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on February 08, 2017, 03:54:19 pm
Have just seen that the US visa waiver application form now asks you to list your social media profiles. Optional ... for now.

It's a pretty scary thought, there goes Privacy...

http://news.sky.com/story/us-considers-asking-visa-applicants-for-social-media-passwords-10759953

Mr Kelly told a hearing of the Homeland Security Committee: "We're looking at some enhanced or some additional screening.

"We may want to get on their social media, with passwords.

"It's very hard to truly vet these people in these countries, the seven countries. But if they come in, we want to say, what websites do they visit, and give us your passwords. So we can see what they do on the internet."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 08, 2017, 04:30:28 pm
Have just seen that the US visa waiver application form now asks you to list your social media profiles. Optional ... for now.

Do you mean the landing card or the ESTA form?
Pretty sure it was on the ESTA, I filled one out for the first time only a month ago and remember it as an option.

Yes, on the ESTA application form.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: bigtuboflard01 on February 08, 2017, 06:04:05 pm
Can only assume there is another BTOL somewhere with a murky(ier) past...

Roy Hattersley?
Thankfully I don't pass even a passing resemblance to him. Except maybe for the eyebrows.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: bigtuboflard on February 08, 2017, 06:06:37 pm
Can only assume there is another BTOL somewhere with a murky(ier) past...

Roy Hattersley?
Thankfully I don't pass even a passing resemblance to him. Except maybe for the eyebrows.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
not sure what happened there. Tapatalk seems to have created an alter ego for me. But I still stand by not looking much like Roy Hattersley.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on February 08, 2017, 08:45:52 pm
Have just seen that the US visa waiver application form now asks you to list your social media profiles. Optional ... for now.

It's a pretty scary thought, there goes Privacy...

http://news.sky.com/story/us-considers-asking-visa-applicants-for-social-media-passwords-10759953

Mr Kelly told a hearing of the Homeland Security Committee: "We're looking at some enhanced or some additional screening.

"We may want to get on their social media, with passwords.

"It's very hard to truly vet these people in these countries, the seven countries. But if they come in, we want to say, what websites do they visit, and give us your passwords. So we can see what they do on the internet."

:jaw:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bubba on February 08, 2017, 09:00:53 pm
Have just seen that the US visa waiver application form now asks you to list your social media profiles. Optional ... for now.

It's a pretty scary thought, there goes Privacy...

http://news.sky.com/story/us-considers-asking-visa-applicants-for-social-media-passwords-10759953

So if you're after a US visa you just create a dummy set of social media accounts that will bore them to tears and leave out all those posts about your ISIS sympathies. Easy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 08, 2017, 09:20:33 pm
I actually was granted a US visa (K-1 alien fiance) last Friday.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 08, 2017, 09:25:19 pm
I actually was granted a US visa (K-1 alien fiance) last Friday.

Is that Vulcan or Klingon?





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 08, 2017, 09:35:16 pm
I actually was granted a US visa (K-1 alien fiance) last Friday.

Is that Vulcan or Klingon?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's a rather personal question to ask about a fella's fiancé ;)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on February 08, 2017, 09:56:45 pm
Have just seen that the US visa waiver application form now asks you to list your social media profiles. Optional ... for now.

It's a pretty scary thought, there goes Privacy...

http://news.sky.com/story/us-considers-asking-visa-applicants-for-social-media-passwords-10759953

Mr Kelly told a hearing of the Homeland Security Committee: "We're looking at some enhanced or some additional screening.

"We may want to get on their social media, with passwords.

"It's very hard to truly vet these people in these countries, the seven countries. But if they come in, we want to say, what websites do they visit, and give us your passwords. So we can see what they do on the internet."

:jaw:

Shit, I'm going to Trump land at the weekend.
Do I have to put on visa about being a regular on UKB?
Will jfdm be unmasked state side.
If the Trump gets hold of my profile Lordy .....


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 09, 2017, 12:05:24 am
Canadian reaction to rumours that Sarah Palin may be new US ambassador to Canada

http://mobile.twitter.com/dippedbanana/status/829420692617756676 (http://mobile.twitter.com/dippedbanana/status/829420692617756676)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on February 09, 2017, 09:12:43 am
I actually was granted a US visa (K-1 alien fiance) last Friday.

I might have missed something along the way, but is this an announcement that you're getting married Andy? Congratulations if so!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 09, 2017, 09:30:39 am
That's the general idea.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fried on February 09, 2017, 10:31:54 am
 :2thumbsup:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 09, 2017, 02:42:20 pm
That's the general idea.
[emoji3]


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on February 14, 2017, 09:50:44 am
A racist reaction in America, aka Prohibition:

https://flipchartfairytales.wordpress.com/2017/02/13/america-has-been-here-before/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fultonius on February 15, 2017, 09:33:23 am
Burning the books?   

Just imagine the damage he could do. Too alarmist?


https://www.wired.com/2017/02/diehard-coders-just-saved-nasas-earth-science-data/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 15, 2017, 07:12:22 pm
Did you hear the one about the Trump voter, who ended up a refugee in a Sikh temple..?

You couldn't make it up.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-supporter-oroville-dam-refugee-sam-lyon-sikh-temple-sacramento-a7581501.html?cmpid=facebook-post


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on February 16, 2017, 08:24:21 am
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/02/donald-trump-israel-presser-anti-semitism-electoral-win

I'm more concerned about the hot air causing global warming. Should such a thing exist.
Title: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 17, 2017, 08:49:04 am
So, being half term, I'm a bit later than normal with the coffee and papers thing.
The coffee is good, "Grumpy Mule" Columbian; not bad for off the shelf.
Papers are becoming a bit monotonous though, to be fair. I mean, the Mrs and I have just started watching the "Walking Dead" (season 1-3 in a week) for the first time and it's getting hard to tell if I'm still watching or reading the papers...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/16/trump-raises-spectre-nuclear-holocaust-amid-questioning-russia/

Note to self:

Add tinned food to shopping list.
Repair gap in back garden fence (Razor wire, for preference).
By that Crossbow for £20 they sell in "The Range".
Teach kids to make fishing nets.
Augmentin. Lots of it.


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 17, 2017, 08:52:08 am
Track down his thoughts on what uranium is from n yesterday's presser... shocking.

I recommend house of cards when you're done with Walking dead...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 17, 2017, 08:58:24 am
Track down his thoughts on what uranium is from n yesterday's presser... shocking.

I recommend house of cards when you're done with Walking dead...

Oh yeah, that stuff does all sorts of things, like nuclear things, like I'm allowed to say, I've been briefed, and what a victory! I wasn't supposed to get 207, but I believe in a one state solution, believe me! But China are nice, good people, gave me a great, really wonderful trademark, but the leaks were fake NEWS! The leaks were real, but they were fake! And that's what Uranium does!


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on February 17, 2017, 09:00:46 am
Reading the quotes and listening to Trump's press conference is like listening to a five year old on the verge of a tantrum. It'd be really funny if it weren't so serious.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fried on February 17, 2017, 09:04:09 am
When I give my evening report to the missus about what Trump's been up to, that's all she says '..Walking Dead' in the same voice. I think they're the only 2 works she knows in English.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 17, 2017, 09:08:45 am
When the "Daily Mash" makes as much sense as the "real" news, we are a long, long, way up Shit-Creek, with no paddle, a hole in the Canoe, an impending flash flood, surrounded by half starved Crocodile...

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170217/0d4f925398d69e76eba565b436e7c839.jpg)


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on February 17, 2017, 09:40:58 am
Sensible guy, can we elect him instead

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/16/politics/harward-says-no-to-national-security-adviser-role/

And when it is all blatantly going to ratshit, best to blame the other guy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/us/politics/trump-news-conference.html?_r=0

love to see what Obama thinks of that comment.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Iesu on February 17, 2017, 10:02:10 am
When the "Daily Mash" makes as much sense as the "real" news, we are a long, long, way up Shit-Creek, with no paddle, a hole in the Canoe, an impending flash flood, surrounded by half starved Crocodile...

Me mam's favourite variant on this was always "up shit creek in a barbed wire canoe" occasionally "with no paddles" in extremis. Definitely appropriate to current world affairs (she's a Democrat voting US citizen for her sins; I have citizenship of the mother country but no voting rights sadly).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 17, 2017, 04:53:20 pm
So... Once the troops are on the streets, where next?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/17/trump-immigration-roundup-national-guard?CMP=share_btn_fb


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 17, 2017, 05:33:58 pm
And now he seeks an excuse to curtail the press.

Andy, you might want to ask some faculty and friends to complete this survey...

https://gop.com/mainstream-media-accountability-survey/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on February 17, 2017, 07:42:08 pm
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rFK3tbkNX-A (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rFK3tbkNX-A)
Just when things couldn't get any more bizarre.
Up pops, a British Trump appointee Seb Gorka.
Was in NYC this week.
Had a few conversations with Locals and most still can't believe that Trump is President.
Most of the talk on Fox was about the Trump handshake. Fox News reporters found it embarrassing. And tried to laugh things off.
The big event though was Charles Oakley the basketball great being thrown out of the NY Knicks game. Almost as though this was a welcome distraction from Trump.
Logistically protecting the Trumps, sounds like a costly nightmare, tax payer money being well used.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/trump-familys-elaborate-lifestyle-a-logistical-nightmare--at-taxpayer-expense/2017/02/16/763cce8e-f2ce-11e6-a9b0-ecee7ce475fc_story.html?utm_term=.f4b90643499e (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/trump-familys-elaborate-lifestyle-a-logistical-nightmare--at-taxpayer-expense/2017/02/16/763cce8e-f2ce-11e6-a9b0-ecee7ce475fc_story.html?utm_term=.f4b90643499e)
Had a great time in NYC but much prefer the UK even with Brexit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 19, 2017, 03:50:09 pm
FFS

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-cabinet-appointees-mar-a-largo-golf-club-white-house-us-president-bedminster-a7588146.html?cmpid=facebook-post


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 19, 2017, 07:37:04 pm
Is it bad that I am reminded of when we used to line up in the junior school playground to divvy up who'd be on which team to kick a tennis ball around all lunchtime and call it football?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 19, 2017, 07:37:17 pm
Never forget.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170219/7934b227f8ecda32367f137c7cf09cf1.jpg)


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on February 19, 2017, 07:48:20 pm
FFS

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-cabinet-appointees-mar-a-largo-golf-club-white-house-us-president-bedminster-a7588146.html?cmpid=facebook-post


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The more you read, the less you believe...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on February 19, 2017, 08:36:04 pm
There's a phrase in US pop culture "the Tyson Zone"  (coined by Bill Simmons - used to run the Grantland site, and is now head honcho of "The Ringer" site).  Essentially, it describes the situation where a celebrity's behaviour is so oddball or extreme, so often, that even the most far-fetched rumours are given credence.  Mike Tyson, twice bit an opponents ear off, went to prison for rape, was a very keen pigeon fancier, tattooed his face, threatenned to eat Lennox Lewis' children, and blew $400m on hookers, coke, tigers, and a fella whose sole job it was to follow him shouting "fight the power!" occassionally.  In view of that, if you was told that he was obsessed with Britsh comedy and had just commissioned an enormous gold statue of Ken Dodd riding a giraffe, you would think.... "well, it sounds absurd... but it's Tyson - he probably would ".

Trump has now redefined the Tyson Zone.  Unfortunately, every mad rumour seems to be true..... and he is not a sportsman but the man in control of the World's largest ecomony and nuclear arsenal.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on February 20, 2017, 03:04:15 pm
The difference being Tyson, despite (or maybe because of) being batshit crazy, was excellent at his trade.

Trump's just an idiot. He makes George Bush look astute.

He'll just keep talking his way into more and more widespread ridicule. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't last the full term - impeachment, or the second ever president to declare himself unfit to serve and resign.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on February 20, 2017, 04:22:50 pm
What happened in Sweden last night is the biggest tragedy since the Bowling Green Massacre.

He clearly has FOX News on, barely digests the information, and then just regurgitates it at what he thinks is the most appropriate moment. Ideal FOX viewer.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 20, 2017, 04:29:28 pm
The main problem here is that his supporters believe him and no one else:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-voters-why-did-they-vote-grant-county-nebraska-a7588681.html?cmpid=facebook-post

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/09/intellectuals-for-trump?mbid=social_facebook


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 20, 2017, 04:31:25 pm
What happened in Sweden last night is the biggest tragedy since the Bowling Green Massacre.

He clearly has FOX News on, barely digests the information, and then just regurgitates it at what he thinks is the most appropriate moment. Ideal FOX viewer.

Bit scary to think US policy might be based on Murdoch's editorial line, don't you think?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on February 20, 2017, 05:22:22 pm
Nah, not scary.

FUCKING TERRIFYING.

Thing is i always thought he would be shit. But so far he's surpassed all expectations.

Oops, better not let them know my social media profiles.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 20, 2017, 05:33:30 pm
You're safe - no one but me knows that you're really Terry from Rotherham.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 20, 2017, 06:07:00 pm
And then there's this :

http://trib.al/2oRBhss

Mixed with:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/cia-operative-name-donald-trump-spies-plotting-take-down-us-president-intelligence-agencies-a7589271.html?cmpid=facebook-post


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 20, 2017, 08:33:47 pm
Definitely not a muslim travel ban then. Unless you are British. Or a teacher, responsible for children on a trip. Nothing to do with being Muslim at all.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/20/british-muslim-teacher-denied-entry-to-us-on-school-trip
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: A Jooser on February 20, 2017, 10:16:56 pm
I'm willing to bet the Muslim teacher denied entry to the US story has nothing to do with Trump's travel ban. It will turn out to be one of those mistaken identity / good dude has same name as other dude stories!

The school teacher from Wales, Juhel Miah, apparently shares the same name as a chap who was friends and WhatsApp message buddies with one of two 'IS supporters' accused of murdering an imam 'because they viewed his practice of Islamic healing as "black magic"'.

The name crops up in the report of the Manchester Crown Court trail in August 2016 here:
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/national/article/Muslim-leader-murdered-by-IS-supporters-for-practising-Islamic-healing-ba9835d6-58fc-4ddc-9823-819c6e6a5506-ds (http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/national/article/Muslim-leader-murdered-by-IS-supporters-for-practising-Islamic-healing-ba9835d6-58fc-4ddc-9823-819c6e6a5506-ds)
And here:
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/jalal-uddin-murder-trial-live-11791748 (http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/jalal-uddin-murder-trial-live-11791748)

Bad luck for the school teacher, but it is not hard to see how that particular name gets on a US security black list regardless of who is president.

I don't know if this information has found its way into any of the news reports of the school teacher's story, or if they're all just trotting out the Trump Muslim ban red herring, so can we claim this as a UKB exclusive?!  8)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on February 20, 2017, 10:24:20 pm
I don't get this stuff about people being stopped with the same name as a bad egg. Presumably they don't have the same passport number?
I know a Dave Smith who was detained in the States for a couple of hours while he was checked out. They said it was because his name was similar to somebody on a list. So presumably they're stopping every Dave Smith? Somehow I think not.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 21, 2017, 09:05:18 am
In fact, I suspect this is a valid theory.

Getting into the US has always been "interesting". Back in early 2000, I was held for five hours in Atlanta and eventually sprung by my new employer's lawyer after some odd and aggressive questioning.
There wasn't anything to indicate who my employer was in my travel or visa details (I had a B1), but several months of harassment later, I realised "they" were well informed and had good reason...

In short, I doubt "they" are as dumb as they first appear, idiot leaders not withstanding.


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on February 21, 2017, 10:29:27 am
I'm willing to bet the Muslim teacher denied entry to the US story has nothing to do with Trump's travel ban. It will turn out to be one of those mistaken identity / good dude has same name as other dude stories!

Bad luck for the school teacher, but it is not hard to see how that particular name gets on a US security black list regardless of who is president.

This.

As someone who is now black flagged and prevented from entering the US without first applying for a travel visa at the US embassy, for no good reason other than a boring story involving leaving Canada via the US at the end of my 4 years on work visas, mistakenly entering my Canadian address on the green card entry form, and becoming 'a person without any country of residence' - i.e. I was in limbo and not allowed to enter either the US or back into Canada -  I can vouch for their homeland security as taking the worst possible interpretation of anything remotely suspicious. I don't doubt that sharing a name with a terror suspect would be a huge headache at the US border.


So if true does that make the story fake news? It sort of does.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 21, 2017, 10:45:25 am
Well it is fake if you say it never happened, and no teacher was removed from a plane on a school trip. I'll assume you don't mean it is a complete fabrication unless you say otherwise.

If you are saying that it happened for reasons as yet not completely clear, that is a statement of fact.

Just because there's a fakenooz bandwagon doesn't mean you have to get on board.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on February 21, 2017, 10:53:15 am
As is A.Jooser, I'm pointing out that the story of the teacher being barred entry to the US may not actually be connected to trump's travel ban in the way the media have portayed it. It might be. But it's important to hold everyone - both fuckwit trump and the media, to the same standards of scrutiny isn't it. Otherwise you're as guilty as breitbart viewers or whoever for believing in untruths.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 21, 2017, 11:04:45 am
Oh yeah, I'm totally in agreement with that, in fact on reflection it seems very likely the case.

Misattribution isn't new though, journalists and readers jump to conclusions and both should be extremely wary about making assumptions.  I should have been more careful about how I posted that.

'Fake news' is a different thing though, my reply was just about that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on February 21, 2017, 11:19:52 am
The trouble with Trump's fixation on the media and 'fake news' is like any good lie it's based on a small truth. It's true that the media, of all biases, sometimes knowingly misrepresent things. Same goes for politicians and makes me think you end up getting what you deserve in the end - whether that's an extreme version of bad politics or an extreme reaction against the media. Public trust in the media in the UK and US is low, and for a good reason - it isn't that long ago the media were being dragged over the coals for various misdemeanors. Now there's a narrative emerging in reaction to Trump's aggressiveness, with the media supposedly being the 'good guys' and speakers of truth, and the Trump administration 'the baddie' and creator of all mis-truth? It isn't that simple (not suggesting you think it is MrJ).

When the mood is as heated and distrustful as it currently is it's even more important for 'responsible' media to get the facts correct and not give bullshitters like Trump any more ammunition. If it turns out the rel reason for the teacher's barring entry to the US is due to sharing a name, the nit makes the media that reported it as 'a victim of Trump's travel ban' almost as guilty of bullshit as Breitbart etc.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 21, 2017, 12:09:24 pm
When the mood is as heated and distrustful as it currently is it's even more important for 'responsible' media to get the facts correct and not give bullshitters like Trump any more ammunition.
+1


The article is reporting on the facts available eg the council spokesman's statement which they quote

Quote
No satisfactory reason has been provided for refusing entry to the United States – either at the airport in Iceland or subsequently at the US embassy in Reykjavik. Mr Miah attempted to visit the embassy but was denied access to the building. Understandably he feels belittled and upset at what appears to be an unjustified act of discrimination.

i.e. They need more information to understand the exactly what has happened, and have asked for it.

The paper just reports this without saying why the teacher was removed so I don't quite see how you get to this:

If it turns out the rel reason for the teacher's barring entry to the US is due to sharing a name, the nit makes the media that reported it as 'a victim of Trump's travel ban' almost as guilty of bullshit as Breitbart etc.

I don't think there's a 'victim of travel ban' assertion. The subheading implies it however.

Quote
...removed from plane in Reykjavik despite suspension of president’s travel ban

That clearly needs removing as there is no hard evidence for it and it does not meet the same standard of objective reporting that the rest of the article does. They have let themselves down there, I agree. I still think we're a long way from Breitbart and bullshit.

Edit muddle with iPad keyboard
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 21, 2017, 12:53:53 pm
Actually I am going to take that back: just seen that the front page listing reads 'Travel ban...' when the facts aren't clear, that's sloppy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on February 21, 2017, 06:54:34 pm
The teacher in question in his own words.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/21/british-muslim-teacher-taken-off-us-bound-flight-i-was-treated-like-a-criminal (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/21/british-muslim-teacher-taken-off-us-bound-flight-i-was-treated-like-a-criminal)
The vetting that now goes on in teaching is pretty strong.
The bar is set high regarding child protection.
If he had any unsavoury links, they would have already shown up during his vetting at school.

I am sure that it probably is a name mix up, as has been discussed above.
But he already had enhanced checks before boarding and no reason was given to him for his removal from the plane.

Even if it is a mix-up this doesn't make it right, a question mark hangs over him now in relation to the children he teaches, his colleagues and employer, and the wider school community, parents etc.

Once again all really sad and the way the world is now going unfortunately.
With regards to newspaper reporting 1+1 often = 3
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fultonius on February 21, 2017, 08:09:05 pm
Name mix up isn't so outlandish - up until fairly recently I had two valid UK passports with different passport numbers, so you can't just rule someone out because the number doesn't match.

Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 21, 2017, 11:15:38 pm
Hell in a hand cart:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/02/20/oil-price-recovery-vulnerable-us-shale-confounds-opec/

Something's going on in the world today, either by coincidence or design and it  is dancing along the edge of the catastrophe curve...


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fultonius on February 22, 2017, 07:08:30 am
For a minute I thought the link implied the oil price was up...  I know Trump wants to "bring production home" but if U. S. shale oil costs $70/bbl to produce, and the worldwide oil price is <$50/bbl, how does Trump plan to square that? That amounts to huge state subsidy. Surely he isn't going to advocate banning imports?

Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 23, 2017, 10:41:21 pm
This is quite amusing...

http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2017/02/23/slow-donald-trump-bit-real-old-drunk-man-ranting-bar-3am-feel/


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Andy F on February 24, 2017, 05:31:10 pm
Someone has been handing out Russian flags with Trumps name on a the CPAC. Most of the delegates happily waved them not realising what they were...  :clap2:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fried on February 24, 2017, 05:45:09 pm
Ol, give us a link!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Andy F on February 24, 2017, 06:03:59 pm
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-cpac-russian-flags-speech-republicans-support-president-latest-a7598276.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fried on February 24, 2017, 06:10:10 pm
 :2thumbsup: Small mercies
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 24, 2017, 07:52:47 pm
Dark.
Very dark:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/white-house-blocks-news-outlets-from-media-briefing-a7598641.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 25, 2017, 07:00:24 pm
I think the WH thinks the media are easily distracted by their favourite topic- themselves.

Surely it's an attempt to drag the news away from this:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/25/trump-russia-fbi-white-house-priebus (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/25/trump-russia-fbi-white-house-priebus)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 27, 2017, 07:12:02 pm
Even his own party are turning against him now.

Mainly because he's talking about spending money, but still...

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/throwing-more-money-at-the-military-is-a-waste/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on March 04, 2017, 08:05:57 pm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110

Baby throws his toys out of the pram again.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 04, 2017, 08:42:22 pm
Yes, with the most incredible part being that by admitting he was under investigation (which cannot be instigated by a sitting POTUS); he is admitting that a Federal Judge found probable cause to issue the warrant based on evidence that criminal activity was likely...


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. I always forget to put those smiley things...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 05, 2017, 01:03:38 am
Yes, with the most incredible part being that by admitting he was under investigation (which cannot be instigated by a sitting POTUS); he is admitting that a Federal Judge found probable cause to issue the warrant based on evidence that criminal activity was likely...

That's assuming he understands the implications as you lay them out (correctly). The reality is that the President of the United States was lying awake in bed at 5am, reading Breitbart and fiddling with his phone.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2017, 09:30:23 am
Yes, with the most incredible part being that by admitting he was under investigation (which cannot be instigated by a sitting POTUS); he is admitting that a Federal Judge found probable cause to issue the warrant based on evidence that criminal activity was likely...

That's assuming he understands the implications as you lay them out (correctly). The reality is that the President of the United States was lying awake in bed at 5am, reading Breitbart and fiddling with his phone.

With one hand.

I think we can all guess what the other hand was doing...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on March 05, 2017, 09:49:02 am
 Small hand...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on March 05, 2017, 10:19:28 am
What amazes and saddens me is how we're becoming gradually innured to the stupidity and recklessness Trump's behaviour.  I had faint hope (which seems ridicuous now) that his more vulgar aspects were more "persona" than actual personality, and that he would be more dignified once in office - or at least be cautious enough to exercise some restraint, or be held in check by his advisers. 

Instead, if anything, the rate at which he makes unfounded accusations and issues patent lies has accelerated.  And, the worrying thing, is that the prevailing mood seems to be resignation, rather than outrage.

A minor example - he took a break from ruling the most powerful nation on Earth to troll Arnold Schwarzenegger on twitter about his poor ratings for The Apprentice.  It's triffling compared to some of his other recent statements (e.g. accusing Obama of wire-tapping) but when you think about it, it's insanely unPresidential behaviour.  It's like finding out that Abe Lincoln had a row with Mark Twain and then self-publicised that he put a dog turd through his letterbox.
Title: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2017, 11:00:00 am
What amazes and saddens me is how we're becoming gradually innured to the stupidity and recklessness Trump's behaviour.  I had faint hope (which seems ridicuous now) that his more vulgar aspects were more "persona" than actual personality, and that he would be more dignified once in office - or at least be cautious enough to exercise some restraint, or be held in check by his advisers. 

Instead, if anything, the rate at which he makes unfounded accusations and issues patent lies has accelerated.  And, the worrying thing, is that the prevailing mood seems to be resignation, rather than outrage.

A minor example - he took a break from ruling the most powerful nation on Earth to troll Arnold Schwarzenegger on twitter about his poor ratings for The Apprentice.  It's triffling compared to some of his other recent statements (e.g. accusing Obama of wire-tapping) but when you think about it, it's insanely unPresidential behaviour.  It's like finding out that Abe Lincoln had a row with Mark Twain and then self-publicised that he put a dog turd through his letterbox.

I think you should find a way of sharing those few words with a much wider audience.
It sums up all the dangers and the sneaking terror of this "man" and his potential to (quite literally) destroy the world.

https://www.indy100.com/article/twitter-anecdote-donald-trump-7612076


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 05, 2017, 01:47:50 pm
And, the worrying thing, is that the prevailing mood seems to be resignation, rather than outrage.

This is n'tthe case, at least from where I'm standing - in a mid-size city in south-east Pennsylvania that voted Clinton but is surrounded by rural counties that voted Trump (as did the state, narrowly). All our friends are liberal but its impossible not to interact with people who aren't (like our cab driver the other night) - in other words we probably live in a bit of a bubble but are far from completely insulated.

Certainly there are plenty who through ignorance, ideology or desperation are happy with him. We spent a couple of hours yesterday afternoon in a small town about 25 miles and a whole world away: many signs of abject poverty and of Trump support. These people are not going to be outraged, they don't care. But in a bar nearer home later on the table next door (a father and two adult sons) were having a passionate discussion that we got sucked into - the father was Polish-American (generally a very conservative group) and owned a well-known local construction company, the sons both educated to Masters level - in other words, immigrants made good: they described themselves variously as distraught, outraged, angry. Likewise the blue collar union organiser father of my stepdaughter's best friend. The outrage remains palpable, possibly even getting stronger these last few days.

What I think we've seen happening the last few days is the press really beginning to do its job. They (and the security services) are royally pissed off and I think they scent blood. That would describe the mood I'm sensing right now. I don't expect that to slacken any time soon.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on March 05, 2017, 05:17:14 pm
What I think we've seen happening the last few days is the press really beginning to do its job. They (and the security services) are royally pissed off and I think they scent blood. That would describe the mood I'm sensing right now. I don't expect that to slacken any time soon.

I am quite enjoying this part of the whole charade. You'd have thought someone in Trump's position would have been a little more tactful (i.e. tried to make a few friends before making too many enemies), but now he's pissed off a big chunk of the press and security services Im interested to watch them retaliate.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2017, 05:33:17 pm
And there's the problem...

His base already think the Security Services and the Media are the enemy. A large number of them actively wish for civil war, they parade around in Cammo and form Militias.
Many of the others sit in their mothers basement, inventing conspiracies and publishing their delusions far and wide.
Some of the later are quite wealthy and distressingly powerful.

Now add to that the religious dicks.

If the population were "normal" this would be over already. The sheer number of total fruitloops, infesting the US; is staggering and they've found a hero.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 05, 2017, 05:54:41 pm
It is important not to over estimate that which you describe as his base. Trump claims to have built a movement the like of which has never been seen before - this is simply not true (he lost the popular vote on a very low turnout). In Pennsylvania, and many other states, he won, in essence, because of people not voting for Hillary. Some prior democrats did turn out to vote for him, as they did for Reagan in the 1980s, but many more stayed home (why is another debate). Those who did vote for him did so for a very wide range of reasons - the white nationalists etc. are a minority. The cab driver we had a conversation with last week voted Trump because he sincerely felt things needed "shaking up" (a point I'd concede), others, like those we saw in the town of Wind Gap yesterday, are simply desperate (understandably - there are many losers in modern America), a friend's aged father voted Trump, despite being disgusted with the man, because he views voting as a civic duty and is a life-long, tribal Republican. He is not being kept in power by overwhelming popular support (100 turned out at a pro-Trump rally in NYC yesterday, we got at least 400 out in a small local town at very short notice after the travel ban executive order). He was elected not by a movement but by a coalition that is disparate and riddled with contradictions and conflicts of interest. It is potentially weak. Similarly, his administration is not a coherent unit; it comprises at least three potentially warring elements: Trump himself; a small cadre of ideologues around him (Bannon, Miller etc.), and the GOP. This coalition too is under some stress currently.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on March 05, 2017, 06:16:38 pm
Small hand...

Might explain why he thinks he's got a big dick.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2017, 07:26:57 pm
https://www.indy100.com/article/pro-donald-trump-rally-america-obama-wiretap-supporters-steve-bannon-7612081

Corroboration of your point.

It's the potential of those I mentioned to be disproportionately loud (and by loud I mean violent), that would worry me.

Oklahoma repeat?
It only takes one.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2017, 08:27:07 pm
JFCOAB The bloke is a penis:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/tweetstorm-trump-exercised-exclusive-declassification-authority/story?id=45912824
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 05, 2017, 11:28:26 pm
https://www.indy100.com/article/pro-donald-trump-rally-america-obama-wiretap-supporters-steve-bannon-7612081

Corroboration of your point.

It's the potential of those I mentioned to be disproportionately loud (and by loud I mean violent), that would worry me.

Certainly they are loud, which is why it is so important to resist these narratives about there being a "movement."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 06, 2017, 09:42:40 pm
Dan Rather:

"At some points words fail, or they are starting to fail me. We have an Administration in freefall. Have we passed through the circle of chaos? Are we at the circle of havoc?

The real Donald Trump has stood up, once again. Let no one ever be fooled. Let there be no doubt. The man who sends out a twitter tirade accusing a former President of crimes for which he provides no evidence, the man who doubles down when everyone with any sense pushes back, that man is our Commander in Chief. Every one who normalizes Mr. Trump now, or has in the past, will have to answer to future generations for their acquiescence, silence or sophistry—if, indeed, not outright cowardice.

How hollow do all those pundit plaudits (including from many progressives) sound now for an average and disingenuous speech of someone else's words read from a teleprompter to Congress and the nation a week ago? A "presidential" Trump is a punchline to a joke no one wants to have told. Conspiracy theories are corrosive in society at large. When they dictate national policy, they can be lethal.

This is a man who challenged the citizenship of President Obama, with lies, innuendo, and no evidence. This is a man who claimed widespread voter fraud with lies, innuendo, and no evidence. This is a man who has taken a rhetorical blowtorch to our Constitutional principles with lies, innuendo, and no evidence. Those who rose in Congress to applaud his turns of phrase bear responsibility. Those who cynically use his presidency to push forward unpopular giveaways to the rich and well connected bear responsibility. Those in the press who meet insults with explanations bear responsibility.

Even the most grounded of presidents must fight to keep themselves moored to the real world. The Oval Office can be a bubble. Power attracts sycophants and cynics. But I have never seen anything like this. The sheer level of paranoia that is radiating out of the White House is untenable to the workings of a republic. I have a real question if President Trump actually believes what he is saying. Even Richard Nixon, the most paranoid president to date, ruled for years with a relatively calm hand. This Administration has been an off kilter whirlwind since the inauguration, and news reports suggest that seething anger from Mr. Trump is only getting worse. There is a growing consensus that the President may be "unhinged." It's a serious allegation, but even if it is not the case, Mr. Trump only has himself to blame.

To call a drama Shakespearean or operatic is usually an overreach. But I imagine artists of the future, and even the present, will find ample inspiration in our moment in history. Doesn't Steve Bannon strike you as an Iago whispering in the ear of an Othello-like Trump, consumed by jealousy and paranoia?

As the questions mount around Russia, as the circles of defense begin to falter, the determination to create diversions will escalate. But if the President hoped he could create a distraction, I think he misjudged the will of the American people. We have woken. We are paying attention. And we love our country too much to let it falter without a fight."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 08, 2017, 05:31:02 pm

Team Trump!

Because this is so much better than actually having a fucking clue what you are doing...

https://www.thelocal.de/20170307/germany-rebuffs-us-attempt-to-start-trade-talks-saying-speak-to-eu
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on March 08, 2017, 05:32:09 pm
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/03/06/us-new-travel-ban-entire-announcement-tillerson-sessions-kelly-sot-ath.cnn

I find it really hard to take Jeff Sessions seriously - watch from about 3:30. Sounds like he should be asking how much gas you want in your vee-hicle.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 09, 2017, 10:44:30 am
I knew Donny was a twat. I didn't realise he was a Pimp!
I wonder if Congress will approve this, what with them all being such good Christians n'all...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/china-donald-trump-branded-without-us-congress-permission-trademarks-spas-escort-services-hotels-and-a7619136.html?cmpid=facebook-post


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 13, 2017, 02:22:24 pm
Quick!
Unplug your Microwave! Obama might be watching you!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/kellyanne-conway-donald-trump-barack-obama-spying-through-microwave-claims-a7626826.html?cmpid=facebook-post

Scientifically illiterate?

No.

Just plain, old, fucking brain-numbingly, illiterate.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2017, 08:36:49 am
So, now we are the enemy.
That bodes well for future trade negotiations.

Britain's GCHQ agency denies wiretapping Donald Trump
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39300191
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 20, 2017, 02:52:30 pm
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/fbi-director-james-comey-donald-trump-team-russia-links-us-presidential-election-2016-house-a7639686.html

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170320/b33f5c31fbcac128a0de860f7c002b51.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 20, 2017, 07:38:23 pm
 Well that is interesting. I wonder why he didn't choose to reveal the existence of a 4+ month investigation into Trump's possibly treasonous links to Russia just before the poll but felt honour-bound to mention a one week only reopening of the investigation into Hilary's emails?  :-\
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 20, 2017, 09:49:17 pm
Cue "Pink Panther" theme...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-will-resign-soon-dianne-feinstein-senator-senate-judiciary-committee-a7639341.html?cmpid=facebook-post
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 21, 2017, 10:04:04 am
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/20/ivanka-trump-given-west-wing-office-security-clearance-expanded/

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170321/b7c7fa8344b875c8611b2d95f875076f.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 24, 2017, 06:24:23 pm
Is Trump about to enter a death spiral? It's far from inevitable, but its looking ever more likely.

We're glued to screens as the attempt to repeal and replace AHA unravels before our very eyes. At the moment, they are insisting a vote will go ahead in 90 minutes, but it looks increasingly doomed either way. This is a massive and very much self-inflicted wound and failure will significantly damage both Trump and the GOP. The GOP has signally failed to come up with a meaningful plan over the last seven years. They are the Emperor in new clothes. The hard right Freedom Caucus looks insane and ungovernable. And Trunp, who has made this very much his in the last few days (watch him blame Paul Ryan when it fails though) looks weak and fails to deliver a key campaign promise. The great deal closer is a loser. Credibility and authority ebb away making it harder to get other parts of the agenda passed. How he will take public failure on this scale, who knows, especially coming after the instant blocking of the second travel ban (which he has been surprising quiet on. Maybe he's simply lost interest?).

At the same time, he only becomes ever more embroiled in the questions surrounding ties to Russia. The attempt to distract through the Obama wiretapping claims are another backfire and he doesn't seem to have the sense to know when to stop digging. Moreover, his refusal to stop digging forced Devin Nunes, Republican Chair of the House Intelligence Committee, into a massive error on Wednesday as he attempted to give Trump cover by revealing to the press and the President but not the committee he chairs some very flakey information about Trump associates being surveilled (in fact, it was foreign entities that were being entirely legally surveilled). In doing so he squandered all his credibility in terms of leading a neutralt bipartisan enquiry into Trump-Russia connections, making a genuinely independent investigation much more likely just as more and more evidence emerges of links between Trump and Russia (though smoking gun proving collusion yet). Of course, this follows hard on the heels of Comey's acknowledgement on Monday that the FBI is investigating the same issue.

They are embattled on every front right now. The question is, is America sick of winning yet?

Re: the point made a couple of weeks ago about the mood turning to one of resignation, in my experience there is still no sign of that happening. This is kind of exhausting but people are still angry and active. People sense that now is not the time to let up. One thing I've been impressed with is how participatory American democracy can be. For example, thousands upon thousands spend time every single day ringing congressmen and senators to voice their opposition as directly as they possibly (my wife is literally on the phone now to our representative about Nunes). And it works. Our local representative (R Charlie Dent, 15th district PA) on Wednesday committed to voting against the healthcare bill no doubt in part because of constituent pressure. I attended a small demonstration outside one of Dent's local offices and staffers came out to listen to the crowd. Elected politicians are compelled to attend public town hall meetings and are ridiculed and spotlighted when they refuse to meet citizens face-to-face. Of course there are also the big head line demonstrations as well. Its true the turn out at the election was shamefully low, but the day-to-day, grassroots participatory activity has impressed me. Despite everything we hear about politicians being bought the Americans I know demand accountability from those who represent them.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: erm, sam on March 24, 2017, 07:29:47 pm
Thanks Andy, it is really interesting to get your perspective.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 24, 2017, 07:44:39 pm
So they just abruptly stopped the debate and pulled the bill minutes from when the vote was due. I'm over the moon, but ideally I would have liked to see it go to a vote and lose. They should be forced to own this colossal fuck up rather than scurry away. They are spineless shits.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 24, 2017, 07:46:16 pm
Hmmmm... [emoji57]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/house-leaders-cancel-vote-obamacare-repeal_us_58d54cdde4b03692bea5563e?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 24, 2017, 07:47:26 pm
Mind you, the Dump's threat was "Vote Friday or move on", so, dead?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 24, 2017, 08:00:51 pm
Possibly. Let's see. For the moment he's saying he doesn't blame Ryan but how long will that last? Donnie's going to be in a bad mood tonight. Melania must be thanking her lucky stars she lives in New York.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 24, 2017, 08:50:41 pm
I have to say, this "I don't think I'm going to win, so you don't get to vote" version of democracy seems a bit off.
Possibly miss understanding the US system, but that's how it reads?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 24, 2017, 08:55:27 pm
I have to say, this "I don't think I'm going to win, so you don't get to vote" version of democracy seems a bit off.
Possibly miss understanding the US system, but that's how it reads?

Absolutely, they're a bunch of completely spineless shits. They needed to face the vote and own this bill.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 24, 2017, 09:05:34 pm
Dan Rather:

"Stunning. A complete defeat that I don't think anyone would have predicted in the manner that took place. Donald Trump promised to repeal and replace  Obamacare on day one of his presidency. He promised a health care nirvana of lower premiums, choice and better care. The GOP have been demonizing the Affordable Care Act for 7 years and yet here we are. The Affordable Care Act remains the law of the land. Who knew healthcare was hard?

The morass of blame is only beginning. As he just told New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman, this is "the Democrats fault."  We'll see how that plays with the public and with history. Mr. Trump is wounded and he will try to do his usual two step of taking credit for everything and blame for nothing. It is a dance that I think was already old for a majority of Americans. And if recent polls are to be believed even some of his voters are getting weary. And let's remember we are just over two months into his presidency.

I have never seen such a staggering loss so early in a term. We have long left charted waters with this administration. And our ship of state bobs amidst ominous waves.

The damage isn't limited to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Many Democrats never understood Paul Ryan's golden boy wonk status. But that aura has also been deeply and perhaps irrevocably tarnished by this health care failure. And the difficulty was expected to be in the Senate.

Meanwhile, the Russian shadow continues to darken."

Any idea of the connotation of "Wonk" to our dear cousins?
Sounds good...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 24, 2017, 10:57:12 pm
I'd always understood it as 'geeky expert' as in 'policy wonk' but in America could be different...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 24, 2017, 11:07:49 pm
I'd always understood it as 'geeky expert' as in 'policy wonk' but in America could be different...
Apparently a studious and diligent worker.

Or an incompetent sailor / Naval cadet.

I think the second is the more apt.

Even fellow conservatives seem to be glad/unsurprised (for a given value of "glad").
I'm always surprised by the depth and breadth of the chasms that separate the factions of the Right:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/the-republican-waterloo/520833/?utm_source=atlfb
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on March 24, 2017, 11:31:37 pm
I have to say, this "I don't think I'm going to win, so you don't get to vote" version of democracy seems a bit off.
Possibly miss understanding the US system, but that's how it reads?

Did you hear Trump on the news saying how "we've learnt so much, including some very, very arcane rules". He appears to have misunderstood that he lives in a democracy (!) not a totalitarian state. He must be wondering how Putin just does what the hell he likes. Lets hope it takes more than 4 years for him to work that one out...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 25, 2017, 02:10:59 pm
I'd always understood it as 'geeky expert' as in 'policy wonk' but in America could be different...

Yep, geek/nerd.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 01, 2017, 09:35:55 pm
?......

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/legal-expert-explains-michael-flynn-immunity-request-trump-links-russia-investigation-a7661531.html?cmpid=facebook-post
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on April 01, 2017, 10:18:16 pm
Possibly well known to all you polical mavens but I recently stumbled across "Pod Save America" and really recommend it.  In the episode I heard, what really struck home was not the aspect of grand corruption, more the ongoing omni-shambles of an admistration made up of peope who just cannot cope and do not understand the situation they are in.  Hosted by ex-White House staffers - so they know how things usually are.   

https://getcrookedmedia.com/here-have-a-podcast-78ee56b5a323 (https://getcrookedmedia.com/here-have-a-podcast-78ee56b5a323)

also, for those who like to see a graph or two - I recommend the 538 (Nate Silver, like everyone else might have predicted a Clinton win, but at least he had Trump at around 30%, rather than the <1% most did!)

https://fivethirtyeight.com/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Jim on April 02, 2017, 10:58:35 am
I find the whole Britain leaving the EU clusterfuck deeply worrying and combined with this madness on the other side of the Atlantic, I greatly fear an enormous backwards step for humanity (or at least for western civilization)
The only thing that actually glimmers some hope for me is the fact that the American system (if you discount the gun problem) seems to of been robust enough so far to reject a lot of the absurdity.
Unfortunately I'm yet to hear about any robustness in our own systems that reject the utter chaos that is starting to happen here
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 02, 2017, 09:13:07 pm
Nothing like a hardcore punk to put the situation into perspective:

http://www.laweekly.com/music/henry-rollins-fuck-mick-mulvaney-scott-pruitt-and-the-whole-trump-administration-8075218
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 02, 2017, 09:39:16 pm
He's bang on about the EPA. I fear the two great legacies of Brexit and Trump will be stymying action on climate change. Nothing else will cost us like that in the longer term.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 03, 2017, 05:48:27 pm
He's bang on about the EPA. I fear the two great legacies of Brexit and Trump will be stymying action on climate change. Nothing else will cost us like that in the longer term.

Indeed. Whilst Trump is racking up some notable failures and remains in deep trouble on many fronts its important to recognise significant parts of his agenda are being enacted through mechanisms such as the executive orders - not least with regard to the environment. Its too tempting and too easy to get caught up in the idea that he is losing.

In other news, some may remember that I've been involved in refugee resettlement. Yesterday we learnt that the organisation we have been working with, a Lutheran ministry that has been doing this kind of work for at least 30 years, have now had to lay off most of their staff. Though the travel ban remains suspended the flow of refugees has slowed to a trickle and without funding. This is just another of the little pieces of crappy news that help comprise one huge crappy picture. One of the case workers we liaised with was himself was an Iraqi refugee turned US citizen, in love with this country and the opportunity he's been given, working hard, putting his children through college, and generally trying to live the American dream. What will he do now? And for what purpose has this end come about? Just to sow division and discord I would say.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on April 03, 2017, 07:25:52 pm
In other news, some may remember that I've been involved in refugee resettlement. Yesterday we learnt that the organisation we have been working with, a Lutheran ministry that has been doing this kind of work for at least 30 years, have now had to lay off most of their staff. Though the travel ban remains suspended the flow of refugees has slowed to a trickle and without funding. This is just another of the little pieces of crappy news that help comprise one huge crappy picture. One of the case workers we liaised with was himself was an Iraqi refugee turned US citizen, in love with this country and the opportunity he's been given, working hard, putting his children through college, and generally trying to live the American dream. What will he do now? And for what purpose has this end come about? Just to sow division and discord I would say.
I am really sorry to hear about all this Andy, a really courageous thing to do.
I was going to reply to what you said a few weeks ago, but didn't know how to start to reply.
My parents about 20 years ago were involved in a similar arrangement resettling young people from Angola, long story short in order to make things work ended up going down adoption route. As you know circumstances around wanting to uproot and move 1000's of miles are tragic. Fortunately some good can come of this my adopted brother lives in Manchester and has lovely wife and children. Andy you have given people a start to hopefully lead a better life. I am sure that in time circumstances will change and things will come full circle. I know this doesn't make things easier but Trump won't be around forever.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 03, 2017, 08:45:42 pm
Thanks jfdm - that means a lot. And good for your parents! It sounds like they did something far more significant than we're ever going to.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fultonius on April 11, 2017, 06:55:44 pm
Freudian slip?   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9vnE4JWvrU

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 25, 2017, 09:41:01 pm
The fourth (and I think final) of four long pieces the Guardian have published over the last few months, reporting from Northampton county, PA - I'm just a few miles from Bethlehem, which features a lot. It gives an interesting perspective from a very ordinary, "every town" kind of place: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/25/trump-supporters-elect-again-100-days#comments
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: cjsheps on April 26, 2017, 08:29:10 am
In your opinion, does this article reflect the general mood in those places?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 26, 2017, 06:00:18 pm
Yes and no. Certainly, I recognise these voices, as it were, and opinions of this nature are not hard to find, but for this article in particular I think they spoke to much too narrow a range of people. I remember the previous three being better balanced. There isn't a general mood really, though divisions tend to stay under the surface, for the most part.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Iesu on May 03, 2017, 12:45:25 pm
Quote from: Rick Wilson on twatter
Taken as a package, the 100 Days interviews sound like evidence submitted in an involuntary commitment hearing to a mental institution.

https://twitter.com/TheRickWilson/status/859376613674418177 (https://twitter.com/TheRickWilson/status/859376613674418177)

This from a "republican political consultant" as well. allegedly.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 09, 2017, 11:45:27 pm
So Trump just fired FBI Director James Comey - this is a man who played a significant part in helping get Trump elected through his unprecedented public statements on the then ongoing investigations into Hillary Clinton's emails (the FBI normally refuses to say whether there is an investigation). But Comey is also leading the investigation into Trump-Russia connections/possible collusion. Judging by his tweeting yesterday Trump was clearly rattled by Sally Yates (ex acting Attorney General, also fired by Trump) masterful testimony to Congress on how Michael Flynn, ex National Security advisor (also fired by Trump), was compromised by his Russia ties.

This is just unbelievable stuff. I think - hope, at least - that they are starting to get close.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on May 10, 2017, 12:34:01 am
DT quacks like a dictator, after all. And now, it seems like.... He'll be YouTube ing bear wrestling video very, very soon. I'd put money on it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Wood FT on May 10, 2017, 06:53:42 am
So Trump just fired FBI Director James Comey - this is a man who played a significant part in helping get Trump elected through his unprecedented public statements on the then ongoing investigations into Hillary Clinton's emails (the FBI normally refuses to say whether there is an investigation). But Comey is also leading the investigation into Trump-Russia connections/possible collusion. Judging by his tweeting yesterday Trump was clearly rattled by Sally Yates (ex acting Attorney General, also fired by Trump) masterful testimony to Congress on how Michael Flynn, ex National Security advisor (also fired by Trump), was compromised by his Russia ties.

This is just unbelievable stuff. I think - hope, at least - that they are starting to get close.

I just don't understand how he can be fired like that? He can't hire like that so it doesn't make sense to me
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: joble on May 10, 2017, 07:32:49 am
Did you not watch the apprentice?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 10, 2017, 07:50:11 am
He only found out he was fired by accident, according to the NYT. He was giving a lecture and it was reported on a tv screen behind him. Apparently he thought he was being pranked!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on May 10, 2017, 08:07:05 am
Trump hasn't got this whole despot president thing very dialed has he? Everyone knows you're supposed to have opponents mysteriously killed, no arrests made, Putin needs to have a word.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Wood FT on May 10, 2017, 08:22:39 am
Did you not watch the apprentice?

You what? Sugars in on this as well?! The plot thickens
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on May 10, 2017, 08:27:01 am
I think he chose his words to wind up Arnie again... he used

"you are terminated" in the letter...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Iesu on May 10, 2017, 12:02:41 pm
 :popcorn: everyday!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on May 10, 2017, 12:59:23 pm
Everyone knows you're supposed to have opponents mysteriously killed, no arrests made, Putin needs to have a word.

Only Polonium!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 10, 2017, 06:28:11 pm
So let's just put it like this, people are going absolutely apeshit over here. If this was an attempt to put a lid on the Russia questions, it didn't work.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 10, 2017, 08:05:49 pm
When he does all the things his conspiracy theory, bunker dwelling , gun wielding base, had accused Obama of doing, and doing those things so blatantly. Do you think they might wake up?


Nope, me neither.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on May 10, 2017, 08:16:10 pm
When he does all the things his conspiracy theory, bunker dwelling , gun wielding base, had accused Obama of doing, and doing those things so blatantly. Do you think they might wake up?


Nope, me neither.

No, but I do think there's a large group in the middle who the republicans have lost as a result of all of this bullshit.  I just hope the democrats aren't equally stupid. 

My brother in law is one of "The base", and we were talking the other night and it devolved into a discussion about planned parenthood.  He was adamant that the only service they provide is abortions because he had seen some video of a girl called planned parenthood centers and asking for pre-natal care.  Of course the planned parenthood centers all said they don't provide pre-natal because it's not something they say they do, and other obvious reasons (they aren't a hospital or birthing center).  My wife (his sister) and his wife both told him they had been to planned parenthood for medical exams for women's health, had gotten birth control Rx from them, and gotten other non-abortion services.  He still wouldn't change his mind.  It was such a crazy moment of seeing firsthand the intractability of the extreme positions. 
 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on May 10, 2017, 09:20:25 pm
A "think piece" here suggests that there is every chance that this yet another egregious abuse of power that results in a 2-3 day shit-storm, which all but the most politically aware members of the public rapidly lose interest in (and the House Republicans allow to die, as whilst they might not like Trump, they are sufficient loyal not to throw him under a bus).  Still, be interesting to see if the approval / disapproval ratings diverge any more.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-to-know-if-the-trump-russia-story-has-momentum/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-to-know-if-the-trump-russia-story-has-momentum/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 10, 2017, 09:24:28 pm
A "think piece" here suggests that there is every chance that this yet another egregious abuse of power that results in a 2-3 day shit-storm, which all but the most politically aware members of the public rapidly lose interest in (and the House Republicans allow to die, as whilst they might not like Trump, they are sufficient loyal not to throw him under a bus).  Still, be interesting to see if the approval / disapproval ratings diverge any more.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-to-know-if-the-trump-russia-story-has-momentum/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-to-know-if-the-trump-russia-story-has-momentum/)

Possibly not...

This might have legs.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-comeys-firing-accelerates-the-russia-investigations?mbid=social_facebook
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on May 10, 2017, 09:44:05 pm
Here's hoping, although, I would be more optimistic if your link was to a similar piece in the Oklahoma Pro-life Gazette or the Wyoming Gun  Lover's Almanac, rather than the New Yorker (preaching to the converted?).

After years of public figures in the UK and USA being hauled over the coals for comparatively petty transgressions: inappropriate expenses claims for swan shelters, possibly calling some-one a pleb, even Hilary's server issues, which seemed more a case of being crap at IT rather than corruption, it seems bizarre that Trump is currently getting away with the highly visible abuse of emoluents, inappropriate relations with an aggressive foreign power, and bombing foregn nations seemingly to impress a dinner guest.  It's like an experiment to prove the saying that "the best place to hide is in plain sight".
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: lagerstarfish on May 11, 2017, 07:51:17 am
bombing foregn nations seemingly to impress a dinner guest.

if he goes to dinner with Putin, I'm hiding in my cellar for a few weeks
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on May 11, 2017, 08:12:20 am
In a nation full of guns you'd thing at least one enterprising soul would take one for the team and do a john wilkes booth on this motherfucker. Come on america, prove me wrong about gun laws.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Wood FT on May 11, 2017, 08:26:18 am
In a nation full of guns you'd thing at least one enterprising soul would take one for the team and do a john wilkes booth on this motherfucker. Come on america, prove me wrong about gun laws

They're all on the other side, I truly believe Hillary would have been at risk had she won
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on May 11, 2017, 08:35:45 am
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/09/trump-gun-owners-clinton-judges-second-amendment (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/09/trump-gun-owners-clinton-judges-second-amendment)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Iesu on May 11, 2017, 08:39:59 am
In a nation full of guns you'd thing at least one enterprising soul would take one for the team and do a john wilkes booth on this motherfucker. Come on america, prove me wrong about gun laws.

Inciting gun violence seems a little bit extreme Dave, even in these "extreme" times! Luckily I doubt there are too many potential presidential assassins reading these boards.

Here's an interesting link on the Comey "termination": http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/10/comey-firing-trump-russia-238192 (http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/10/comey-firing-trump-russia-238192)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on May 11, 2017, 08:42:08 am
I think it would be justified to avoid nuclear apocalypse. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 11, 2017, 10:14:55 am
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/us/politics/comey-russia-investigation-fbi.html?referer=http://m.facebook.com

I think the leaks are about to turn into a flood. I get the impression that Trump is unable to distinguish between his role as company CEO and Public servant; and frankly too dim to listen to advisors or even his own common sense...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on May 11, 2017, 10:51:16 am
Quote from: Oldmanmatt link=topic=27555.msg551110#msg551110 too dim to listen to .... his own common sense...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[/quote

Must be a very quiet voice.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on May 11, 2017, 11:04:28 am
In a nation full of guns you'd thing at least one enterprising soul would take one for the team and do a john wilkes booth on this motherfucker. Come on america, prove me wrong about gun laws.

Inciting gun violence seems a little bit extreme Dave, even in these "extreme" times! Luckily I doubt there are too many potential presidential assassins reading these boards.


The irony of this is that this is very close to the reason the second amendment exists but the most vociferous second ammendmenters come from the same constituency as those who still support Trump. I mean 34% approval rating may be low but that's still 34% of the population THINK HE IS DOING A GOOD JOB!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: duncan on May 11, 2017, 12:04:56 pm
So let's just put it like this, people are going absolutely apeshit over here. If this was an attempt to put a lid on the Russia questions, it didn't work.

Thanks for this. With the atomisation of media it's much harder to gauge which way the wind is blowing from this side of the Atlantic. Following Helen Richardson (https://twitter.com/HC_Richardson) (etc.) is fascinating but she is not trying to be representative.

I was an avid follower of politics in the 70s. You could smell the blood when the hunt was on for Nixon - thrilling stuff for a nerdy youth - and this is starting to feel similar.


In a nation full of guns you'd thing at least one enterprising soul would take one for the team and do a john wilkes booth on this motherfucker.

A forthcoming alternative history, if we're still around to tell it, like Rogue Male (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_Male_(1976_film)) (Really good, not just for Wintour's Leap standing in for Bavaria).


I get the impression that Trump is unable to distinguish between his role as company CEO and Public servant; and frankly too dim to listen to advisors or even his own common sense...

You mean being POTUS benefits from a more nuanced approach than fronting The Apprentice?!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 11, 2017, 12:33:35 pm
Who'd thunk'it Eh?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 11, 2017, 01:06:41 pm
So let's just put it like this, people are going absolutely apeshit over here. If this was an attempt to put a lid on the Russia questions, it didn't work.
Thanks for this. With the atomisation of media it's much harder to gauge which way the wind is blowing from this side of the Atlantic.

*Amongst the people I know, I should add. This is a reasonably diverse bunch: many professors but also school teachers; small business owners, supermarket cashiers; union officials; unemployed due to disability etc. ... but they are almost without exception die hard liberals. Sasquatch's post yesterday is important. There is a core of base that is simply immune to all of this. I guess the difficult thing is estimate just how big that unreachable core is.

I think sometimes I forget that core exists.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on May 11, 2017, 01:22:15 pm

*Amongst the people I know, I should add. This is a reasonably diverse bunch: many professors but also school teachers; small business owners, supermarket cashiers; union officials; unemployed due to disability etc. ... but they are almost without exception die hard liberals. Sasquatch's post yesterday is important. There is a core of base that is simply immune to all of this. I guess the difficult thing is estimate just how big that unreachable core is.

I think sometimes I forget that core exists.
This is my concern, if you look on Twitter (not exactly scientific I know but...) Tweets in favour of Trump in regard to this issue are still a very significant proportion.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 11, 2017, 01:28:01 pm
In case anyone missed it, Senate Intelligence committee subpoenaed Michael Flynn yesterday, and the FBI is refusing a freedom of information request to release documents relating to Trump's public calls last summer for Russia to hack Clinton's emails, which suggests it views those documents as part of an ongoing investigation.

In some ways, one of my biggest worries is that if a way is found to remove Trump, now matter how legitimate that mechanism is, then it will be viewed as some kind of liberal coup by the base.

The Twitter thing is probably largely down to bots.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on May 11, 2017, 01:28:33 pm

I was an avid follower of politics in the 70s. You could smell the blood when the hunt was on for Nixon - thrilling stuff for a nerdy youth - and this is starting to feel similar.


I know little about Watergate but isn't there a difference in that when the truth emerged about what Nixon had been doing it was easy for the GOP to disavow him as they knew nothing of what he'd been up to. The difference now is that it'll be impossible for those who have supported Trump to claim ignorance of what he is like, even if they can claim they were unaware of links to Russia (if any are found), they can't claim to not know he was trying to obstruct the investigation. Anyone who is still supporting him now will have to support him to the bitter end, and that's most of the GOP, they missed the bus to throw him under.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on May 11, 2017, 01:29:29 pm
Sorry, double post
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on May 11, 2017, 01:32:16 pm

In some ways, one of my biggest worries is that if a way is found to remove Trump, now matter how legitimate that mechanism is, then it will be viewed as some kind of liberal coup by the base.


Agreed, the problem won't got way even if Trump does, if half the country were prepared to vote for someone that unsuitable last time around there's no reason they won't do the same again.  In fact the GOP might be as well to double down and go for and even more polarising character as by predictions of a few years ago, Dems should have won this election easily due to changing demographs, they probably would not have on with a different character.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on May 11, 2017, 02:54:42 pm
For anyone who is interested in the phenomenon of Trump's core of supporters, this book would be worth a read. There is a way to turn them away from Trump's isolationist worldview, but it involves giving them opportunities, which is easier said than done.
(http://images.gr-assets.com/books/1463569814l/27161156.jpg)



In some ways, one of my biggest worries is that if a way is found to remove Trump, now matter how legitimate that mechanism is, then it will be viewed as some kind of liberal coup by the base.


Agreed, the problem won't got way even if Trump does, if half the country were prepared to vote for someone that unsuitable last time around there's no reason they won't do the same again.  In fact the GOP might be as well to double down and go for and even more polarising character as by predictions of a few years ago, Dems should have won this election easily due to changing demographs, they probably would not have on with a different character.

I share this concern. However even if a Trump-a-like was to run in his place, all the Democrats need to do is front a candidate that people can bear to vote for. I think Clinton lost in part because she didn't mobilise a lot of the traditional Democrat voters.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on May 11, 2017, 03:09:08 pm
Yep, Trump got fewer voted than Mitt Romney the previous election. The democrat vote just collapsed as thousands didn't vote. The GOP could have tied a bowtie around a dogturd and put that forward as their candidate and won.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on May 11, 2017, 03:11:45 pm
Yep, Trump got fewer voted than Mitt Romney the previous election. The democrat vote just collapsed as thousands didn't vote. The GOP could have tied a bowtie around a dogturd and put that forward as their candidate and won.

Ironically Dave, I think we're about to witness the same thing happening in our own country...
But that's a different thread  :)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on May 11, 2017, 03:13:06 pm
You're probably right, especially with such nutjob policies such as adequate funding for schools and hospitals, and no tuition fees. UNELECTABLE.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 11, 2017, 03:18:41 pm
For anyone who is interested in the phenomenon of Trump's core of supporters, this book would be worth a read. There is a way to turn them away from Trump's isolationist worldview, but it involves giving them opportunities, which is easier said than done.
(http://images.gr-assets.com/books/1463569814l/27161156.jpg)

Don't get my wife started on that book, which has been all the rage here amongst liberals trying to "understand," which was part of this weird moment after the election when many liberals indulged in this bizarre fit of self-loathing/mea culpa/we're the reason this all happened. I think a lot of people actually now think: "Fuck it, I'm not going to go round beating myself up. I didn't do this. The people who voted for him did it." This book wants to induce that guilt.

So to Vance, the critique is that this is essentially one long bout of special pleading on behalf of a culture that likes to see it as a victim and to blame everyone else (black and brown people especially) for the plight it finds itself in. OK, that's a bit crude but it needs to be read with a very critical mind and a close eye on Vance's motives. Vance himself got out and is now as elite as they come and closely associated with figures on the right such Peter Thiel. Much of this is glossed in the book.

Its sat on the bookshelf next to me but I've been pretty much banned from reading it.

As an aside we came close to moving to the exact part of the world the book is set in late last year.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on May 11, 2017, 03:49:46 pm
You're probably right, especially with such nutjob policies such as adequate funding for schools and hospitals, and no tuition fees. UNELECTABLE.

about half way down the page
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/11/leaked-labour-manifesto-policies-clause-v

Quote
All the evidence suggests voters choose the party they see as a credible government, capable of putting its plans into practice. More specifically, what tends to determine a voter’s choice is not a party’s policies, but its leader and its perceived ability to run the economy.

Labour’s wishlist might put it in front on policy. But on the two measures that matter to voters most, Labour lags far behind – and a manifesto packed full of admirable hopes and laudable plans won’t change that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on May 12, 2017, 08:18:20 am
https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/winners-and-losers-of-the-recent-nuclear-holocaust (https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/winners-and-losers-of-the-recent-nuclear-holocaust)
Title: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 12, 2017, 05:56:07 pm
No comment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-to-meet-russian-foreign-minister-at-the-white-house-as-moscows-alleged-election-interference-is-back-in-spotlight/2017/05/10/c6717e4c-34f3-11e7-b412-62beef8121f7_story.html?utm_term=.328734d2777e
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on May 13, 2017, 08:58:32 am
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/12/donald-trump-has-no-shame-that-makes-him-dangerous

Well worth a read. Extremely gloomy but true.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 13, 2017, 10:03:53 pm
A "professional " view...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/12/opinion/how-worried-should-i-be.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/upshot/democracy-in-america-how-is-it-doing.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 15, 2017, 10:29:13 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLkYrxCm5rg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLkYrxCm5rg)

The art of debate, quite an interesting exchange (if you can cope with 20 minutes stonewalling that is).

Quote
Making it personal only reveals weakness in a position. It's a basic rule of argument
  :lol:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 16, 2017, 08:11:19 pm
Well, I think its fair to say the last eight days have been the most unrelenting, jaw-droppingly incredible shitstorm yet. Let's see what the next week bring. At this point, it could be almost anything.
Title: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 17, 2017, 08:15:54 am
It's beyond incredible now.
Can you imagine a British politician clinging on under such a shit storm of accusations? Thatcher was ousted for using the "Royal We" ffs (I know there was more to it, but a fraction of what Trump faces).
The man has no shame and that has to be the most dangerous characteristic possible in such a powerful position.
Oddly, looking back now, I would never have thought of that as the single most frightening thing I could say about a leader; before this wanker graced our lives.

Mind you, May's not much better, she really is a selfish, power hungry, bitch; intent on wringing every drop of personal gain she can from her situation and advancing some weird dogma that would make Palin blush. Match made in hell? Hands held across the pond as we become the 51st state of the Glorious Fourth Reich?

http://robertreich.org/post/160651192690


It's possible I got out of bed on the wrong side today...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on May 17, 2017, 08:35:16 am
Interesting article on the history of impeachment and how it might be applied to Trump:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/05/08/how-trump-could-get-fired (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/05/08/how-trump-could-get-fired)

A sample:

More than fifty thousand mental-health professionals have signed a petition stating that Trump is “too seriously mentally ill to perform the duties of president and should be removed” under the Twenty-fifth Amendment.
.....
As an example of “pathological inattention,” Tribe noted that, on April 11th, days after North Korea launched a missile, Trump described an aircraft carrier, the U.S.S. Carl Vinson, as part of an “armada” advancing on North Korea, even though the ship was sailing away from North Korea at the time. Moreover, Tribe said, Trump’s language borders on incapacity. Asked recently why he reversed a pledge to brand China a currency manipulator, Trump said, of President Xi Jinping, “No. 1, he’s not, since my time. You know, very specific formula. You would think it’s like generalities, it’s not. They have—they’ve actually—their currency’s gone up. So it’s a very, very specific formula.”
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on May 17, 2017, 08:58:52 am
That's not a sentence, that's verbal diarrhea.

On a par with the classic beauty queen response.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on May 17, 2017, 09:14:10 am
I wouldn't trust Trump to work with children or animals though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 17, 2017, 09:34:08 am
I wouldn't trust Trump to work with children or animals though.

Cox seems to think it's where he belongs...

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170517/c25b8197493348cc4e113218a0d95645.jpg)

He does look like a psychotic version of Mr Tumble though, as this image from POTUS's last press conference shows:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170517/cfe5f5817600510301d27b5573d063ba.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 17, 2017, 11:13:33 am
Well, I think its fair to say the last eight days have been the most unrelenting, jaw-droppingly incredible shitstorm yet. Let's see what the next week bring. At this point, it could be almost anything.

I wrote this before the NYT broke the news about the Comey memo in the evening. Poor, naive me actually thought we were done for the day.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on May 17, 2017, 11:51:44 am
He didn't do a very good job of controlling the media did he..
Title: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 17, 2017, 02:48:00 pm
Premature?

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/donald-trump-impeachment-president-mike-pence-republican-congress-support-not-so-bad-a7740341.html?cmpid=facebook-post

We're a bit late for the Ides of March, but could we pencil him in for the Ides of June?

Should be nice weather for it then, too.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 17, 2017, 02:58:07 pm
Premature?

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/donald-trump-impeachment-president-mike-pence-republican-congress-support-not-so-bad-a7740341.html?cmpid=facebook-post

We're a bit late for the Ides of March, but could we pencil him in for the Ides of June?

Should be nice weather for it then, too.

Pence is a Christian fundamentalist zealot. As I saw someone else comment yesterday, he probably thinks The Handmaid's Tale is a blueprint for an ideal society. For that reason alone I don't want Trump alone to fall know because of the Comey memo or some other scandal. The ideal is that eventually there is proof of collusion between the campaign and Russia, enough to invalidate the entire election ... but that is very probably just ideal daydreaming.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 17, 2017, 04:30:03 pm
The rest of the world might (might, possibly, fuck knows) be better off with the religious nut-job; than with the Orange Baboon nut-job, holding a nuclear trigger...

You're right about the Handmaid's tale though. I've yet to watch the new TV offering, but I'm told the writers have brought it right into contemporary society and the insidious way the "reforms" are acted out, seem entirely plausible.
It must be ten or even fifteen years, since I read it. Must dig out a copy and swat up, so I know whats happening just before everyone else...[emoji33]
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on May 17, 2017, 05:07:04 pm
https://youtu.be/SSLyFiHOC5I?t=1m21s

From 1:20 if this doesnt start then....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on May 17, 2017, 06:51:59 pm
Even if impeachment proceedings start, I can't imagine him actually stepping down.  So the proceedings would carry on for at least 12-18 months.  We would have a new house/senate election by then, likely shifting the balance of power.  Then he'd be impeached and pence would be a lame duck for 12 months.  I'm not afraid of Pence because I can't imagine Trump giving in.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 17, 2017, 07:13:02 pm
Thanks for that take on it Sas, I hadn't thought of it like that.

You're right about the Handmaid's tale though. I've yet to watch the new TV offering, but I'm told the writers have brought it right into contemporary society and the insidious way the "reforms" are acted out, seem entirely plausible.

I've watched the first four or five episodes. Its very worth watching in my view. The updating is pretty subtle but the way it plays out feels increasingly plausible.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 17, 2017, 07:53:20 pm
Thanks for that take on it Sas, I hadn't thought of it like that.

You're right about the Handmaid's tale though. I've yet to watch the new TV offering, but I'm told the writers have brought it right into contemporary society and the insidious way the "reforms" are acted out, seem entirely plausible.

I've watched the first four or five episodes. Its very worth watching in my view. The updating is pretty subtle but the way it plays out feels increasingly plausible.

Just waiting for it to air here.

http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/tv-radio/2017/05/handmaid-s-tale-dystopian-dread-new-golden-age-television


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 17, 2017, 08:04:59 pm
Good piece.

Chaos.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-systems-failed-with-comey-firing-but-trump-pushed-the-buttons/2017/05/13/e9db104e-375c-11e7-b373-418f6849a004_story.html?utm_term=.44ae425ebb86


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on May 17, 2017, 08:45:00 pm
Even if Pence's principle are terrible, at least he has principles. Trump on the other hand is only there on a ego trip and to enrich himself. Pence is a cunt but Trump is in another league.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on May 17, 2017, 09:43:54 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLkYrxCm5rg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLkYrxCm5rg)

The art of debate, quite an interesting exchange (if you can cope with 20 minutes stonewalling that is).

Quote
Making it personal only reveals weakness in a position. It's a basic rule of argument
  :lol:
Incredible, fucking unbelievable.
What a joke, where there's smoke there's fire.
I hope the journalist keep digging for the truth.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on May 18, 2017, 10:57:10 am
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/17/donald-trump-coast-guard-gradution-unfairly-treated-president-238505

By the same token I don't think any politician has treated the press more unfairly.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 18, 2017, 11:20:01 am
Well, I think its fair to say the last eight days have been the most unrelenting, jaw-droppingly incredible shitstorm yet. Let's see what the next week bring. At this point, it could be almost anything.

I wrote this before the NYT broke the news about the Comey memo in the evening. Poor, naive me actually thought we were done for the day.

And I wrote that before yesterday's late revelations of a) appointment of a special counsel/prosecutor b) recording of senior GOP politicians "joking" that Trump could be in Putin's pay in mid 2016 and c) that Flynn told the Tump campaign he was being investigated for ties to Russia before he was appointed and before Sally Yates told them (and they still went ahead and appointed him National Security advisor anyway).

The timing of the Washington Post's release of story b) late yesterday suggests to me that they have more lined up and ready to go. Things accelerated a lot yesterday.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 18, 2017, 12:14:59 pm
Well, this is all over Reuters...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-russia-vladimir-putin-secret-backchannel-michael-flynn-campaign-a7742231.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 18, 2017, 12:26:39 pm
For a different perspective, the history of the humble memo. Sometimes, it really is the little things that matter.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2017/05/17/james-comeys-memo-has-shaken-a-presidency-heres-why-memos-have-always-mattered/?tid=ss_fb&utm_term=.19d4b37db2ea
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 18, 2017, 04:54:07 pm
Just so we don't get too depressed about it all, remember this guy writes his own gags:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170518/191b70b326252f1305adc91755f0e041.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on May 19, 2017, 08:17:58 am
On Meuller and why Trump (and his associates) have much to fear. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/18/james-comey-trump-special-prosecutor-robert-mueller-fbi-215154 (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/18/james-comey-trump-special-prosecutor-robert-mueller-fbi-215154)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on May 19, 2017, 10:35:25 pm
Looks like the shit is about to hit the fan.
Putins on the phone "Agent Orange your time is up."
URL is crazy on this one too.
 :popcorn:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/jared-kushner-russia-investigation-trump-song-in-law-probe-person-interest-a7745916.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/jared-kushner-russia-investigation-trump-song-in-law-probe-person-interest-a7745916.html)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 19, 2017, 10:53:33 pm
On Meuller and why Trump (and his associates) have much to fear. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/18/james-comey-trump-special-prosecutor-robert-mueller-fbi-215154 (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/18/james-comey-trump-special-prosecutor-robert-mueller-fbi-215154)

That is a really interesting piece.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 24, 2017, 11:31:28 pm
Well...
That went well.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170524/d96f5c49c5f96e84caef1ec72e084802.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on May 25, 2017, 08:28:47 am
 :lol:
Pope hates him. Lost control of the FBI. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/24/theresa-may-to-tackle-donald-trump-over-manchester-bombing-evidence
Republican senators beating up guardian journalists. No grasp of middle eastern politics. Tiny hands, orange hair. Still the idiots love him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on May 25, 2017, 08:40:33 am
Has someone conveniently forgotten to switch on roaming on his phone? #notwitter
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on May 25, 2017, 08:49:41 am
Well...
That went well.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170524/d96f5c49c5f96e84caef1ec72e084802.jpg)

Whats with the veils, the Trumps go to visit the Middle East no heads scarfs insight.
Go and visit the Pope, crack out the veils, I think that whoever is giving them clothing tips needs "firing."
A definite wardrobe malfunction, they look even more stupid than normal.
I bet Popey is thinking they are all nuts.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on May 25, 2017, 10:41:32 am
Pope definitely has that "WTF, who are these people" look on his face.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 25, 2017, 10:53:23 am
Even without the Photoshop additions, the photo begged to be accompanied by the "Adams family" theme tune...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on May 25, 2017, 10:58:40 am
Because Trump's hands are neat, sweet, petite.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 25, 2017, 11:12:33 am
As to the veils, much as I hate to defend a Trump, I believe this is a Vatican requirement. Michelle Obama wore one there (and didn't wear one in Saudi, for which Trump criticised her, of course). But the whole black thing? Not sure what is going on three.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on May 25, 2017, 11:18:49 am
As to the veils, much as I hate to defend a Trump, I believe this is a Vatican requirement. Michelle Obama wore one there (and didn't wear one in Saudi, for which Trump criticised her, of course). But the whole black thing? Not sure what is going on three.

The black thing is all part of Vatican Protocol. I believe women have to wear long sleeved black "mourning" clothing with a veil for a papal hearing unless you are a catholic queen.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 25, 2017, 11:40:25 am
So they're off the hook for all of it. Damn.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on May 25, 2017, 11:43:53 am
off the hook, and OFF THE HOOK, Y'ALL.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on May 27, 2017, 11:16:42 am
As to the veils, much as I hate to defend a Trump, I believe this is a Vatican requirement. Michelle Obama wore one there (and didn't wear one in Saudi, for which Trump criticised her, of course). But the whole black thing? Not sure what is going on three.
I need to read up a bit more for my next meeting with popey
Double standards though crack veils out for pope but not in the Middle East.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/melania-trump-pope-wear-black_us_59258828e4b00c8df2a08d40 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/melania-trump-pope-wear-black_us_59258828e4b00c8df2a08d40)
I still think the Trump ladies look like extras out of a spaghetti western.
The huff video shows that pope wasn't looking forward to meet the Trumps.

Anyway back to Donny's big trip.
Looks as though most eu leaders suffered only minor injuries.
A few broken knuckles, fingers and maybe an arm or two.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/27/donald-trumps-europe-tour-leaves-leaders-shaken (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/27/donald-trumps-europe-tour-leaves-leaders-shaken)
Macron tried to get one over with the Trump shake but Donny had the last laugh.
The videos are hilarious :lol: He's like a toddler at a play group.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Andy F on June 01, 2017, 09:25:30 pm
He's chosen oil money over the future prospects of the world. What a tool.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 01, 2017, 11:03:41 pm
He's chosen oil money over the future prospects of the world. What a tool.

The entire planet, including his pimp (sorry, that's not how you spell Putin, is it) and China (didn't they invent Climate change?) are now openly mocking him and contradicting him.

It also seems that "pulling out" is more complicated than he thinks and can't be done (or at least completed) within his current term (PLEASE! FFS! Can this be his "ONLY" term. FOR THE LOVE OF COFEVEV!).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on June 04, 2017, 04:28:39 pm
Cheb end.

That's the best description of him I've heard all day. What a fucking tool.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 05, 2017, 10:54:09 pm
So, Kelly Conway's husband is not a fan of his wife's boss...

http://ti.me/2sws8hC


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 07, 2017, 07:05:39 pm
Do you think they managed to hit it?

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170607/fedcaab52262e813f672e714640e3d2b.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 07, 2017, 09:14:50 pm
Worth five minutes of reading:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/06/06/the-real-reason-working-class-whites-continue-to-support-trump/?tid=ss_fb&utm_term=.cc72e7bb9326
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 14, 2017, 03:29:55 pm
Premature?

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/donald-trump-impeachment-president-mike-pence-republican-congress-support-not-so-bad-a7740341.html?cmpid=facebook-post

We're a bit late for the Ides of March, but could we pencil him in for the Ides of June?

Should be nice weather for it then, too.

Pence is a Christian fundamentalist zealot. As I saw someone else comment yesterday, he probably thinks The Handmaid's Tale is a blueprint for an ideal society. For that reason alone I don't want Trump alone to fall know because of the Comey memo or some other scandal. The ideal is that eventually there is proof of collusion between the campaign and Russia, enough to invalidate the entire election ... but that is very probably just ideal daydreaming.

On the second sentence there, there's a novel that sounds more prescient every day.
Next a bomb in Congress and suspend the Constitution, while they deal with the "Terrorists"...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-congressional-shooting_us_5941294ce4b0d31854862a29?utm_campaign=hp_fb_pages&utm_source=main_fb&utm_medium=facebook&ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 30, 2017, 09:54:17 am
This amendment passed Congress yesterday, it now goes before the Senate. It's gone through quietly, no fanfare and the Senate republicans may still scupper it.
But...

This clips Trumps wings dramatically, removes the Executive authority to declare war and brings it back into the hands of the assemblies.
If it passes the Senate (and from the lack of publicity, I think that's already decided and no one wants the Orange Buffoon to realise what's happening), he will be a hollow figurehead only.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170630/2e2beb1fab4c23bc34b94486b0f31545.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: cjsheps on July 15, 2017, 09:42:14 pm
On a lighter note...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCAbBnWm4LM

Really enjoyed this.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 26, 2017, 09:46:40 pm
I've been meaning to try and write an update for ages, but at this point words simply fail me.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on July 27, 2017, 10:15:47 am
he will be has a hollow figurehead only.


Assume this bill went through then?
Title: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 27, 2017, 10:35:47 am
he will be has a hollow figurehead only.


Assume this bill went through then?

I believe it did.

Edit:

No, just checked. The amendment has been included in the Bill, but the bill is still to be debated.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/06/29/barbara-lee-aumf-house-debate/


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 27, 2017, 01:38:19 pm
I've been meaning to try and write an update for ages, but at this point words simply fail me.

Yep.
Chomsky is, as ever, un-afflicted by such human frailty.
Never quite sure the fellow is entirely amongst the sane, however I feel he might be on to something here.

http://nordic.businessinsider.com/chomsky-says-trumps-scandals-are-only-a-distraction-to-hide-whats-going-on-behind-the-scenes-2017-7


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 27, 2017, 03:09:24 pm
I'll give it a go. Where are we? It feels like everything is falling apart; not in terms of day-to-day life, which goes on as normal, for the most part, but in terms of the norms of how democracy and the government function. Nothing about this is normal. A sense of chaos and unpredictability reigns and it's how to imagine how long that can be sustained. Trump is out of control - I mean that literally. I think there are now very few if any restraints on his impulses and behaviour. He's lost whatever grasp he ever had over how government and the law are supposed to function: this week alone witness his bizarre ongoing assault on his own AG Jeff Sessions or the dictat by tweet banning transgender people from the military, issued on a complete impulse. I think he is deeply frustrated and angered that he simply cannot do what he wants. I think he is confused by the resistance and disdain he is encountering - I think his reality is that he is winning. He is also, I suspect (and hope) frightened about what may be coming down the road. The only good thing that can be said about the GOP is that they are utterly dysfunctional, because if they could get themselves together then they could enact a truly terrifying agenda with the potential to radically alter American society and culture – and for decades given the Supreme Court is now in conservative hands. The Republicans should be shamed by the health care bill debacle but with one or two honorable exceptions they are not, because they are without shame.

What do people think? Obviously no-one person can answer that question and I do live in a “bubble,” whatever that means. For what its worth I do meet many who are appalled. But there are many who are not or who even remain enthusiastic. Everyday Tuesday at noon we go to a protest at the local office of our Senator (against whom I will be able to vote at the next election without being a citizen). Senator Toomey is a disgrace who refuses to meet with his constituents. Hence the symbolic weekly protest alongside the busy highway outside his office. Its to say: "we’re here and we’re not going away." There’s normally between 50 and 100 people and on occasions considerably more. Cars stream by and the honks, clenched fist salutes and thumbs up far outweigh the scattered middle fingers, shouts of “Get a job,” and chants of “Trump, Trump, Trump.” But by far the greatest number don’t respond at all. Apathy reigns. I suspect that many, many people are simply not paying attention or believe the concerns and fears are entirely exaggerated. Remember, the turn out was barely 50%.

What will happen? I still hope, and believe it possible, that something will bring him down. There is already a great deal of damaging material in the public domain and I suspect Special Counsel Robert Mueller knows a great deal more. Trump may make a catastrophic error – such as firing Sessions and then Mueller – that cannot be ignored. But what happens then? Many supporters would literally regard any successful attempt to remove him as a coup. I’m not predicting violence but his downfall would not lead to reconciliation and unity. The fabric of what you might call the body politic feels too damaged for that. And the social fabric feels damaged by a release of misogyny, racism, and many other forms of hatred. There is also the damning fact that any of this happened in the first place. Like many I know on the left, I think Clinton was a poor candidate who ran a very poor campaign … but still this shouldn’t have happened in a healthy society. This is a world turned upside down, in which black is white and truth is false. The elevation of know-nothingness and contempt for truth to the status of virtues is alarming and has only been magnified by the last six months.

Maybe I’m being ridiculously alarmist – this week has been particularly insane after all – and I hope I am. But right now, I really don’t know.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 27, 2017, 03:17:54 pm
The elevation of know-nothingness and contempt for truth to the status of virtues is alarming and has only been magnified by the last six months.

Like our erstwhile Education Secretary (!) said, we've had enough of experts here too.

It's a splendid wheeze, to elevate ignorance to a virtue is the political equivalent of saying 'Nothing to see here, move along'.

But there is quite a lot to see and none of it is pretty when you look.

Trump is out of control - I mean that literally. I think there are now very few if any restraints on his impulses and behaviour. He's lost whatever grasp he ever had over how government and the law are supposed to function... I think he is deeply frustrated and angered that he simply cannot do what he wants.

Sounds like good a description of despotism- albeit ineffective so far- to me.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 27, 2017, 05:18:23 pm
If you can issue new laws, on Twatter, on a whim, without oversight; then you are a dictator.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on July 27, 2017, 10:22:31 pm
The partisanship of US politics seems to have largely killed moderate / consesus politics (with the exception of those few non-Tea Party GOP representatives who have voted against the Trumpcare variants) but surely there are limits that are being reached?  Is there any hope that if Trump tries to install an obvious stooge as Attorney General, or tries to pardon his family and himself, that the body of Republicans will turn on him - as a threat to re-election / loss of control after the mid-terms, if not out of common decency? 

The banning of trans-gender folk in the army could be a blow too.  It seems that the high-ups in the US mililtary were not consulted and are coming out against it; even Senator McCain, who left his sick bed to support Trumpcare, has spoken out.   I hope that the respect that rank and file Republicans likely have for the view of the military brass perhaps outweighs any "traditional" attitudes to sexuality.  Surely the moderates who supported Trump are now realising that blindly trying to repeal every Obama era piece of legislation (health, environment, banking restrictions, oversight into Police killings of blacks etc) is not the basis of coherent policy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 28, 2017, 04:47:10 pm
What will happen? I still hope, and believe it possible, that something will bring him down. There is already a great deal of damaging material in the public domain and I suspect Special Counsel Robert Mueller knows a great deal more. Trump may make a catastrophic error – such as firing Sessions and then Mueller – that cannot be ignored.

Maybe it is too early to start being hopeful but it looks like more Republicans are coming to their senses (http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/27/politics/lindsey-graham-holy-hell-jeff-sessions/index.html) and realising the threat Trump poses to US democracy. Which, presumably, is a necessary pre-condition for an impeachment process, given their majority in both houses? In that context, the unambiguous defeat for the Repeal Obamacare bill this evening seems encouraging too.

Slow and bleary morning here after getting sucked up into staying up to watch the healthcare vote. This week has been just insane (Scaramucci!!!!!!!!) but also with some more encouraging signs. He's faced GOP pushback on Sessions, the transgender ban, and now healthcare.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on July 28, 2017, 05:06:43 pm
Scaramucci is a screwed up piece of work isn't he?

I'm thinking he's umimpeachable. He seems to just brazen it all out. It fascinates me.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 28, 2017, 07:25:51 pm
It's not just a political push back, it's open defiance from the military.
My retired Colonel buddy, Erica, is spitting lava and along with many other retirees, organising "phone assaults" to keep Senators/Congressmen/Governors switchboards tied up with angry Veterans.
It's not just the injustice, it's treating the Military as his private army, the breach of protocol and arrogance they object to. As she said, they swear allegiance to the constitution, not the President  (her words, I don't know the wording of their oath, I shall google it presently).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 28, 2017, 07:28:39 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170728/33ab3fa1664f04f16db11e44a6c981b6.jpg)

Interesting...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 28, 2017, 10:54:41 pm
It's not just a political push back, it's open defiance from the military.
My retired Colonel buddy, Erica, is spitting lava and along with many other retirees, organising "phone assaults" to keep Senators/Congressmen/Governors switchboards tied up with angry Veterans.

I was focusing specifically on signs of movement within the GOP, which is ultimately where any change will have to come from, given they control both houses. But yes, it is much wider. Pretty much everyone I know is active in some form, not least in calling elected representatives at all levels, as well as protesting etc.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 29, 2017, 07:54:32 am
It's no longer just the left, I'm seeing more and more of the center right commentators openly in opposition:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/07/28/as-trump-debases-the-presidency-the-religious-right-looks-away/?utm_term=.58099fdde375
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on July 31, 2017, 11:18:35 pm
Seems to be going for some sort of rapid staff turnover record http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40782299
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on July 31, 2017, 11:58:11 pm
I was focusing specifically on signs of movement within the GOP, which is ultimately where any change will have to come from, given they control both houses.

This is dynamite coming, as it does, from a Republican senator
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/07/31/my-party-is-in-denial-about-donald-trump-215442

Could be the trickle that becomes a flood

I assume the Mooch went because of a chronic coke habit? Surely there's nothing he said which the prez would consider beyond the pale?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 01, 2017, 12:28:53 am
No more Mooch! Straightly out the door.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 01, 2017, 07:00:16 am
I was focusing specifically on signs of movement within the GOP, which is ultimately where any change will have to come from, given they control both houses.

This is dynamite coming, as it does, from a Republican senator
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/07/31/my-party-is-in-denial-about-donald-trump-215442

Could be the trickle that becomes a flood

I assume the Mooch went because of a chronic coke habit? Surely there's nothing he said which the prez would consider beyond the pale?

Wow!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on August 01, 2017, 11:06:09 am
http://newsthump.com/2017/07/31/scaramucci-fired-after-failing-to-do-the-fandango/

Beautiful
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 01, 2017, 07:08:16 pm
I assume the Mooch went because of a chronic coke habit? Surely there's nothing he said which the prez would consider beyond the pale?

I imagine John Kelly aspires to run a tighter ship, that's what he was brought in for I think.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 03, 2017, 01:22:23 am
So, I last posted on Friday morning, the appalling healthcare bill having just been defeated. It seemed the week couldn't get any more insane. Then the President flew too Long Island and gave a speech encouraging law enforcements to use rough justice. As part of the trip he sacked Chief of Staff Reince Preibus by tweeter. The weekend was spent berating Republican Senators, again via Twitter, branding them "quitters" if they didn't again to try and pass the dead in the water healthcare act. Then out of the blue Monday the Mooch was gone. Mooch, sincerely, we will miss you. Trump, who personally insisted on his appointment ten days earlier, tweeted, apparently entirely without irony, "Great day at the WH." The insanity ...

Seriously, there's a worrying pattern over the last week: the transgender/military ban, the law enforcement speech, action to attack affirmative action, and todays Xenophobia thinly described as an immigration bill. This is naked playing to the base and speaks to me of a man feeling increasingly cornered and potentially dangerous. I expect more - and worse - of the same over coming days.

I assume the Mooch went because of a chronic coke habit? Surely there's nothing he said which the prez would consider beyond the pale?

I imagine John Kelly aspires to run a tighter ship, that's what he was brought in for I think.

That's undoubtedly the plan but I very much hope it fails. Bring on the chaos, that way lie the mistakes and catastrophes.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 03, 2017, 07:49:19 am
You forgot the bit about the poem on the Statue of Liberty, "not being about immigration " and that saying it is " is the dumbest thing ever said"...
Oh, and committing an act that amounts to a clear obstruction of justice, is just "what any father would do".
And, (possibly due to lack of gold plating), the stunning revelation that "the White House is a dump".
And...
He knows mix, and would be the first to say mix, but the boss of the Boy Scouts called him and told him it was the  greatest ever speech to Boy Scouts and it was a standing ovation all the way through and for five minutes after and they love him and...

Didn't happen. No phone call. No ovation. Absolute denial of call and a sincere apology to attendees from the Scout leadership.
Actually, possibly, Trump's most blatant lie yet.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 03, 2017, 10:55:36 pm
Ooof!

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/special-counsel-mueller-impanels-washington-grand-jury-in-russia-probe-1501788287

(Poster cautiously allows a modicum of hope to sneak into general feeling of hopelessness).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 04, 2017, 09:14:32 pm
Interesting how the Republicans are becoming more vocal in their criticism.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/why-is-donald-trump-still-so-horribly-witless-about-the-world?mbid=social_facebook
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on August 04, 2017, 11:15:20 pm
interesting analysis of the reasons why the Senate GOPs are getting more vocal, whilst the House remains compliant:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-senate-seems-more-willing-to-push-back-against-trump-than-the-house-why/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-senate-seems-more-willing-to-push-back-against-trump-than-the-house-why/)

the TR:DR version is "don't get your hopes up, self-interest still rules".  That said, the continued divergance in the Approval vs Disapproval rating chart is heartening.  Maybe even "the base" is realising that the desired prospects of environmental rap, corporate tax cuts, and financial deregulation are a heavy price for drowning in global embarassment, handcuffed to a leaden moron, and being viewed as a stooge to Putin. 

Btw, for "whistling in the dark" relief, I recommend the Pod Save America cast.  It has serious faults - very "preaching to the converted" - but its weaknesses are also strengths - hosted by ex-Obama / Clinton speechwriters - so they know how the White House should work, and can provide well informed details of the mechanical defects of the current adminsistration (beyond the normal "Trump" is a cretin").

https://getcrookedmedia.com/here-have-a-podcast-78ee56b5a323 (https://getcrookedmedia.com/here-have-a-podcast-78ee56b5a323)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 04, 2017, 11:55:09 pm
interesting analysis of the reasons why the Senate GOPs are getting more vocal, whilst the House remains compliant:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-senate-seems-more-willing-to-push-back-against-trump-than-the-house-why/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-senate-seems-more-willing-to-push-back-against-trump-than-the-house-why/)

the TR:DR version is "don't get your hopes up, self-interest still rules".  That said, the continued divergance in the Approval vs Disapproval rating chart is heartening.  Maybe even "the base" is realising that the desired prospects of environmental rap, corporate tax cuts, and financial deregulation are a heavy price for drowning in global embarassment, handcuffed to a leaden moron, and being viewed as a stooge to Putin. 

Btw, for "whistling in the dark" relief, I recommend the Pod Save America cast.  It has serious faults - very "preaching to the converted" - but its weaknesses are also strengths - hosted by ex-Obama / Clinton speechwriters - so they know how the White House should work, and can provide well informed details of the mechanical defects of the current adminsistration (beyond the normal "Trump" is a cretin").

https://getcrookedmedia.com/here-have-a-podcast-78ee56b5a323 (https://getcrookedmedia.com/here-have-a-podcast-78ee56b5a323)

We (wife and I) were saying this morning that Trump has pretty much lost Senate Republicans at this point: there are very few who are wholeheartedly onboard. This has to be a sign. The simple explanation? There are far more nutters in the House. As to the base, at its core, the ones who will be the last ones standing, the commitment is almost entirely emotional and entirely divorced from any rational means/ends analysis.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 05, 2017, 07:29:47 pm
When Mueller gets round to handing his final report to the House (if Trump hasn't succeeded in sacking him first, in which case it will be another prosecutor) I think Trump will try to bring everything down around him to avoid responsibility, having whipped his remaining supporters into a state of hysterical denial. Listening to him speak to his fans it feels dangerous tbh.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 06, 2017, 02:24:38 pm
I think Trump will try to bring everything down around him to avoid responsibility, having whipped his remaining supporters into a state of hysterical denial. Listening to him speak to his fans it feels dangerous tbh.

His rally in West Virginia on Thursday evening, hours after the news that Mueller has convened a Grand Jury, was very instructive. There was a strong emphasis on a new narrative about how "they" were trying to deny "your" (the crowd's) future. As indictments appear ever more likely he is clearly preparing the ground for a delegitimisation of the Special Counsel's investigation and its possible findings. I think that strategy will work in the sense that there is a constituency ready - eager - to buy that story. I was at a local music festival yesterday and noticed a number of signs of Trump support on t-shirts, hats etc. That's happens in daily life too, like the Trump yard sign that disappeared after the election but that has now reappeared. They haven't gone away and they're not about to any time soon. It does feel dangerous.

And then there's this ... a frightening endpoint to where all this rhetoric seems to be inexorably leading us.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/05/nra-new-york-times-video-coming-for-threat-dana-loesch
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on August 09, 2017, 03:52:26 pm
Interesting development, been kept quiet for a couple of weeks

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40879798
Title: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 12, 2017, 09:09:51 pm
The videos in this article are hard to watch and difficult to see the act as "accidental" (I wondered if it was a panicked reaction, prior to actually seeing it).
The third link is the most telling, with the grey car obviously moving from clear streets into the crowd at speed and then reversing away fast and purposefully.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/charlottesville-protesters-unite-right-rally-vehicle-injuries-a7890396.html

Why in the Trump thread? Because their leader claimed they were there to fulfil Trumps promises.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170812/39142e5ecd3dc551515e17130e9282f7.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 12, 2017, 09:46:50 pm
Well, the whole Korea thing sure does take the focus off the Russia enquiry.... just like house of cards...

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 12, 2017, 09:49:44 pm
Those video clips are horrific OMM.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 15, 2017, 12:42:39 am
I should probably write another post. It was a pretty horrible weekend. We're down in Philadelphia for Saturday day/night for reunion with old friends but constantly surreptitiously checking phones for updates. I had a bad feeling long before the terrible events unfolded and then of course, there was shock and sadness. Busy Sunday morning we drove home in time to catch a hastily called rally downtown (for what it's worth I live in a city called Allentown) that had a crowd of about 500. Largely organised by a coalition of faith groups, as well as grass roots political organisations, there was a series of powerful speeches from Christians, Jews, Muslims, atheists, Hispanics, LGBTQ activists – seriously, I have never heard so many pastors speak in my life till I moved here! The (multiracial crowd) was given a serious schooling in white privilege! Really, the focus and debate has very quickly moved on to reactions and aftermath. Trump was pathetic, his white supremacist sympathies and lack of moral courage very painfully exposed. The Nazis were delighted. Sometimes, on both sides of the Atlantic, I’m asked the difference between Brexit and Trump. The answer is increasingly unavoidable. Race. Race has become (even more) deeply toxic here in the US. But this is also about history, claims to history, and failures to deal with history. Much of white America has simply failed to come to terms with its history. And I’m not even really talking about the avowed Nazis marching in Charlottesville but rather those who equivocate, try to draw moral equivalence, and ask that people of colour here “move on” and “put the past behind them.”
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 15, 2017, 04:32:33 pm
Worth five minutes:

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/is-america-headed-for-a-new-kind-of-civil-war?mbid=social_facebook
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: duncan on August 15, 2017, 06:22:07 pm
Official Mike Pence for president (http://www.officialmikepence.com). Satirical, possibly.

On a more serious note, is there any dirt on Pence? He says today he "never witnessed" any collusion between the Russian government and Trump campaign in the 2016 campaign. I take this to mean he knew all about it. The 1973 playbook says you first bring down the VP (Spiro Agnew) because he's even worse than the prez. Only when the relatively acceptable Gerald Ford is in place do you go all out for Nixon.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 15, 2017, 09:42:01 pm
Wow. Trump just blamed the "Alt-Left"(sic) for starting the violence in Charlottesville, in his New York press conference.
He claims they charged the Unite the Right march "with clubs".
This contradicts both the Police, State Troopers and even the Militia accounts as well as all the media accounts I've seen.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 15, 2017, 09:46:36 pm
Shit! I was watching it live on  WP and he's just gone full Nazi! Reckons R.E. Lee is comparable to George Washington etc. Had to find a non-live link. AP is going berserk, so here's the Beeb's take:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40943425?ocid=socialflow_facebook&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_source=facebook
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on August 15, 2017, 09:50:37 pm
I was watching it live on BBC's "Outside Source" (a great news show BTW) and it was absolutely insane.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 15, 2017, 09:58:46 pm
Just for balance, a confirmed "right wing" view point:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/15/donald-trump-says-sides-charlottesville-violent/?WT.mc_id=tmgoff_fb_tmg
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 15, 2017, 10:22:06 pm
And assuming the Guardian isn't inventing quotes, the Militia view point:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/15/charlottesville-militia-free-speech-violence?CMP=fb_gu
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 15, 2017, 10:39:03 pm
It's so fucked up. Both what he is saying - and presumably he is being torn in all sorts of directions behind the scenes by his 'teams' - hence the contradictions.

It is gob smacking how he is being allowed to do this - I mean he's not just wrong - he's stupidly wrong. I'm struggling to describe the bonkersness..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on August 15, 2017, 10:56:05 pm
Presidential, what a shambles, Trump seems to amplify all that's bad within America.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=alc_x49hLuw (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=alc_x49hLuw)
Just when you think things can't get any worse, he opens his mouth or begins to tweet.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 16, 2017, 03:47:26 am
Re-read a transcript in the Washington Journal:

TRUMP: Okay, what about the alt-left that came charging at us – excuse me – what about the alt-left that came charging at the, as you say, the alt right? Do they have any semblance of guilt?

Did you notice the "us"?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dave on August 16, 2017, 08:02:53 am
You know the best thing about this entire fuckup is? It's that this time next week it'll be all forgotten, made obsolete by something even more stupid or negligent he'll say or do between now and then.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 16, 2017, 08:07:28 am
You know the best thing about this entire fuckup is? It's that this time next week it'll be all forgotten, made obsolete by something even more stupid or negligent he'll say or do between now and then.

I think this is pretty bad - as what he said is unpicked. For me the telling comment is the 'us' referring to the alt-right... at a time where he should be trying to bring the country together, he's just picked a side. Everyone probably thought he was on that side anyway, but I (and Isuspect many) hoped he would be presidential in some way and put that to one side for the sake of his country.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on August 16, 2017, 09:31:47 am
Trump's clearly incapable of putting anything - greater good of his country, peace in SE asia  etc. - ahead of his own ego for more than 24hrs.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on August 16, 2017, 09:56:07 am
In other news

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-scottish-golf-course_uk_59931c08e4b00914164031d6

At least we can control him doing something.

What are the odds on May cancelling the visit? Or would that be an international disaster?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on August 16, 2017, 11:03:04 am
Presidential, what a shambles, Trump seems to amplify all that's bad within America.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=alc_x49hLuw (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=alc_x49hLuw)
Just when you think things can't get any worse, he opens his mouth or begins to tweet.

He says that bit about the "alt-left charging" at 13:43. Watching the video, I don't think he does says "us". I think he says "charging at 'em". The audio goes a bit weird at that point, but if you look at his lips he certainly seems to be saying "'em" and not "us". Two distinctively different mouth movements. What do others think?

The Washington Journal does not contain a video clip of him saying anything. The WJ cites Politico as the source of the transcript, but the Politico article that they link to does not contain a transcript, nor does it contain a video clip.


Soooo. Fake news?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 16, 2017, 11:20:16 am
Presidential, what a shambles, Trump seems to amplify all that's bad within America.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=alc_x49hLuw (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=alc_x49hLuw)
Just when you think things can't get any worse, he opens his mouth or begins to tweet.

He says that bit about the "alt-left charging" at 13:43. Watching the video, I don't think he does says "us". I think he says "charging at 'em". The audio goes a bit weird at that point, but if you look at his lips he certainly seems to be saying "'em" and not "us". Two distinctively different mouth movements. What do others think?

The Washington Journal does not contain a video clip of him saying anything. The WJ cites Politico as the source of the transcript, but the Politico article that they link to does not contain a transcript, nor does it contain a video clip.


Soooo. Fake news?

Entirely possible.
I was reading in bed in the early hours, so actually replaying the vid would have resulted in Mrs OMM removing my nut sack with extreme malice...

On t' Moors at the mo, so will listen again later.
I didn't notice an "us" in the live broadcast, but was prepared to accept he might have said it, based on that report.
At the time I was slightly stunned at the whole thing, having read so much from both ends of the spectrum over the previous 24 hrs. He contradicted almost every other account and to me most tellingly, the Militia version.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slackline on August 16, 2017, 11:27:05 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P54sP0Nlngg
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on August 16, 2017, 02:51:15 pm
Quote from: Politico
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this transcript quoted Trump as saying, "Okay, what about the alt-left that came charging at us – excuse me." In a review of the audio, we could not definitively discern Trump's exact words at that moment in the news conference. The transcript has been updated to now read: "Okay, what about the alt-left that came charging at [indiscernible] – excuse me."

So yes, fake news. To me it isn't indiscernible. I'm certain that he didn't say "us" and I would say it's pretty certain that he said "'em" (it seems this is what other people think he said too).

At the time of me writing this, the Washington Journal has not taken down their "Freudian Slip" story.

Does nobody else think this is an enormous problem? A supposedly reputable outlet picked up a fabricated story from a third party and ran it without checking the actual source because it fit with their own narrative. It's just as bad to see that sort of behaviour coming from the Trump opposition media as it is from the Trump supporting media.

How are we supposed to know what is true and what is not true any more when the press won't adhere to high professional standards? How many other times has Trump been misquoted and I've just believed it readily because I find it easy to believe and I want to believe it? How many thousands out there will not pick up on the fact that he didn't say "us"?

In Hilary Mantel's Reith lectures, she talked about there being no such thing as history. There were simply events, and then a narrative created after the fact to describe those events. The media moves so fast that this is unlikely to be picked apart or redacted in any significant way, so now we have a situation where an untruth has become truth in the eyes of many. I remember looking at Twitter after Charlottesville and seeing the driver of the car being named as a Trump opponent, complete with screenshots from licence plate directory websites and the kids Facebook profile. Now I hear that a very different Hitler-sympathising suspect has been identified. Those initial reports were convincing enough. I can imagine many people, if asked in a year's time, will say "wasn't Charlottesville an anti-fascist attack?"

I used to think that Twitter, Facebook and electronic media would be good for democracy. I'm starting to think that they are the beginning of the end of it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: IanP on August 16, 2017, 03:57:04 pm
At the time of me writing this, the Washington Journal has not taken down their "Freudian Slip" story.

Does nobody else think this is an enormous problem? A supposedly reputable outlet picked up a fabricated story from a third party and ran it without checking the actual source because it fit with their own narrative. It's just as bad to see that sort of behaviour coming from the Trump opposition media as it is from the Trump supporting media.

Assuming you mean this site https://washingtonjournal.com/ (https://washingtonjournal.com/), then it looks pretty clearly like a left wing version of many right wing fake/spam news sites with loads of headlines against Trump and nothing else.  A quick google doesn't find anything about the Washington Journal as news site, just links to a TV show that doesn't seem to have any links to the above website.

So I could be wrong but to me this doesn't look like a main stream media 'fake news' issue, much more a fake media 'fake news' issue.  Lesson is don't necessarily believe stuff you read on random websites and always have an appropriately skeptical mindset (and preferably corroborate against other mainstream sites). 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 17, 2017, 08:25:12 am
Isn't history a narrative or interpretation based around 'facts' and evidence (facts is in quotes as in the science meaning - there's bugger all in life that is a fact).

Anyway - the main story from the presser is Trump giving moral equivalence to a load of Nazi's and a load of counter supporters.

I really can't see how this sits with the Jewish community in the US...  Trump has made great claims about his support for Israel etc... this would seem somewhat contradictory now..??

As someone above I think stated - this is all about his ego. He hated having to correct what he first said (the both sides statement) and so went back to double down on his original words.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on August 17, 2017, 11:36:15 am
Yeah that was ME, listen to ME  :ang: 8) :smartass:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 17, 2017, 03:02:09 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P54sP0Nlngg

Wow. Kudos to the young reporter, that's some composure.

Cantwell's closing comments bear quoting:
Quote
These people ('the blacks') want violence and the Right is just meeting market demand.

There'll be more of this.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 21, 2017, 05:35:33 pm
Somehow - don't ask - we found ourselves in a dive bar in a bombed out area of Detroit last Wednesday evening; that is, the day after a sitting US president refused to disavow Nazis. We had a fascinating conversation with an older African American. He summed it up for me in one pithy sentence: "The man might as well put on a motherfucking hood."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 22, 2017, 06:57:13 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/22/thousands-of-trump-shaped-ecstasy-tablets-seized-in-germany
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on August 22, 2017, 09:12:35 pm
A joke from the Edinburgh festival:

“Trump’s nothing like Hitler. There’s no way he could write a book.” Frankie Boyle
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 27, 2017, 03:49:24 pm
The company Trump likes to keep: https://static.currentaffairs.org/2017/08/wait-do-people-actually-know-just-how-evil-this-man-is
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on August 27, 2017, 07:34:27 pm
The company Trump likes to keep: https://static.currentaffairs.org/2017/08/wait-do-people-actually-know-just-how-evil-this-man-is

Scary. Very scary.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 27, 2017, 09:55:33 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170827/201b13b94d583cb50f6f801e904c2be7.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 28, 2017, 10:49:36 am
Joe Arpaio's criminal behaviour represents Trump's ethos at county level. Being pardoned whilst sanctions in train for flouting the constitution, wow.

After Bannon and Gorka, this is a strong statement to reassure his base. He'll need that base next year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_elections,_2018

All these attacks on Flake, McCain and other Republicans suggest to me he's after moderate seats to swing towards him as well as (obviously) Democrat seats, so growing his base will be key to that strategy.

That could give him some real power in Congress.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 28, 2017, 10:02:40 pm
After Bannon and Gorka, this is a strong statement to reassure his base. He'll need that base next year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_elections,_2018

All these attacks on Flake, McCain and other Republicans suggest to me he's after moderate seats to swing towards him as well as (obviously) Democrat seats, so growing his base will be key to that strategy.

That could give him some real power in Congress.

The GOP already hold majorities in both houses, and thus, at least in theory, real power.

The Arpaio pardon is definitely some red meat thrown to the base - as will be the threatened end to DACA, the program that gives a path to citizen for illegal immigrants brought to the country as children. However, I think he is going after Republicans such as Flake, McCain, Corker and others because a) he has few other options at this point given the lack of legislative wins and b) because he can't control his impulse to attach anyone who criticises him. Whether that is a winning strategy is another question - I can see it perhaps firming up a base that is starting to show some signs of softening. But is it a strategy for growing the core base? These antics are as likely to repulse moderates as they are to attract them. In some ways the bigger threat is if the Republican party succeeds in effectively separating themselves in voters minds from their own president. Tillerson did this over the weekend, saying that the president speaks for itself when it comes to values. Similarly Defence Secretary Mattis told US troops they add to "hold the line" as the country went through this aberrant period - in other words they have to provide a model of cohesion and civility. Both pretty extraordinary statements from men both appointed by Trump. If the GOP succeed in effectively disowning the President - and he is making it easier for them for through his constant attacks - then it could give them a path to surviving the mid-terms (and thus probably quashing any hopes of impeachment).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 28, 2017, 11:05:38 pm

The GOP already hold majorities in both houses, and thus, at least in theory, real power.

.... But is it a strategy for growing the core base? These antics are as likely to repulse moderates as they are to attract them.

I'm not suggesting it's the GOP which needs amenable seats, but Trump himself. How many of these sitting congressmen and women are as far right as Trump? I suspect he sees moderates as much a hindrance as a help given his racism and contempt for the judiciary and constitution.

Just how far does he want to go? He has no respect for the democratic structures and supports neo-Nazis in public. The norms were abandoned many moons ago.
But as to the GOP dissociating itself from his more extreme antics whilst using his presidency to further their agenda, yes, I get that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jfdm on August 28, 2017, 11:30:03 pm
The company Trump likes to keep: https://static.currentaffairs.org/2017/08/wait-do-people-actually-know-just-how-evil-this-man-is

Scary. Very scary.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=67lZvxW2ZNA (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=67lZvxW2ZNA)
The pardon coincided with the evening of the hurricane. As Trump states he was surprised at the "ratings." So it's seems as though he still thinks he's on the Apprentice rather than POTUS.
Earlier last week there was talk on the thread about media bias, both pro/anti trump. It's is always better to listen to what's going on directly, through unedited clips of trumps press conferences - YouTube - primary source,  rather than a third persons view - media outlet - secondary source. There's less chance of spin. For what it's worth though he is a complete nut job. In many ways the U.K. Gov mirrors lots of Trumps ideas, nationalism, demonisation of immigrants etc. That's the worry for me.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 29, 2017, 12:02:34 am

The GOP already hold majorities in both houses, and thus, at least in theory, real power.

.... But is it a strategy for growing the core base? These antics are as likely to repulse moderates as they are to attract them.

I'm not suggesting it's the GOP which needs amenable seats, but Trump himself. How many of these sitting congressmen and women are as far right as Trump? I suspect he sees moderates as much a hindrance as a help given his racism and contempt for the judiciary and constitution.

Just how far does he want to go? He has no respect for the democratic structures and supports neo-Nazis in public. The norms were abandoned many moons ago.
But as to the GOP dissociating itself from his more extreme antics whilst using his presidency to further their agenda, yes, I get that.

OK, got it, I thought you were talking about moderate voters. He undoubtedly sees moderate Republicans as (personal) enemies. The Senate is a (relatively) sober and august body but the House has many more crazies. But how many moderates are there and can he engineer their defeat and replacement by loyalists, without ceding a seat to Democrat in the process? Its complex and depends on a patchwork of local circumstances. But moderate Republicans get elected for a reason. Our own representative, Charlie Dent, is a very prominent moderate House Republican and led much of the opposition to the attempts to repeal "Obamacare." He is a sane and well-liked representative and he gets elected with cross-party support. He can't get elected without Democratic support and knows it. There aren't enough Trump base voters in the District to compensate for the Democrats he would lose by aligning more closely with Trump. I suspect that is the case for many moderate Republican members of the House. Appeal to the base isn't a winning strategy in my view, at least not in many places.

How far does he want to go? There are no limits on that. I'm thinking of a more extreme disassociation. His Presidency is becoming a severe hindrance to their agenda, not a vehicle for realising it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: alx on September 05, 2017, 11:06:52 pm
Anyone know what the odds are Congress saving the DACA?

Are they really going to deport 800,000 children!? :'(
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 06, 2017, 05:19:07 am
Anyone know what the odds are Congress saving the DACA?

Are they really going to deport 800,000 children!? :'(

On the second, it is far from clear what the real intentions and likely outcomes are (its worth pointing most are not children now, they were brought to the US as children, not that this diminishes the cruelty). The programme will be allowed to begin to expire in 6 months, if no solution is found. Those whose permits to work, which last two years, are close to expiring will for now be allowed to renew. It is claimed that they will not be a priority for deportation and will not be actively sought out but rather deported if, for example, the come into contact with immigration/law enforcement/gain a conviction (as a group they are 100% crime free, its a condition of maintaining "Dreamer" status). But this seems to leave a lot of ambiguity around what their real status is and I am sure many are suffering a great deal of anxiety and uncertainty now. Besides the threat of deportation, expiration or revocation of Dreamer status could well mean being thrown out of university or out of a job - 91% are in employment. To me, its clear they should be given a path to citizenship

As to the second, who knows? It seems many in Congress do not want to end DACA and polls suggest it has very wide support in the population. But this Congress has proved itself so spectacularly inept, cynical and fractious I wouldn't bet on them passing anything, let alone something as complex as immigration reform. Of course, handing it off to Congress is another piece of shameless buck passing and blame shifting from Trump. He even got Sessions to make the announcement for him. He wanted to throw more red meat to the white supremacist base but didn't have the courage to take it on himself.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 07, 2017, 01:02:16 pm
Not entirely on topic, but...
Well, read it, you'll see:

http://admin.duluthnewstribune.com/opinion/4322927-keillor-when-red-state-gets-blues#.WbCYAuN_MIl.facebook
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 07, 2017, 08:22:22 pm
This is hands down the best thing I've read on Trump's victory. If you're going to read it, please read it all:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/10/the-first-white-president-ta-nehisi-coates/537909/?utm_source=atltw
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 07, 2017, 10:15:01 pm
I think after Charlottevillesville, the unmentionable became undeniable.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 07, 2017, 11:09:34 pm
There are very many in absolute denial.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on September 08, 2017, 07:06:00 am
People may not like to look in the mirror (who does, really?) but his campaign and presidency are full of it, stoking grievance, promoting entitlement, monstering the immigrant, praising violence at his rallies, to the police, against women, defending racists and neo-nazis.

That's not hiding; that's just in plain sight.

Like the writer says, not everyone who voted Trump is a white supremacist, but they are happy to see one in the White House.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on September 08, 2017, 09:00:22 am
This is hands down the best thing I've read on Trump's victory. If you're going to read it, please read it all:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/10/the-first-white-president-ta-nehisi-coates/537909/?utm_source=atltw

Thanks Andy, that was excellent. How has it gone down amongst the white people you know? I'm assuming that the Atlantic is at least reasonably widely read amongst bookish Americans.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 08, 2017, 09:52:37 am
I'm currently in the UK and haven't spoken to anyone who has read it yet (except my wife, who is far hotter on these topics than me). Some, many, will fully acknowledge and accept its argument and the conclusions that follow. But others, including amongst liberals and progressives, will either deny or deflect what Coates has to say. It makes people uncomfortable - but then again, its meant to and should.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on September 08, 2017, 12:45:46 pm
From the outside (even though I've spent quite a lot of time in US over the years, and have family who lived there) the main tenor in the Atlantic article seems to ring true.
Title: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 08, 2017, 05:00:05 pm
I lived in San Hose for a couple of years in my early teens. ~'84. This coincided with the advent of CNN, or at least it was still new then. I was struck by the lack of international news back then. I remember the only 24hr news available was "Bay area", with "State" features on the hour and two "National" slots at midday and ~5pm iirc. International news was confined to a single evening slot, not more than 30mins or so.
The last time I spent significant time there was a year in Savannah 1999/2000 and frankly, it didn't seem much better then. I assume there is greater global awareness now, but I wouldn't put any money on it being very widespread.

So I'd guess the readership or interest in something like this, or even global opinion, would be limited...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 08, 2017, 05:09:55 pm
This is hands down the best thing I've read on Trump's victory. If you're going to read it, please read it all:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/10/the-first-white-president-ta-nehisi-coates/537909/?utm_source=atltw

Thanks Andy, that was excellent. How has it gone down amongst the white people you know? I'm assuming that the Atlantic is at least reasonably widely read amongst bookish Americans.

Thinking about this again, my wife has a cousin, a lawyer in the suburbs of Philadelphia, mid 40s. I've met hime once socially and he seemed a nice chap, swears blind he didn't vote for Trump and would deny he's racist till the cows come home. But he has a massive problem with the Obamas, Michelle especially, that he's let slip more than once. When I challenged him about this he said it was because she'd been an interfering, activist First Lady. When I pointed that almost all First Ladies do this and some much more (Eleanor Roosevelt is the most obvious example) he didn't have an answer. Like many white Americans he consciously or otherwise held the Obamas to a much higher standard. They'd got above themselves basically - its not far from there to the "uppity n****r" stereotype of old. Its this as much as open bigotry of white supremacist that the article is talking about.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on September 08, 2017, 06:05:42 pm
I grew up in a very sexist society, which has given me a lot of biases — some that I'm aware of and that I've been trying to work on, some that I'm not aware of, I'm sure. I assume that I'm still pretty sexist even though I don't subscribe to any obviously misogynist ideologies. I'd assume it is the same for those who grew up in a racist society: they are still pretty racist even if they are not ideologically so.

(Trump is clearly an open racist)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 08, 2017, 07:06:13 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170908/2b2c3b80ff5654a108d7f7483a5b8fec.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 09, 2017, 08:33:21 am
I assume that I'm still pretty sexist even though I don't subscribe to any obviously misogynist ideologies. I'd assume it is the same for those who grew up in a racist society: they are still pretty racist even if they are not ideologically so.

(Trump is clearly an open racist)

Yes, absolutely, in many cases. But one important differences: you acknowledge your sexism, many white Americans do not acknowledge their racism.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 09, 2017, 07:55:03 pm
This is hands down the best thing I've read on Trump's victory. If you're going to read it, please read it all:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/10/the-first-white-president-ta-nehisi-coates/537909/?utm_source=atltw

Though I have The Atlantic web site bookmarked and often read articles there, I found this one somewhat TL;DR. From a skim-read, the thesis seems to be that white racism was the primary reason for the Trump presidency, and that economics (especially pertaining to the rustbelt white under-class) was less of a factor than the consensus imagines. Is that approximately correct? If so, it raises the question as to how Obama managed to get elected in the two preceding elections? (Or is that also addressed in the article somewhere?)

Yes and no, on Obama being elected.

Just like everything else that has been said on Trump's election and the state of the States; it's true for a given value of "true".
I mean it raises very logical and quite probably real issues, but dismisses others of equal value. In someways it suffers very much from an inverse of the very tenets it purports to expose.
 
My guess is that it's very much a "bit of both" thing and a great deal more besides.

What was the voter turnout amongst African Americans ? Anyone know? (I'll look too, but someone here probably has the figures to hand already).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 10, 2017, 08:52:16 am
If so, it raises the question as to how Obama managed to get elected in the two preceding elections?

Does it though? To argue that racism helped elect a specific white President is not necessarily to argue no African American could ever be elected. In any case, the article does really address this in its argument that Trump is the first white president. Of course every single President prior to Obama was white, but Trump is the first elected since the fact of a black President and, the article argues, elected largely because he is white, because he is not black.

On the other issue, the intersections of race, class and economics are treated extensively in the article.

OMM asked about turn out amongst African Americans; it was poor, down on the last two elections.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 11, 2017, 02:07:56 pm
Ummm...
Shit?

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/09/08/more-white-more-male-more-jesus-cia-employees-fear-pompeo-is-quietly-killing-the-agencys-diversity-mandate/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 11, 2017, 05:36:10 pm
If so, it raises the question as to how Obama managed to get elected in the two preceding elections?
In any case, the article does really address this in its argument that Trump is the first white president. Of course every single President prior to Obama was white, but Trump is the first elected since the fact of a black President and, the article argues, elected largely because he is white, because he is not black.

Yes I read that bit. It seems more like a rhetorical device than a robust argument? Trump's opponent was also white.

Repeating the comments above, I am unconvinced there is a single dominant factor explaining Trump's win. Correspondingly I doubt Obama's unpopularity amongst some demographics was wholly explained by his colour. For example, I am sure for many he was insufferably clever and articulate (as Trump so definingly isn't).

Isn't rhetoric argument? Anyway, I'm still not really getting some of the logic. That Trump's opponent was white hardly proves racism proved no role. Elections are about much more than simply the two candidates. All of the crap about the US being a "post-racial" society has been fully exposed for what it is.

I don't think anyone, not me, not the author, is arguing that there is single explanatory factor. But race is a very powerful factor because of the way it intersects with so many, if not all the other factors, from economics and class to culture. As to Obama, anyone put off by his erudition and learning is likely to also view those as especially unforgivable traits when found in a black man.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on September 12, 2017, 09:58:54 pm
Not necessarily Trump, but this half hour film is well worth a watch - a week in America's heroin epidemic.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2017/09/09/editor-why-we-did/635589001/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 19, 2017, 03:55:51 pm
We have just entered the Twilight Zone.
I won't bother with a link, there can't be a media channel that's not carrying the story "Fat Orange Baboon casually says it's going to snuff out tens of millions of people, because Fat Funny Haircut Baboon called him names".
And so ends the world.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on October 25, 2017, 09:24:53 am
Geoff Flake announces retirement. Can't really argue with this observation, well done:

Quote
“The alliances and agreements that ensure the stability of the entire world are routinely threatened by the level of thought that goes into 140 characters,” Flake said. “Would we Republicans meekly accept such behavior on display from dominant Democrats? Of course we wouldn’t. And we would be wrong if we did.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/24/jeff-flake-retire-republican-senate-trump
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on October 25, 2017, 10:59:10 am
Geoff Flake announces retirement. Can't really argue with this observation, well done:

Quote
“The alliances and agreements that ensure the stability of the entire world are routinely threatened by the level of thought that goes into 140 characters,” Flake said. “Would we Republicans meekly accept such behavior on display from dominant Democrats? Of course we wouldn’t. And we would be wrong if we did.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/24/jeff-flake-retire-republican-senate-trump

It is good to hear some of his own party publically condemning him. Perhaps it might start making people think/a chain reaction...

Though it is also a shame that people who disagree are leaving also. It would be awful if they ultimately get replaced with people whom Trump approves of...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 25, 2017, 11:49:15 am
Geoff Flake announces retirement. Can't really argue with this observation, well done:

Quote
“The alliances and agreements that ensure the stability of the entire world are routinely threatened by the level of thought that goes into 140 characters,” Flake said. “Would we Republicans meekly accept such behavior on display from dominant Democrats? Of course we wouldn’t. And we would be wrong if we did.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/24/jeff-flake-retire-republican-senate-trump

It is good to hear some of his own party publically condemning him. Perhaps it might start making people think/a chain reaction...

Though it is also a shame that people who disagree are leaving also. It would be awful if they ultimately get replaced with people whom Trump approves of...

Too little, too late.

There's a good chance that in states such as Tennessee (Corker) and Arizona (Flake) the candidates picked through Republican primaries will be far more right wing/crypto-fascist, just as the people of Alabama selected the unhinged and wholly unfit Roy Moore. It is hard to go too far in stressing how far these people want to go in destroying and remaking the fabric of American society. And in some places, such as Alabama, they will get elected.

The only possible positive is that people such as Moore are so undisciplined as to make the work of the Senate even harder and less effective than it already is.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on October 25, 2017, 06:10:38 pm
Have you kept a journal of your observations while living in the US Andy? I wish I had.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 26, 2017, 12:25:13 pm
No, I haven't. Perhaps I should have? It can become bewildering trying to keep up. Each fresh outrage rapidly recedes into the past as it is replaced by some new idiocy. At the same time it feels like Groundhog Day. Something like attempts to repeal ACA feel like ancient history but it also seems like we're stuck on a treadmill.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 26, 2017, 12:39:28 pm
By the by, here's the latest article in the series The Guardian have been running from neighbouring Northampton County. Doesn't really add anything new though: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/26/no-regrets-one-year-after-they-voted-for-trump-has-he-delivered
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 30, 2017, 12:09:33 pm
As widely predicted over the weekend, Robert Mueller's investigation into possible collusion with Russia has just moved into a new phase with erstwhile Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort ordered to surrender to the authorities a few minutes ago. Let's see what's next!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on October 30, 2017, 01:29:38 pm
12 counts. Serious charges inc. Conspiracy against the US. Serious atuff
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 30, 2017, 02:06:55 pm
I was just about to post the same FD. Conspiracy against the USA is much more serious than I was expecting. This could get interesting quick. Will Trump resist the temptation to fire Mueller?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: duncan on October 30, 2017, 02:44:57 pm
Conspiracy against the USA is much more serious than I was expecting.

Hit the smaller guy with a really serious charge, plea bargain in return for the dirt on his boss. Don't you guys watch any American TV crime  ;)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on October 30, 2017, 02:50:54 pm
It would be incredible if he did.  The two of them are in court later today... let's see what happens.  Trump's been on Twitter saying it was all 'years ago' - yeah right!

I learned that Treason is only an offence during wartime and that Conspiracy against the US is effectively treason by another name.  They could easily go away for life so they might both be singing by teatime...  <what Duncan just said>
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 30, 2017, 03:51:13 pm
Also unsealed today, Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty earlier this month to lying to the FBI. Apparently the charges cite interactions between him and Russian intermediaries. He is, we are told, a cooperating witness.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 30, 2017, 04:34:47 pm
Bizarre that any other Western leader would have been brought down by the merest fraction of the scandals that surround Trump and yet he remains.
It’s quite hard to see how anything will remove him.
It’s a shame to see a nation and it’s democracy die, but I think that’s what we’re watching.
I hope that’s not what is happening here too...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 30, 2017, 11:02:32 pm
It’s a shame to see a nation and it’s democracy die, but I think that’s what we’re watching.

I think that take is too pessimistic.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 31, 2017, 08:10:00 am
It’s a shame to see a nation and it’s democracy die, but I think that’s what we’re watching.

I think that take is too pessimistic.

Will you still say that if he’s still in office when Mueller is done?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 31, 2017, 02:32:02 pm
It’s a shame to see a nation and it’s democracy die, but I think that’s what we’re watching.

I think that take is too pessimistic.

Will you still say that if he’s still in office when Mueller is done?

That depends on what Mueller finds. Mueller's role is not to get him out at all costs (much as we might want that outcome) but to try and establish the truth, so far as possible. I will get really worried if he fires Mueller and/or pardons those indicted: either of those actions would take us into crisis territory.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 31, 2017, 03:03:26 pm
It’s a shame to see a nation and it’s democracy die, but I think that’s what we’re watching.

I think that take is too pessimistic.

Will you still say that if he’s still in office when Mueller is done?

That depends on what Mueller finds. Mueller's role is not to get him out at all costs (much as we might want that outcome) but to try and establish the truth, so far as possible. I will get really worried if he fires Mueller and/or pardons those indicted: either of those actions would take us into crisis territory.

Pessimism is the way ahead.

If I’m right, I have the satisfaction of being right.

If I’m wrong, I have the joy of being pleasantly surprised...

😉😜
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 31, 2017, 04:53:19 pm
It’s a shame to see a nation and it’s democracy die, but I think that’s what we’re watching.

I think that take is too pessimistic.

Wait 'til he pardons those that get convicted....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on October 31, 2017, 05:26:19 pm
The following is a good précis of what's happened and what might happen, it doesn't make for pleasant reading and there seems to be strident tone compared to other WaPo articles, considering this isn't really a comment piece:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/10/31/trump-and-his-allies-are-laying-the-groundwork-for-a-saturday-night-massacre/

Edit: Obviously it is an opinion but in the main section rather than some deliberately incendiary comment column designed to provoke the below the line commenters
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 31, 2017, 05:36:18 pm
The following is a good précis of what's happened and what might happen, it doesn't make for pleasant reading and there seems to be strident tone compared to other WaPo articles, considering this isn't really a comment piece:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/10/31/trump-and-his-allies-are-laying-the-groundwork-for-a-saturday-night-massacre/

Edit: Obviously it is an opinion but in the main section rather than some deliberately incendiary comment column designed to provoke the below the line commenters

Yes, this is exactly what I was talking about in terms of the potential for crisis. The key issue however will be political and public responses where he to do something similar to the Saturday night massacre. Would the GOP continue to hold the line for him?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nigel on October 31, 2017, 05:46:51 pm
Now that something "concrete" seems to be happening in relation to the "Russia thing" other than just noise, can anyone explain what exactly they (Russia) are meant to have done? I've bothered myself more with UK stuff of late to be honest. I've tried to read up the current situation briefly and as far as I can make out there's an allegation that they might have hacked some of the Clinton campaign's emails and given them to Wikileaks, and also something about paid Facebook adverts. Is that it or is there, er, more? Is the claim really that this is why he won the election???
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 31, 2017, 06:02:23 pm
Now that something "concrete" seems to be happening in relation to the "Russia thing" other than just noise, can anyone explain what exactly they (Russia) are meant to have done? I've bothered myself more with UK stuff of late to be honest. I've tried to read up the current situation briefly and as far as I can make out there's an allegation that they might have hacked some of the Clinton campaign's emails and given them to Wikileaks, and also something about paid Facebook adverts. Is that it or is there, er, more? Is the claim really that this is why he won the election???

I believe that's probably at the lenient end of the spectrum of possibles...

The upper end is that $millions has been channeled to Trump companies in payment/bribe for winning.

From what I've read accepting help from a foreign power to help manipulate an election result comes under the definition of Treason..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 31, 2017, 06:02:58 pm
The following is a good précis of what's happened and what might happen, it doesn't make for pleasant reading and there seems to be strident tone compared to other WaPo articles, considering this isn't really a comment piece:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/10/31/trump-and-his-allies-are-laying-the-groundwork-for-a-saturday-night-massacre/

Edit: Obviously it is an opinion but in the main section rather than some deliberately incendiary comment column designed to provoke the below the line commenters

Yes, this is exactly what I was talking about in terms of the potential for crisis. The key issue however will be political and public responses where he to do something similar to the Saturday night massacre. Would the GOP continue to hold the line for him?

Yes, they will.

They want they’re Xtian ISIL nation and the big T is their ticket.

That they have not broken with him already, despite a few prominent Reps (the last few with honourable intent?) publicly turning on him; does not bode well.

Edit:

Though this is nice:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/john-mccain-trump-speech-conspiracy-theories-propaganda-attack-a8029571.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/john-mccain-trump-speech-conspiracy-theories-propaganda-attack-a8029571.html)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nigel on October 31, 2017, 06:36:39 pm
I believe that's probably at the lenient end of the spectrum of possibles...

The upper end is that $millions has been channeled to Trump companies in payment/bribe for winning.

From what I've read accepting help from a foreign power to help manipulate an election result comes under the definition of Treason..

So is it also alleged that the Russian government directly helped fund Trump's campaign? Is that what you mean there? Or they paid him afterwards, a sort of "performance bonus"?

I get the treason thing, its just that from what I've read so far while trying to catch up I've yet to see anything explosive to say the least. Hacking some emails, and chucking a few roubles at Facebook and billboard adverts just seems a bit, well, flaky. I was expecting them to have demonstrably hacked voting machines in swing states or Trump to have been off grid for 5 years living in Moscow or something like that. Am I missing something? Its just if I was the government of Russia and I wanted to swing the US election I'd like to think I'd make a better fist of it than that! I hold no brief for Trump and want him gone as much as the next man but it looks a bit desperate if that's it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 31, 2017, 07:02:34 pm
Its just if I was the government of Russia and I wanted to swing the US election I'd like to think I'd make a better fist of it than that!

If I was Putin - I'd think we played that one perfectly! JUST enough to swing the vote - but not so much it was obvious...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 31, 2017, 07:25:14 pm
We know that Russia interfered in the election. I think there is some evidence they probably tried to hack voting machines. But they definitely hacked and released Clinton's emails, which often then became the subject of increasingly lurid/untruthful narratives that were very damaging to her. Russian operatives placed huge numbers of negative or false news stories on social media - Facebook today told Congress that stories generated by Russian operatives were seen by up to 126 million US Facebook users. At least 1,000 anti-Clinton videos generated by Russian operatives appeared on 18 different Youtube channels. Russian trolls and bots then commented on all of these stories and videos in order to spread them further. This was all highly targeted, again (I think) using hacked information to reach the most susceptible voters in key states. It is probably impossible to know whether the outcome would have been different without this activity. But given the insane, highly damaging and often entirely false stories millions of US voters believe about Clinton I think that it did. Before we consider any other issue, I believe this makes the Trump administration illegitimate. Russia has undertaken similar operations in other recent European elections. These operations were highly professional and far from flaky. Electoral processes are being deeply compromised and I think its a mistake to be so relaxed about it.

The only question is whether any of this was done in collusion or coordination with the Trump campaign. Did the campaign have inside knowledge of what was happening? Did they provide information to or receive it from Russia or Russian surrogates? Did either party provide funding or other kinds of support to the other? Are Trump and other family members and close associates financially comprised vis-a-vis Russian entities, such as banks? We certainly know there multiple meetings between members of the campaign and Russian actors or surrogates.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nigel on October 31, 2017, 07:27:33 pm
Its just if I was the government of Russia and I wanted to swing the US election I'd like to think I'd make a better fist of it than that!

If I was Putin - I'd think we played that one perfectly! JUST enough to swing the vote - but not so much it was obvious...

Well yes, quite. I guess that's my point - it really isn't obvious! For instance, why is it obvious that hacking and releasing some of Hillary's emails swung voters (and in just the right amounts!)? What was in them? Was it worse than the Trump pussy grabbing stuff (must have been!!). Good job they didn't release more / less or it would have been transparent. I guess that's just how evil mastermind Russian presidents play it. Judged to perfection. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 31, 2017, 10:00:03 pm
Whatever the Russians are supposed to have done to swing voter sentiment against Clinton it had to have been enough to negate various acts of seeming self-destruction by Trump - such as the damaging report by an ex MI6 officer alleging Trump hired Russian prostitutes to perform golden showers, among other ''perverted sex acts'', on the same Moscow hotel bed used by the Obama's during official visits - ''in an expression of hate for the former president and first lady''. While Russian intelligence video-taped it. For use as leverage or blackmail material...

I didn't see that one in Charlie Brooker's 'Black Mirror'...

Now just waiting for the meltdown when Trump is blackmailed into fucking a pig live on CNN.. although that might strengthen his support in some states..

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 01, 2017, 11:42:47 pm
May be paywalled: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/russian-ads-now-publicly-released-show-sophistication-of-influence-campaign/2017/11/01/d26aead2-bf1b-11e7-8444-a0d4f04b89eb_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-low_techads-115pm-winner%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.95e9f1641db9
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 08, 2017, 04:33:51 pm
Trump was elected one year ago today. I had planned to write something that looked back over the past year, which was bound to have been depressing and pessimistic. Instead, I'm going to celebrate the great results in the state and local elections that took place across the country. There are the headline stories, particularly the Democrats taking the governorship of Virginia but also a host of encouraging firsts: from the numerous cities that elected their first black mayor (from Montana to New Hampshire) or the transgender woman who beat a well established old GOP bigot, back in Virginia. These stories go right down to the micro-level. A friend of ours worked incredibly hard running a slate of candidates for the school board in a nearby small - and deeply Trump - town. School boards are incredibly important and this one had been run by crazies (evolution and climate change to be taught only as theories alongside other "theories" etc.); but last night they lost control. It was a great night!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 08, 2017, 04:37:09 pm
You forgot this 24 carat nugget, almost the pick if the crop too:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections-chris-hurst-virginia-state-house-win-nra-democrat-republican-girlfriend-shot-dead-live-a8043321.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections-chris-hurst-virginia-state-house-win-nra-democrat-republican-girlfriend-shot-dead-live-a8043321.html)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 01, 2017, 05:30:58 pm
End Ex.
Return and stow all gear.
Maybe?
(Please).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/01/michael-flynn-shares-information-senior-trump-official-fbi-pleading/ (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/01/michael-flynn-shares-information-senior-trump-official-fbi-pleading/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 01, 2017, 05:54:28 pm
My ability to get any work done today is completely shot.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 20, 2017, 04:42:14 pm
(Whistles).
The day the music died 🎶🎵🎶

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-42424666 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-42424666)
 :wall:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on December 20, 2017, 05:00:52 pm
That's just rhetoric - and of little consequence.
I fully expect that inter-state support of each other in this vote or that vote forms a fundamental part of international affairs. "You support us on this and we'll support you on that", and the converse, is surely the bedrock of political negotiation. Names will always be taken.

The only unusual thing here is to see the threat issued on social media. But that's entirely in line with the administration's wish to be seen by voters to be "tough" (whatever that means) on an international stage. It's more for the xenophobic nature of 3rd party onlookers than it is for the states being browbeaten.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 20, 2017, 07:17:45 pm
And yet, he raised the stakes again and threatened direct consequences after that initial report was made.
Some of the Arab media outlets I follow are somewhat less sangine than you Will.
Nations that bang-up tourists and ex-pat workers for seemingly innocuous Facebook posts are less inured the such “Rhetoric” than we are and way more prone to seeing “Mortal insult”...

Diplomacy exists for a reason. Scratch that veneer and humanity’s essential, craven, brutality is all too real. In the context of other statements by the Orange Baboon, over the last week; certain populous and powerful Dragon fanciers are likely pondering how best to chop down the tree said Baboon brachiates in...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on December 20, 2017, 08:47:07 pm
I read “Collusion” by Luke Harding over the weekend - Harding is the Guardian journo who ran their Russia desk in the 00’s and then investigated and covered the Litvineko murder.  If you’re interested in the whole Russia/Trump affair then I  highly reccomend it.  If the whole affair is as presented in the book then it’s way, way bigger than Watergate.

It’s all a bit overwhelming and gobsmacking to read as one tale - Trump is really just a “useful idiot” in reverse - and a much larger story of greed, coercion, Nationalism and all sorts of skullduggery. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 20, 2017, 09:01:05 pm
I read “Collusion” by Luke Harding over the weekend - Harding is the Guardian journo who ran their Russia desk in the 00’s and then investigated and covered the Litvineko murder.  If you’re interested in the whole Russia/Trump affair then I  highly reccomend it.  If the whole affair is as presented in the book then it’s way, way bigger than Watergate.

It’s all a bit overwhelming and gobsmacking to read as one tale - Trump is really just a “useful idiot” in reverse - and a much larger story of greed, coercion, Nationalism and all sorts of skullduggery.

Personally, I fear the “useful idiot” scenario.
And strongly suspect it. I think the whole “forbidden language” attack on the CDC and other science bodies, along with the Tax bill and co-opting of the Judiciary is so damn frightening.
Yet, the Baboon’s twitter rants swallow the headlines. He’s so bloody awful, things that should be bringing the people onto the streets (at the very least entire campuses of irate students) are pale by comparison. Silent but deadly.
Several of us have quipped about Gilead emerging into reality, but some of this is genuinely a long way down that road. I thought it was playful hyperbole, on my part, just exaggeration to lampoon and deride. Now it’s starting to feel embarrassingly accurate.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on January 02, 2018, 05:15:09 pm
Lots of bad shit from Trump as he dumps news over the holidays

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2018/01/02/daily-202-trump-s-true-priorities-revealed-in-holiday-news-dumps/5a4af37830fb0469e883fe50/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_daily202-820a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.02647a568b8e
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 03, 2018, 09:03:29 am
Pffft! That was sooo last week!
We’re on to bigger twatishness now.

When even the BBC headline includes a Face Palm emoji, you know we’re all doomed:

(https://image.ibb.co/dcsvZw/A27_C85_A5_78_BC_4380_AA0_C_276178_F6_AD10.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kelvin on January 03, 2018, 10:34:15 am
At first, I really thought it was a parody site as I don't use Twitter anymore and didn't realise the letter count had gone up - I'd not seen the Beeb's response.
How to improve your international standing in one easy tweet.

Between him and the flat earthers, the US is on a roll.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 03, 2018, 02:14:21 pm
This, though, might the most significant nugget of todays news barage. The worm (in this case, obese, mutant Naked Mole Rat, with Scabies) turns:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/03/donald-trump-russia-steve-bannon-michael-wolff?CMP=fb_gu (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/03/donald-trump-russia-steve-bannon-michael-wolff?CMP=fb_gu)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on January 03, 2018, 05:54:42 pm
Here's a jaw dropping excerpt from the Fire and Fury book that the Bannon quotes are from - it's out next week.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html?utm_campaign=nym&utm_source=tw&utm_medium=s1 (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html?utm_campaign=nym&utm_source=tw&utm_medium=s1)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 03, 2018, 06:38:58 pm
Trumps just that Bannon has lost his mind - apparently...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 03, 2018, 08:21:59 pm
Trumps just that Bannon has lost his mind - apparently...

Just got the full text of that release:

(https://image.ibb.co/nrEPwb/44_A3_BBC6_3_EC8_4_DD1_AFD2_76_CB50_B36_FC5.jpg)
Edit
Bloody hell. The news wires have gone nuts since I sat down for coffee an hour ago. My inbox is full of this report from every news service I subscribe to (many).
Most of the commentary leans towards this being an enormous error on Trump’s part, as his relationship with Bannon was well documented and corroborated.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 05, 2018, 08:34:06 am
The Failing NYT has reached peak “Fuck this shit” as of yesterday.
Not holding back:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/04/opinion/fire-fury-wolff-trump-book.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/04/opinion/fire-fury-wolff-trump-book.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kelvin on January 05, 2018, 09:42:28 am
One thing they're not failing at is getting their point across in a smooth and brutal manner. That's a headline that pulls no punches.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 05, 2018, 10:46:51 am
We've been in Europe since Boxing Day and frankly its been a relief not to have it all quite so in our faces all the time (though inevitably people do want to talk about it, mainly to ask what the hell the country was thinking!). Anyway, so obviously some internecine war has broken out between Trump and Bannon. More chaos is the only likely outcome (the only possible silver lining is that through the split some of the "Always Trump" base will decide to follow Bannon - hopefully into the wilderness).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on January 05, 2018, 06:05:44 pm
I just downloaded the book onto my Kindle...  I expect it to be very entertaining, but, given the authors admission that some of it is fantasy or falsehoods coming from the mouths of those in the orbit, I wonder whether ultimately it might undermine other verifiable truths in the long run.  I'll report back tomorrow morning.

The Luke Harding (see book thread) Collusion by comparison is meticulously researched and probably tells us more that we didn't know or suspect.

Looks like you also dodged a bullet with the weather as well as the depressing news coverage Andy - it's proper grim and cold. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2018, 01:00:43 am
Looks like you also dodged a bullet with the weather as well as the depressing news coverage Andy - it's proper grim and cold.

Yes, we totally swerved the snowmaggedonmegasnowbombcyclon. Actually I like the snow and would quite like to have experienced but everything we're hearing suggests its actually bloody miserable. Now ensconced in Holiday Inn Luton Airport after Christine and Marina had a truly horrible experience at border control: like they seriously did not want to "foreigners" to enter the country. Welcome to the world of Trump, Brexit, and petty nationalisms.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ru on January 06, 2018, 10:33:11 am
I just downloaded the book onto my Kindle...  I expect it to be very entertaining, but, given the authors admission that some of it is fantasy or falsehoods coming from the mouths of those in the orbit, I wonder whether ultimately it might undermine other verifiable truths in the long run.

The underlying theme of the book seems to be the incompetence and untrustworthiness of the the administration and as such the fact that he admits that some of his sources (from within the administration) may have lied underlines the theme rather than undermines it. The cease and desist letter may turn out to be another shot to the presidential  foot - if it is not backed up by actual legal action it will be seen as a tacit admission of truth. Conversely, starting legal action is extremely risky as it would mean making accusations of untruth on oath when it is reported that Wolff has taken copious notes and recordings.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 06, 2018, 11:25:44 am
Looks like you also dodged a bullet with the weather as well as the depressing news coverage Andy - it's proper grim and cold.
Now ensconced in Holiday Inn Luton Airport after Christine and Marina had a truly horrible experience at border control: like they seriously did not want to "foreigners" to enter the country. Welcome to the world of Trump, Brexit, and petty nationalisms.

Or, welcome to the world of border control situation normal. I can personally vouch for the miserableness of treatment dished out by Canadian border control and US border control in the period 2005 - 2008 when I lived there. Being made, as you say, to feel like you're the last person they want to allow into 'their' country. Long before the existence of either of the coat-hooks on which you hang your grievance.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on January 06, 2018, 01:27:11 pm
Luckily, I do not have to stand for this kind of nonsense at borders anymore, less I leave the Schengen zone.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2018, 09:30:27 pm
Fredo.


Ahah, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, snrk...

God, but this would be hilarious if it wasn’t for his big red button  (quite big apparently).

http://theatln.tc/2Ef9JLB (http://theatln.tc/2Ef9JLB)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2018, 10:15:37 pm
What’s the Fredo line - seen it on twitter and don’t understand
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2018, 10:19:30 pm
Fredo Corleone.

The Godfather’s incompetent son and the essence of Dunning-Kruger.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredo_Corleone (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredo_Corleone)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2018, 10:32:31 pm
Fredo Corleone.

The Godfather’s incompetent son and the essence of Dunning-Kruger.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredo_Corleone (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredo_Corleone)

Badabing. Thanks Matt
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 08, 2018, 07:15:58 pm
Looks like you also dodged a bullet with the weather as well as the depressing news coverage Andy - it's proper grim and cold.
Now ensconced in Holiday Inn Luton Airport after Christine and Marina had a truly horrible experience at border control: like they seriously did not want to "foreigners" to enter the country. Welcome to the world of Trump, Brexit, and petty nationalisms.

Or, welcome to the world of border control situation normal. I can personally vouch for the miserableness of treatment dished out by Canadian border control and US border control in the period 2005 - 2008 when I lived there. Being made, as you say, to feel like you're the last person they want to allow into 'their' country. Long before the existence of either of the coat-hooks on which you hang your grievance.

OK, so my post was a little hyperbolic but it was meant to be taken more rhetorically than literally. Of course I don't think one case of hostile treatment at Border Control is necessarily a direct result of either Trump or Brexit (though in the US many police and other law enforcement officers, such as ICE, are emboldened by an atmosphere they perceive as condoning greater aggression and suspicion). So I was taking one event as symbolic of a bigger change. And that change is not a hypothetical but is arriving in the US now. The administration is in many ways avowedly, actively, and deliberately more hostile to many different groups of visitors and legal, non-citizen residents. UKBers arriving in the US for road trips in 2018 might not notice from how they're treated at the border but it is definitely happening. I should imagine a similar shift would be a distinct possibility after Brexit (especially a hard Brexit). And trust me, Trump is much more than a convenient coat hook on which to hang some grievance.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 14, 2018, 05:49:04 pm
He's had a good week. In no particular order, and making no comment, he has:

 - Contradicted his own administration's policy on immigration (meeting on Tues)
 - Contradicted his own administration's policy on FISA (surveillance bill) (Twitter)
 - Attacked first amendment by floating idea of libel reform (doesn't like people being able to say nasty things about him).
   (Twitter),
 - This is the norm, but multiple attacks on the free press (mostly Twitter)
 - Attacked the judiciary (Twitter)
 - Wrongly accused a serving FBI agent of treason (Twitter)
 - Boasted about sale of F-52 fighters to Norway. The only place the F-52 exists is in Call of Duty (Twitter)
 - Offended a whole continent, most of Central America/the Caribbean, and almost every recent immigrant to the US with the
   "shithole" comment (meeting Thurs)
 - And today, has likely killed a promising bipartisan immigration deal by declaring it is likely dead. This is probably just in a fit
   of rage at the "shithole" blowback (as it were). (Twitter)
 - The last also makes a government shutdown from next Friday a real possibility.
 - Nearly forgot, has totally ignored the fact that Hawaii spent 30 minutes yesterday believing that missiles were heading
   their way. He doesn't like Hawaii. They vote Democrat and Obama was born there (except he was born in Kenya, of   
   course)

I am now entitled to vote at the state level and am looking forward to the 2018 midterms.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 02, 2018, 08:21:22 pm
No time to write properly right at the moment, but we are now close to an all out assault on democratic norms and institutions.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on February 02, 2018, 08:43:19 pm
No time to write properly right at the moment, but we are now close to an all out assault on democratic norms and institutions.

You say that as if it isn't the norm in the US, if not the UK also at present. What's new?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on February 02, 2018, 08:53:26 pm
No time to write properly right at the moment, but we are now close to an all out assault on democratic norms and institutions.

I hope you are wrong, the Nunes memo was a final spasm by the GOP to turn the country against the Muller investigation but its been nasty biter of a damp squib hasn't it? Despite the bluster there's nothing revelatory in it, if anything it's the first time the GOP have admitted the investigation was triggered by Papadopoulos and not Steele. I expect his base won't see it like that but surely there's nothing in there to turn people on to Trump that weren't already?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ferret on February 02, 2018, 09:27:05 pm
No time to write properly right at the moment, but we are now close to an all out assault on democratic norms and institutions.

I hope you are wrong, the Nunes memo was a final spasm by the GOP to turn the country against the Muller investigation but its been nasty biter of a damp squib hasn't it? Despite the bluster there's nothing revelatory in it, if anything it's the first time the GOP have admitted the investigation was triggered by Papadopoulos and not Steele. I expect his base won't see it like that but surely there's nothing in there to turn people on to Trump that weren't already?

I think there might be a different end game here. Sessions is recused so can't fire Mueller, Rosenstein had said he won't fire Mueller. The memo potentially gives a reason for Trump to fire Rosenstein and replace him with somebody who will fire Mueller. Trump just needs enough to fire Rosenstein without upsetting his base too much while giving republicans in Congress an excuse not to challenge him on it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 02, 2018, 09:49:58 pm
No time to write properly right at the moment, but we are now close to an all out assault on democratic norms and institutions.

I hope you are wrong, the Nunes memo was a final spasm by the GOP to turn the country against the Muller investigation but its been nasty biter of a damp squib hasn't it? Despite the bluster there's nothing revelatory in it, if anything it's the first time the GOP have admitted the investigation was triggered by Papadopoulos and not Steele. I expect his base won't see it like that but surely there's nothing in there to turn people on to Trump that weren't already?

I think there might be a different end game here. Sessions is recused so can't fire Mueller, Rosenstein had said he won't fire Mueller. The memo potentially gives a reason for Trump to fire Rosenstein and replace him with somebody who will fire Mueller. Trump just needs enough to fire Rosenstein without upsetting his base too much while giving republicans in Congress an excuse not to challenge him on it.

This. The content of the memo is utterly irrelevant, that much has been obvious long before its release. What matters is whether it emboldens Trump enough to fire Rosenstein. He will be feeling very puffed up right now so who knows. The other alarming thing is the whole orchestrated campaign of attack on the FBI and DoJ that has surrounded the memo for weeks. Trump has as good as declared war on the independent justice system.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 03, 2018, 01:42:32 pm
It feels unlikely that this can end well.

Any rumours on when HRH (Father to his people, Anointed of God) Grand high Wizard (Aryan prince and protector of the faith) Trump, intends to hold his coronation?




Nothing coherent to add anymore. The world has gone mad.
There will be no impeachment. Violence and revolution might unseat the fat git, but that’s about it.
And I can’t see that happening.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 03, 2018, 01:48:19 pm
It feels like the Democrats have played the memo badly. They could have sat back and said "its crap - release it, see what we care - its soooo obviously baloney" etc... But instead they have squealed and drafted alternative releases etc.. which (I think) has had the negative effect of giving the memo kudos.

Whilst Trump may somehow bluster his way out of fixes like this (or not - who knows yet) - I am sure that history will not portray him well...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 03, 2018, 01:59:59 pm
It feels like the Democrats have played the memo badly. They could have sat back and said "its crap - release it, see what we care - its soooo obviously baloney" etc... But instead they have squealed and drafted alternative releases etc.. which (I think) has had the negative effect of giving the memo kudos.

Whilst Trump may somehow bluster his way out of fixes like this (or not - who knows yet) - I am sure that history will not portray him well...
I think the Dems are as much a part of Trumpism as the GOP. They seem suspiciously inert. Only a few have bothered to actually oppose anything vocally. Yes they vote as a block, but there is no apparent, coordinated resistance.
Too many of them profiting from the tax “reform”...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 03, 2018, 02:43:47 pm
(http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-there-is-only-one-party-in-the-united-states-the-property-party-and-it-has-two-right-gore-vidal-48-85-02.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 03, 2018, 08:42:40 pm
Someone just told me an anagram of Donald Trump:

Lord Dampnut...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 17, 2018, 06:00:19 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-lawyer-calls-on-justice-department-to-immediately-end-russia-probe/2018/03/17/c7c58ac8-29f2-11e8-874b-d517e912f125_story.html?utm_term=.345c58c306d2

I now think they are very close to trying to fire Robert Mueller.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 17, 2018, 06:59:59 pm
McCabe was expecting this at some point wasn’t he? Pretty weak line of argument that- because Sessions deemed him unreliable he therefore must be, ergo the investigation as a whole is invalid. Surely the administration will unravel if Mueller is fired..

Appositely the Guardian are leading with this, it’s frankly astonishing:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/data-war-whistleblower-christopher-wylie-faceook-nix-bannon-trump (https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/data-war-whistleblower-christopher-wylie-faceook-nix-bannon-trump)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 17, 2018, 08:02:17 pm
McCabe was expecting this at some point wasn’t he? Pretty weak line of argument that- because Sessions deemed him unreliable he therefore must be, ergo the investigation as a whole is invalid. Surely the administration will unravel if Mueller is fired..

Sure, the line of argument is pathetically weak. But that actually doesn't matter, not anymore. This is one piece in a jigsaw puzzle: the Nunes memo a couple of months ago, attempting to cast doubt on the origins of the investigation; the Nunes (again) committee's hyper partisan report this week claiming to have demonstrated there was no collusion; the firing of McCabe for disciplinary reasons, planting in people's minds the possibility that there really is wrongdoing at the FBI, now this call from Trump's lawyer, who is playing coy about whether or not he was speaking in a personal capacity (there's no way this move wasn't sanctioned), all played out against the President's Twitter commentary, not to mention the right wing media. Its accelerated the last few days and there will no doubt a lot of people saying to themselves, "You know what, maybe there is something to the idea this all a witch-hunt." I think they (the administration) are literally psyching themselves up to take the really big step. Of course, I could be wrong

I'm not at all sure the administration would unravel. Almost anyone with a shred of sanity is long gone, replaced by the most unqualified, craven Trump loyalists (note, the pace of exits from the administration has also massively speeded up recently). As to congress, I don't see the GOP acting as they should.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on March 17, 2018, 09:36:26 pm

I now think they are very close to trying to fire Robert Mueller.

I'll be gutted if Lancashire Bouldering website closes (sorry, not trying to undermine the seriousness of this situation).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on March 22, 2018, 12:18:08 am
Similarly, when I read:

"Almost anyone with a shred of sanity is long gone.."

I found myself looking for the "Same hairstyle, only a little whiter (trash)" thread... somewhere to put this:

"Putin 'will use World Cup like Hitler's Olympics', agrees Johnson"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43487948

There's a deftness, issnn't therre..
Nice work Boris.  :slap:  :clap2:


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 22, 2018, 04:03:59 pm
So...
This happened:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/03/22/us/politics/john-dowd-resigns-trump-lawyer.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&referer=http://m.facebook.com


Just after this:

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/976770619424563200?s=21

Which appears to admit/brag about connection to the scandal?

Hmmm.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 30, 2018, 07:37:09 am
Just read the report of the comedian Michelle Wolf's Correspondents' dinner routine in the Guardian:
Noting the president’s no show, the comedian said: “I would drag him here myself, but it turns out that the president of the United States is the one pussy you’re not allowed to grab. He said it first. Yeah, he did. You remember? Good.”
 :lol:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 13, 2018, 03:29:58 pm
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-trial-runs-for-fascism-are-in-full-flow-1.3543375

Fintan O'Toole wrote this yesterday in The Irish Times:

“To grasp what is going on in the world right now, we need to reflect on two things. One is that we are in a phase of trial runs. The other is that what is being trialled is fascism – a word that should be used carefully but not shirked when it is so clearly on the horizon. Forget “post-fascist” – what we are living with is pre-fascism.

It is easy to dismiss Donald Trump as an ignoramus, not least because he is. But he has an acute understanding of one thing: test marketing. He created himself in the gossip pages of the New York tabloids, where celebrity is manufactured by planting outrageous stories that you can later confirm or deny depending on how they go down. And he recreated himself in reality TV where the storylines can be adjusted according to the ratings. Put something out there, pull it back, adjust, go again.

Fascism doesn’t arise suddenly in an existing democracy. It is not easy to get people to give up their ideas of freedom and civility. You have to do trial runs that, if they are done well, serve two purposes. They get people used to something they may initially recoil from; and they allow you to refine and calibrate. This is what is happening now and we would be fools not to see it.
One of the basic tools of fascism is the rigging of elections – we’ve seen that trialled in the election of Trump, in the Brexit referendum and (less successfully) in the French presidential elections. Another is the generation of tribal identities, the division of society into mutually exclusive polarities.

Fascism does not need a majority – it typically comes to power with about forty percent support and then uses control and intimidation to consolidate that power. So it doesn’t matter if most people hate you, as long as your forty percent is fanatically committed. That’s been tested out too.

And fascism of course needs a propaganda machine so effective that it creates for its followers a universe of “alternative facts” impervious to unwanted realities. Again, the testing for this is very far advanced.
But when you’ve done all this, there is a crucial next step, usually the trickiest of all. You have to undermine moral boundaries, inure people to the acceptance of acts of extreme cruelty. Like hounds, people have to be blooded. They have to be given the taste for savagery.

Fascism does this by building up the sense of threat from a despised out-group. This allows the members of that group to be dehumanised. Once that has been achieved, you can gradually up the ante, working through the stages from breaking windows to extermination.

People have to be given the taste for savagery. Fascism does this by building up the sense of threat from a despised out-group.

It is this next step that is being test-marketed now. It is being done in Italy by the far-right leader and minister for the interior Matteo Salvini. How would it go down if we turn away boatloads of refugees? Let’s do a screening of the rough-cut of registering all the Roma and see what buttons the audience will press. And it has been trialled by Trump: let’s see how my fans feel about crying babies in cages. I wonder how it will go down with Rupert Murdoch.

To see, as most commentary has done, the deliberate traumatisation of migrant children as a “mistake” by Trump is culpable naivety. It is a trial run – and the trial has been a huge success. Trump’s claim last week that immigrants “infest” the US is a test-marketing of whether his fans are ready for the next step-up in language, which is of course “vermin”.

And the generation of images of toddlers being dragged from their parents is a test of whether those words can be turned into sounds and pictures. It was always an experiment – it ended (but only in part) because the results were in.

And the results are quite satisfactory. There is good news on two fronts. First, Rupert Murdoch is happy with it – his Fox News mouthpieces outdid themselves in barbaric crassness: making animal noises at the mention of a Down syndrome child, describing crying children as actors. They went the whole swinish hog: even the brown babies are liars. Those sobs of anguish are typical of the manipulative behaviour of the strangers coming to infest us – should we not fear a race whose very infants can be so devious?

Second, the hardcore fans loved it: Fifty-eight percent of Republicans are in favour of this brutality. Trump’s overall approval ratings are up to 42.5 per cent.
This is greatly encouraging for the pre-fascist agenda. The blooding process has begun within the democratic world. The muscles that the propaganda machines need for defending the indefensible are being toned up. Millions and millions of Europeans and Americans are learning to think the unthinkable.

So what if those black people drown in the sea? So what if those brown toddlers are scarred for life? They have already, in their minds, crossed the boundaries of morality. They are, like Macbeth, “yet but young in deed”. But the tests will be refined, the results analysed, the methods perfected, the messages sharpened. And then the deeds can follow."

Let us protect our freedom with all our democratic power, and continue to be brave with everything we must face.”

***JUST TO BE CLEAR, I DID NOT WRITE THIS PIECE. A WRITER NAMED FINTAN O'TOOLE WROTE IT IN THE IRISH TIMES (LINK BELOW). THANK YOU! ***
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mugabe251 on July 13, 2018, 08:38:35 pm
It's a great thing Trump was elected merely because he brings out the most extreme embarrassing pettiness and histrionic behavior from British and yank liberals that I've ever seen. The last Republican president didn't get anything close to this, despite dragging us into Iraq and Afghanistan, but I suppose that's small change compared to calling Haiti a shithole.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on July 13, 2018, 08:59:56 pm
It’s quite difficult to directly compare unnecessary foreign conflicts with attempting to undermine the judiciary and legal branches of your own country.

Bush Jr was lucky that social media was still somewhat in its infancy during his precedency.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 13, 2018, 10:24:39 pm
It's a great thing Trump was elected merely because he brings out the most extreme embarrassing pettiness and histrionic behavior from British and yank liberals that I've ever seen. The last Republican president didn't get anything close to this, despite dragging us into Iraq and Afghanistan, but I suppose that's small change compared to calling Haiti a shithole.

Are you actually fucking mad or is it just an act?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 13, 2018, 11:48:51 pm

Are you actually fucking mad or is it just an act?


Anyone who posts anywhere under childish pseudonyms deserves to be entirely ignored. OMM, good opnion pieces on this by Martin Kettle and Simon Jenkins in the Gruniad in the last few days.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tregiffian on July 13, 2018, 11:51:10 pm
He does some of what it says on his tin.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 14, 2018, 02:54:38 am
He does some of what it says on his tin.

No, he really, really does not, not even if you're being ironic. If you think so, you're stupid or you're being glib (which is stupid).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 14, 2018, 09:16:05 am
There have been rumours about the fragility of NATO for some time and the proposal of an economic alliance of the English speaking world has been a recurring feature of the Brexit campaign.
Then, a few days ago, the UK adopted the US air to air missle system, Trump comes blustering into the NATO summit; then:

https://news.usni.org/2018/07/12/navy-hopes-commonality-least-interoperability-frigates-australia-canada-u-k (https://news.usni.org/2018/07/12/navy-hopes-commonality-least-interoperability-frigates-australia-canada-u-k)

To be clear, that’s quite a big deal and it’s not “NATO standard” and infact excludes the majority of the alliance.
Now, watch and see if the UK/Swedish future fighter programme quietly disappears.

I actually think Trump is a tool (in both senses), I think he can be wound up and pointed at an objective as a wrecking ball and someone is pulling his levers.
One character that spans the gamut of the current shite is Murdoch, almost every organ playing from the right wing/Nationalist play book is under his control. Not all, but most.

Anyone know where I can purchase a military grade Tinfoil hat?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: lagerstarfish on July 14, 2018, 09:59:17 am

Anyone know where I can purchase a military grade Tinfoil hat?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tin-Foil-Hat/192527900857?hash=item2cd38ea0b9:g:x8sAAOSwWHZa6QCm

get it now, before import taxes go up
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 14, 2018, 10:16:11 am

Anyone know where I can purchase a military grade Tinfoil hat?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tin-Foil-Hat/192527900857?hash=item2cd38ea0b9:g:x8sAAOSwWHZa6QCm

get it now, before import taxes go up

Perfect!

Now, I just need a cammo cover for that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 14, 2018, 03:07:21 pm
Things really are quite screwed up though.
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-ambassador-lobbied-uk-officials-over-jailing-far-right-activist-tommy-1024411?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=NewsweekFacebookSF&utm_source=Facebook (http://www.newsweek.com/trump-ambassador-lobbied-uk-officials-over-jailing-far-right-activist-tommy-1024411?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=NewsweekFacebookSF&utm_source=Facebook)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mugabe251 on July 14, 2018, 06:04:06 pm

Are you actually fucking mad or is it just an act?


Anyone who posts anywhere under childish pseudonyms deserves to be entirely ignored. OMM, good opnion pieces on this by Martin Kettle and Simon Jenkins in the Gruniad in the last few days.

This is the sort of pettiness I was talking about haha
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 14, 2018, 07:04:26 pm
One of the the dumbest, least thoughtful takes on the Trump presidency yet. Yes, I know you're going to say I've proved you right, but you'd be wrong about that too.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 14, 2018, 08:03:08 pm

Are you actually fucking mad or is it just an act?


Anyone who posts anywhere under childish pseudonyms deserves to be entirely ignored. OMM, good opnion pieces on this by Martin Kettle and Simon Jenkins in the Gruniad in the last few days.

This is the sort of pettiness I was talking about haha

As opposed to picking Mugabe as a user name...

Compensating for something?

Actually, let’s be clear here.
Supporting Trum makes you a complete imbecile. A sycophantic little dweeb unable to deal with your pathetic insecurities and fears of “foreigners”. A person who lauds a petty gangster and traitor. An idiot of the highest (lowest) order.
A sheep. A follower and a disgusting waste of space.
Mugabe, was worse. So you are a complete moron.

I’m not hard to find. I have no problem relaying that to you in person if you can dig yourself out of your fake persona and come out from behind your cowardly pseudonym.
You’re one of those people that followed the school bully around saying “yeah! Wot he said” aren’t you?

There’s nothing petty about this, but you are quite pathetic to hide and sling shit.

Edit:
I should add something. To everyone else, I don’t normally lose my rag on the forumand I’m not a seething mass of anger pounding the keys now, either.
Enough is enough. Trump is not a joke and real people are being harmed in very real ways. Twats like Mugabe facilitate that. How long should people continue to be civil in the face of this? In the face of blatant facistic, white supremist, evil?
And this is not going to improve soon, if ever.
So, you either support it, or condemn it utterly, because anything else is tacitly and consciously allowing it to happen.

It seems recognised that a facist regime needs only the support of 35-40% of a population to be able to take control, as long as 10-20% sit idle.
Eventually, the responsibility falls to the ordinary people to confront it as best they can.
 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: lagerstarfish on July 14, 2018, 09:36:52 pm
Andy,

assuming you are still there;

how is the UK anti-trump protest stuff being reported and received in the USA?

on a local scale (Sheffield); even the church-going old ladies on our street think our Lord Mayor is doing the right thing by banning Trump from the city
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mugabe251 on July 14, 2018, 10:06:36 pm
Matt,

And here come the histrionics. While you can sit and complain about how Trump is the worst world leader since Hitler impotently tapping away at your keyboard, you accomplish nothing. I don't even think you care about real atrocities, because if you did, you would most probably not focus solely on the USA. Just like those children masquerading as adults protesting down in London, you're really just a hateful person and Trump (who has in reality done nothing notable since election day, but it's as if he may as well have genocided an entire country and called for "race-based detainment camps") gives you a socially-accepted outlet for your behavior.

Trump is no different to any world leader, yet emotional, reaction-prone people like yourself get angry enough about him to threaten and assume the character of complete strangers over the internet who don't quite boil with the same anger as you. Did I even once suggest that I support Donald Trump? You assume that I do, surely. I don't. Frankly, I don't care about the current leadership; I had more of a problem with Obama and Cameron funding Al Nusra, the FSA and other Sunni terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq but I didn't see anybody protesting those things funnily enough.

By the way, I don't care about your threats or what you might call me. You're nobody. I don't want to meet you in person and hear about what you think either; your opinions are as valuable to me as dog poo on the pavement. And from our short exchange on here, and your propensity for completely unwarranted hateful outbursts, I don't think you're the kind of person I would have any time for in the first place.  :sorry:

Enjoy your weekend xx
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 14, 2018, 10:21:04 pm
Matt,

And here come the histrionics. While you can sit and complain about how Trump is the worst world leader since Hitler impotently tapping away at your keyboard, you accomplish nothing. I don't even think you care about real atrocities, because if you did, you would most probably not focus solely on the USA. Just like those children masquerading as adults protesting down in London, you're really just a hateful person and Trump (who has in reality done nothing notable since election day, but it's as if he may as well have genocided an entire country and called for "race-based detainment camps") gives you a socially-accepted outlet for your behavior.

Trump is no different to any world leader, yet emotional, reaction-prone people like yourself get angry enough about him to threaten and assume the character of complete strangers over the internet who don't quite boil with the same anger as you. Did I even once suggest that I support Donald Trump? You assume that I do, surely. I don't. Frankly, I don't care about the current leadership; I had more of a problem with Obama and Cameron funding Al Nusra, the FSA and other Sunni terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq but I didn't see anybody protesting those things funnily enough.

By the way, I don't care about your threats or what you might call me. You're nobody. I don't want to meet you in person and hear about what you think either; your opinions are as valuable to me as dog poo on the pavement. And from our short exchange on here, and your propensity for completely unwarranted hateful outbursts, I don't think you're the kind of person I would have any time for in the first place.  :sorry:

Enjoy your weekend xx

Cowardly and complicit.
And the user name Mugabe.
You paint the picture sunshine, not me.
You decided to brand everyone who opposes Trump as “embarrassing”, “Histrionic” Liberals.
I brand you an enabler.
This thread is a discussion about Trump, currently the leader of the world’s most powerful and heavily armed nation. That is why the comments here are directed to him and the USA, not the entirety of global politics or machinations, nor the sins of previous administrations.
Your argument that seems to boil down to “Other people are/have been naughty too”, is pretty weak.
And really, those immigration detention centers, that he most certainly has created; are rather similar to “race based detention camps” (I think that’s what you called them, trying to imply they don’t exist).
I think there’s a few on this forum who have some knowledge of the nastier machinations of the governments around the world. Some of us even have some considerable knowledge of Middle Eastern politics (if that’s actually possible). Some who really, really, understand history (with the same proviso as the Mid East Politics).

Further, pretty sure you haven’t read most of this discussion, since there is barely a mention of the protests, I have stated that I don’t see the issue as confined to the US (I think the right is quite well organised, across the globe. Probably an uneasy alliance of contrary twats, akin to herding cats, but organised well enough to be a threat) and I also posited that the orange wanker was not the one pulling the strings.
Now, do you believe for one second, that given the opportunity; some of those lovely “devout” and “loving” christians standing behind him and sitting in his cabinet; would not actually be stoning Gays to death? Or any of the other ridiculous and barbaric crap their holy book calls for?
Because I think they would.
I’ve watched religious extremists “execute” infidels. Sunni killing Shia in Iraq (and vice versa) and Christians killing Muslim on the edge of Europe.
And, frankly, I’m quite aware of where their weapons came from. Yet I still think “Trump” and what he represents/fronts is a greater threat to the world today.
Your trivialisation of him and his cronies are what I and others are calling out. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 14, 2018, 11:27:25 pm
One last thing, Mugabe, I didn’t threaten you. I said I’d be willing to tell you all this to your face, not from the safety an anonymous username.
I suppose it’s possible to twist what I wrote up into a threat of violence, obviously; after all that’s what us histrionic Liberals are all about after all.
(Schrodinger’s Liberal: simultaneously weak, empathic and easily hurt, yet given to violent, hateful, outbursts).
But, I was simply refering to the being open and honest thing, not the punching and bleeding thing and I’m sorry you took that away from what I wrote.
Mind you, that M’Shona prick you’ve chosen to name yourself after was rather fond of a bit of punching and bleeding, no?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on July 15, 2018, 12:01:25 am
Matt,

And here come the histrionics. While you can sit and complain about how Trump is the worst world leader since Hitler impotently tapping away at your keyboard, you accomplish nothing. I don't even think you care about real atrocities, because if you did, you would most probably not focus solely on the USA. Just like those children masquerading as adults protesting down in London, you're really just a hateful person and Trump (who has in reality done nothing notable since election day, but it's as if he may as well have genocided an entire country and called for "race-based detainment camps") gives you a socially-accepted outlet for your behavior.

Trump is no different to any world leader, yet emotional, reaction-prone people like yourself get angry enough about him to threaten and assume the character of complete strangers over the internet who don't quite boil with the same anger as you. Did I even once suggest that I support Donald Trump? You assume that I do, surely. I don't. Frankly, I don't care about the current leadership; I had more of a problem with Obama and Cameron funding Al Nusra, the FSA and other Sunni terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq but I didn't see anybody protesting those things funnily enough.

By the way, I don't care about your threats or what you might call me. You're nobody. I don't want to meet you in person and hear about what you think either; your opinions are as valuable to me as dog poo on the pavement. And from our short exchange on here, and your propensity for completely unwarranted hateful outbursts, I don't think you're the kind of person I would have any time for in the first place.  :sorry:

Enjoy your weekend xx

You are Andy Kirkpatrick and I claim the Daily Messenger prize.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 15, 2018, 04:24:16 am
Andy,

assuming you are still there;

how is the UK anti-trump protest stuff being reported and received in the USA?

on a local scale (Sheffield); even the church-going old ladies on our street think our Lord Mayor is doing the right thing by banning Trump from the city

I've watched a variety of TV news a lot in the US as its weird and scary that it is so partial. When you talk to ordinary people you realise their politics and TV news viewing are much more heavily interlinked than in the UK.

When I first saw one of the opinion shows on Fox (one of the early versions of Hannity) I initially thought it was a spoof as it was so obviously crazy, then became very worried when I realised that it wasn't and that this was one of the leading news shows in the ratings. To my mind US Fox news indicates what Murdoch would do if he was allowed to elsewhere. On Fox, Trump's lies and conspiracy stories are fully backed up (as were previous lies smears and conspiricy stories) with seemingly no legal or regulatory comeback (all in the name of 'freedom of speech'). Hence, I'd be amazed if British protests were mentioned in anything other than some kind of far left threat on Fox. It will be on the liberal news channels but conservatives won't ever see those.

We as a country are in turn largely ignorant is who to blame for this mess. Too often Brits think it is hicks and religious loons and blue collar unemployed who did this but it most certainly isn't (although they helped get him over the finish line). Trump wouldn't have even got started without  the white college educated middle class Republicans mostly putting up with him then once selected as Republican candidate nearly all of them putting their faith in him as a leader: taxes and party above truth and justice. People compare the Trump election and Brexit vote as similarly ignorant popularism without realising that more than half of white college educated men voted for Trump; the educational distribution on the Brexit vote in contrast was stark.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 15, 2018, 06:50:55 am
Absolutely amazing where you find these histrionic liberals these days.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/royal-family-snub-trump-5kwvt5h5b?CMP=Sprkr-_-Editorial-_-TheTimesandTheSundayTimes-_-Unspecified-_-FBPAGE (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/royal-family-snub-trump-5kwvt5h5b?CMP=Sprkr-_-Editorial-_-TheTimesandTheSundayTimes-_-Unspecified-_-FBPAGE)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 15, 2018, 01:21:05 pm
Andy,

assuming you are still there;

how is the UK anti-trump protest stuff being reported and received in the USA?

Yes, still here (there). Offwidth gets it pretty spot on. News media here is both highly partisan and highly divided. Most people rely on a very small range of news sources - and for many that means exclusively Fox News, which often completely ignores, minimises, or twists stories unflattering to Trump. I have lost count of the number of people who have told me about watching a family member's politics go through a radical change after becoming devoted to Fox (almost every single person I know has at least one Trump supporter in the family, often its a whole branch of the family). I never watch Fox (I don't get any news from the TV) but I would imagine they massively downplayed the protests, if they covered them at all. The narrative would have been all about Trump's "triumph" in getting commitments to up defence spending from NATO members. Many people still believe the North Korea summit was likewise a triumph for Trump. Coverage in "serious" mainstream press (e.g. Washington Post and NYT) is more nuanced. Overall the message there would be that Trump is doing serious damage to the US's standing overseas. Social media (that I see) is all over the protests, taking particular delight in the extreme bluntness of many of the signs protestors were carrying. People I know like seeing Trump receiving a massive collective middle finger from Britain. They find him a deep embarrassment.

Mugabe251is just a silly little troll. Matt is right, it is the trivialization of Trump that I object to. He poses a real threat to core elements of American society. And it is not just histrionic liberals saying this; check out the excoriating op eds of arch conservative Jennifer Rubin in the Washington Post.

Finally Offwidth is right point out that though they are often conflated, Trump and Brexit are actually quite different phenomena.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: reeve on July 15, 2018, 02:13:31 pm
http://video.foxnews.com/v/5809303071001/?#sp=show-clips

Just thought to have a look at the kind of fodder you might get on Fox News. I guess a lot of shows are not above using this kind of method to show one side as all stupid, but I was impressed by the way the presenters managed to take some fairly neutral comments (not especially uninformed although nothing specific in their comments was expressed - maybe they didn't have chance or they were cut) and weave them into a certain narrative.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mugabe251 on July 15, 2018, 03:19:39 pm
Merely trivializing what is actually trivial. Obama deported thousands of illegal aliens, dropped tens of thousands of bombs in four countries, committed countless extrajudicial executions with predator drones on foreign soil, ramped up the surveillance state and orchestrating a superb framework for civil liberties violations arguably better than the Patriot Act of 2001. All the while orchestrating the deaths and indefinite detention of tens of thousands in international community and doing more to further American imperialistic goals than our friend Donald has ever done (and probably will ever do). Where were you when this was happening?

You don't really give a shit about people and the biggest clues are in your inconsistency. All Trump is, for you and all those like you, is just an excuse to signal how outraged you are to all your liberal baby-boomer friends. It's nothing more than petty tribalism and flaccid moral posing.

And please make your minds up: am I Paul Joseph Watson, Andy Kirkpatrick or maybe just a Russian troll?  :tease:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 15, 2018, 03:40:44 pm
Andy’s already answered that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on July 15, 2018, 08:17:46 pm
Merely trivializing what is actually trivial. Obama deported thousands of illegal aliens, dropped tens of thousands of bombs in four countries, committed countless extrajudicial executions with predator drones on foreign soil, ramped up the surveillance state and orchestrating a superb framework for civil liberties violations arguably better than the Patriot Act of 2001. All the while orchestrating the deaths and indefinite detention of tens of thousands in international community and doing more to further American imperialistic goals than our friend Donald has ever done (and probably will ever do). Where were you when this was happening?

You don't really give a shit about people and the biggest clues are in your inconsistency. All Trump is, for you and all those like you, is just an excuse to signal how outraged you are to all your liberal baby-boomer friends. It's nothing more than petty tribalism and flaccid moral posing.

And please make your minds up: am I Paul Joseph Watson, Andy Kirkpatrick or maybe just a Russian troll?  :tease:
:wank:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 16, 2018, 01:16:44 pm
I know, enough already.

But running a climbing wall, during a heatwave, is bloody tedious and I was bored enough to doublecheck what I thought I knew.
I thought I’d fact check some of the claims made on the thread, (made without citation or evidence, so worth looking at ).
But it’s been an hour now and I got bored of that too.

You see, before I got too into it and started mailing and inboxing old acquaintances and friends for their opinions and insight; simple google searches made me realise I’d just look an idiot.

From the drawdown of troops in Afghanistan in the later years of Obama, to the Trump Administration increasing numbers by 4000 in 2017 (40% increase), to the “Doubling of Drone strikes” in all American theatres of war/interest over the last two years.
In ten minutes, I could link to certainly tens and probably hundreds of credible refutations to the above mentioned claims, without strolling beyond mainstream news organisations.
So, I thought I’d just post a screen cap of the top results for just one of those claims. Because it includes the search term, I hope it dispells any idea that the search was weighted:

(https://image.ibb.co/is2oyd/BE33_E76_F_BD84_433_D_9_D43_42562_BC6_A1_F1.png)

And, to be clear, I’m no Obama fan boy. I don’t think there has been an honest government or politician/leader in the history of humanity.

Edit:
I should add, the first link there makes some interesting reading if you have the inclination.
Depressing, but interesting.
Humans suck.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 16, 2018, 08:13:13 pm
 :whistle:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-fox-bus-country-1026772?utm_campaign=NewsweekFacebookSF&utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social (https://www.newsweek.com/trump-fox-bus-country-1026772?utm_campaign=NewsweekFacebookSF&utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 16, 2018, 10:41:30 pm
There's a strong argument that Trump openly committed treason today, but don't worry, its all trivial.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 17, 2018, 07:47:54 am
Trump's Putin summit: a slippery slope to a violent, darker world

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/16/trump-putin-summit-russia-hacking-election-nato-slippery-slope-?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 17, 2018, 10:39:00 am
A little cross pollination.
I hope this isn’t paywalled, usually the Time allows a few free views per user per month, but not sure if that’s still the case.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/times2/sacha-baron-cohen-isnt-joking-hes-at-war-with-indifference-2czrmw77x?CMP=Sprkr-_-Editorial-_-TheTimesandTheSundayTimes-_-Unspecified-_-FBPAGE (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/times2/sacha-baron-cohen-isnt-joking-hes-at-war-with-indifference-2czrmw77x?CMP=Sprkr-_-Editorial-_-TheTimesandTheSundayTimes-_-Unspecified-_-FBPAGE)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 17, 2018, 02:39:02 pm
Oh my! :


https://www.channel4.com/programmes/who-is-america
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on July 17, 2018, 03:08:57 pm
Oh my! :


https://www.channel4.com/programmes/who-is-america

The first bit left me a bit cold, but I did enjoy the gun nuts. Hopefully that's not the highlight of the series.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 17, 2018, 04:40:48 pm
Oh my! :


https://www.channel4.com/programmes/who-is-america

The first bit left me a bit cold, but I did enjoy the gun nuts. Hopefully that's not the highlight of the series.

Yep, my usual reaction to Cohen.
I thought Sanders just looked confused and the two “Republicans” versus the New age twat, cringeworthy, since they actually seemed tolerant and borderline nice.
The Art dealer, was a complete and utter.... Art dealer (Arse dealer, in this case).
But, ffs, the gun nuts!
Though the first one, who politely told him to fuck off, was a surprise, in as much as Cohen chose to show the interaction.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on July 17, 2018, 10:26:50 pm
Wondering when the Don will tell us he had his fingers crossed when he says his next howler....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 20, 2018, 12:41:29 pm
I have some experience of living in Eastern Europe and Romania in particular, but Russia itself remains a mystery to me; so whilst I recognise elements of this version of reality, I can’t say “ah ha! That’s it”:

https://www.newyorker.com/news-desk/swamp-chronicles/a-theory-of-trump-kompromat?mbid=social_facebook (https://www.newyorker.com/news-desk/swamp-chronicles/a-theory-of-trump-kompromat?mbid=social_facebook)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 22, 2018, 08:45:18 am
It really is a travesty of justice that a sitting president cannot be criminally indited, as well as the Cohen / Manafort connection, this barely makes the news in the uk as far as I'm aware.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/08/21/trump-must-face-claims-of-assault-on-mexican-protesters-judge-says/?utm_term=.8ba8c2f3c80b
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 22, 2018, 10:56:48 am
The Teflon-Don.

He’s not going anywhere.
We keep talking about the Russian “Kompromat” on him and no one ever speculates about all his GOP supporters in the top echelons of the party and both Houses; that seem to be unable to see anything negative in the man...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on August 22, 2018, 11:04:04 am
I suspect the GOP sees the negatives in the man, but they don't care.  He gave them a tax cut and is repealing environmental protections, which keeps the party donors happy; and he has an unassailable base of voters who like racism.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 22, 2018, 12:23:46 pm
He is now a named if unindicted co-conspirator in guilty plea accepted by the court. As Cohen's lawyer said yesterday, if Michael's a criminal then so is Trump - and Michael most certainly is. The offence is very serious and should lead to impeachment, but won't, because the Republicans control all three branches of the executive - for now - and are overwhelmingly still willing to tolerate Trump, as statements on behalf of people such as House leader Paul Ryan made very clear yesterday. Many in the GOP can see him for exactly what he is but are able to hold their noses so long as his Presidency is giving them what they want (as Moose says, tax cuts and repeal of regulations, plus conservative Supreme Court nominees - the latter are literally the only thing that many highly motivated Christian voters care about) but that could change if they perceive he is becoming a liability; the test for that will the mid-terms on November 6th, and those remain very unpredictable. Personally, I am not convinced we will see the "Blue Wave" many Democrats believe is coming.

Democratic voters will undoubtedly be highly motivated in November and we will see some surprises - currently even Ted Cruz's seat in Texas is in play. The unknown is Republican voters: will they be motivated to defend the presidency against the "libtards" (the base view this in apocalyptic terms, a fight for America's soul) or will they be demoralised or even, in some cases, repulsed. Everyone talks about the base - I'm taking that as shorthand for the MAGA hat wearing, rally attending diehards. They are very real - I could easily find one to argue with online everyday among the friends and family of my US friends on FB - and they remain utterly committed, loyal, and motivated, as we have seen in countless Republican primaries this year when moderate incumbents who have been critical of or even just lukewarm about Trump have lost to often lunatic but sycophantic challengers. The only way to win GOP primaries this year has been to worship Trump. But the base alone did not elect Trump and is not enough alone to keep control in November. Educated whites, women especially, and traditional country club republicans have to be kept onboard in order for the GOP to survive November. How many of them have now had enough? Despite what I said earlier about the Blue Wave, the house is definitely in play, Senate too possibly. If either/both come to pass we will see impeachment proceedings launched (that they won't be before will remain a stain on the GOP forever).

But make mistake about a couple of things:
  - yesterday inflicted a real and serious wound on the President
  - Mueller is very far from done
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 22, 2018, 04:57:28 pm
Andy, did you watch Maddow?
I just got in from a day’s MTB with kids, to a message from a friend in CA, with this link, the words “Go to 27:00, you’ll shit yourself” and a long stream of laughing emojis.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=share&v=lAfepdG1arU (https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=share&v=lAfepdG1arU)

How is this guy still there?
How much more of a direct accusation could anyone make?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 22, 2018, 05:34:36 pm
Andy, did you watch Maddow?
I just got in from a day’s MTB with kids, to a message from a friend in CA, with this link, the words “Go to 27:00, you’ll shit yourself” and a long stream of laughing emojis.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=share&v=lAfepdG1arU (https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=share&v=lAfepdG1arU)

How is this guy still there?
How much more of a direct accusation could anyone make?

No, we watch very little TV - Seth Myers when we can.

How he's still there? See above: the Republicans are either craven cowards; ideological zealots; greedy; or flat out crazy themselves. For now, Trump is their useful idiots and there no other levers (until the elections in November anyway).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 22, 2018, 05:53:42 pm
This I don’t get.
Useful idiot? Ok, perhaps, but...

Pence is highly unlikely to roll back Trumps tax plan, it’s mostly his and the GOP’s plan anyway. I’m not convinced Trump could tie his own shoelaces.

Supreme Court Justices? Pence is already picking them, surely? Trump is a rubber stamp.

“President Pence” would lick all the GOP’s wet dream fantasies, without the potential long term damage of propping up a Felon.
They must have worked that out and yet on they plow.

Why?

There has to be something that makes all the self harm worthwhile and I can’t believe it’s his “base”. They stand to lose the support of every honest Rep.
Plenty of Republicans are straight up, law abiding, moralistic, conservatives; who deeply believe in their sense of right and wrong. Eventually, the taste of Trump, will catch in their craw, if hasn’t already.
Conservative and Honest are not mutually exclusive concepts, regardless of how us “Libtards” might convince ourselves they are...

Edit:

Aaaaannnd....
The longer Trump continues, the more likely Pence is to be brought down with him. As it stands, he still commands enough moral integrity (in appearance, at least) to take up the reins. Much longer and so much of Trump’s turd polish will rub off on him, rolling him in glitter won’t help.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 22, 2018, 06:44:42 pm
Yes, Pence would be even more useful to the zealots - however, the simple fact is that it was Trump, and not Pence, who won the presidential election (I doubt Pence could have won it as nominee for the Presidency). A palace coup now against Trump would risk the ire of grassroots activists and the wider base, where Trump continues to command huge loyalty. There would be a huge risk in trying to get rid of Trump right now. Besides, it may not even be possible to bail now, they are tied to Trump, sink or swim, not least because its possible the whole election/administration faces delegitimisation, not just Trump. Pence surely knows that and must be hedging his bets, trying to read which way the wind is blowing.

As to decent conservatives, yes, they exist. But the depth of divisions in the country, the so-called culture wars, are blinding people to thought and rationality: witness the absolutely unyielding support for Trump from evangelical Christians (he holds out the promise of repealing Roe vs Wade and for that they will do anything).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 22, 2018, 07:00:41 pm
I really didn’t think it was possible to unseat him, but it’s looking as if Cohen is either about to have an “accident” or Mr Pee Pee is going to have a stroke. Life being a random pile of shite, who can say which of those things might be the more “accidental”, in light of how convenient they would both be...

https://www.npr.org/2018/08/22/640795902/michael-cohens-lawyer-says-hed-never-accept-a-pardon-from-president-trump?t=1534960279752 (https://www.npr.org/2018/08/22/640795902/michael-cohens-lawyer-says-hed-never-accept-a-pardon-from-president-trump?t=1534960279752)

I strongly suspect my Californian friend Dwight, Un-reconstituted hippy that he is, is fair quivering in his seat this night...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 22, 2018, 08:09:05 pm
Honestly, I have to sit in at work to cover the desk during youth squad training for a couple hours (bloody staff holidays, roll on Brexit, no more rights for plebs...) giving me a rare moment to actually read the news during a school holiday.
So many little nuggets hidden at the bottom of so many articles, almost as if they know what’s coming, but just can’t paste it into the headline box yet.

Like this one in the Guardian:


Only Mueller and his team know what’s coming next. In one of the lesser news lines Tuesday, Mueller and the legal team for Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, agreed to put off Flynn’s sentencing owing to his ongoing participation in open investigations.”
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on August 23, 2018, 08:41:34 am
Mueller knows everything.

It’s why they’re trying to rush Kavannagh’s appointment to the bench through so if and when this ends up in front of the SC the GOP can control the outcome.  Nunes was caught on tape at a fundraiser pretty much laying it out.

I read a great book last week called “Everything Trump Touches Dies” by Rick Wilson a never-Trump republican whom I’ve followed on Twitter for a while.   It’s good.

Let’s see what the rest of this week brings!


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 23, 2018, 09:35:00 am
Skype call with some Australian co workers this morning - sounds like a right mess over there as well...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on August 23, 2018, 10:43:52 am
I'd love to see him get sent down. In fact, I'd love it if, in the annals of history, Trump was colloquially referred to as "head of the Trump crime family". However something tells me it's not going to happen, or at least, won't happen for many years. I can't even see him getting impeached.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 23, 2018, 01:57:55 pm
I read a great book last week called “Everything Trump Touches Dies” by Rick Wilson a never-Trump republican whom I’ve followed on Twitter for a while.   It’s good.
I read a great book last week called “Everything Trump Touches Dies” by Rick Wilson a never-Trump republican whom I’ve followed on Twitter for a while.   It’s good.

Probably my favourite anti-Trump voice is arch conservative Jennifer Rubin in the Washington Post; I would never listen to her on policy or what the Democrats should do but on Trump she is scathing, forensic and all the more powerful because she's Republican through and through.

I haven't read any books on Trump - its hard to imagine getting enough perspective when we're still in the middle of the maelstrom.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 23, 2018, 02:40:17 pm
GOP =  :tumble:

Sadly, Dems also =  :tumble:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on August 23, 2018, 07:48:15 pm
Andy, I took out a Wapo Digital subscription the week he was elected.  Got fed up of only being able to read 5 articles a month.  I must have read it more than any other paper since Nov '16.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 24, 2018, 10:41:48 am
Andy, I took out a Wapo Digital subscription the week he was elected.  Got fed up of only being able to read 5 articles a month.  I must have read it more than any other paper since Nov '16.

Ditto, the same week
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SamT on August 24, 2018, 12:00:21 pm
I'd love to see him get sent down. In fact, I'd love it if, in the annals of history, Trump was colloquially referred to as "head of the Trump crime family". However something tells me it's not going to happen, or at least, won't happen for many years. I can't even see him getting impeached.

Meanwhile, the whistle blower on the whole Russian vote rigging gets to sit in jail for 5 years ..  :'(

http://www2.philly.com/philly/columnists/will_bunch/free-reality-winner-whistleblower-american-hero-20180724.html


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on August 24, 2018, 04:04:15 pm
Andy, I took out a Wapo Digital subscription the week he was elected.  Got fed up of only being able to read 5 articles a month.  I must have read it more than any other paper since Nov '16.

I did exactly the same  ;D
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 24, 2018, 05:35:05 pm
Well, looks like “Big Newspaper” doesn’t want this to end...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on September 22, 2018, 04:15:49 pm
A new book including interesting and scary stuff on the transition.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/sep/22/michael-lewis-trump-gambling-america
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fatneck on September 26, 2018, 08:35:48 am
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/25/trump-united-nations-general-assembly-speech-globalism-america

Ha! :lol:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 26, 2018, 11:31:44 am
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/25/trump-united-nations-general-assembly-speech-globalism-america

Ha! :lol:

LOL
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on September 27, 2018, 10:13:26 am
This is even more unhinged!

https://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2018/sep/27/the-strangest-moments-from-donald-trumps-un-press-conference-video
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on September 27, 2018, 12:32:54 pm
This is even more unhinged!

https://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2018/sep/27/the-strangest-moments-from-donald-trumps-un-press-conference-video

Fucking hell, couldn’t watch all of that.

For an attempt at context:
https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2018/09/18/eli-zaretsky/the-mass-psychology-of-trumpism/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on September 28, 2018, 09:56:37 pm
Kavanaugh-pr0n

https://twitter.com/i/status/1045747245939871746 (https://twitter.com/i/status/1045747245939871746)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 29, 2018, 12:32:54 am
The last few days have been incredibly painful. Like all of the men on here - and I guarantee all - many of my female friends, some of them very close to me, have suffered sexual violence in their lives. For them this spectacle has been deeply traumatic. It is a deliberate, hyper-aggressive assertion of white patriarchy. It is meant to demean women and to put them back in their place. It is so flagrant and toxic. Every part of it is finely tuned to achieve those ends. It is abhorrent and it will likely succeed.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on September 29, 2018, 08:42:23 am
It’s truly horrible to watch from on far Andy - and being in the thick of all that must be even worse. I watched fords compelling testimony - and had to switch off after a bit of K’s it was too much of the angry white man bile.

There was an editorial I read that said that hearing summed up in many ways what is wrong and how polarised the states is.

Politic here is also polarised and crazy but doesn’t seem to have the angry, white, patriarchal overtones ( kt as much anyway) as in the US at the moment. Both have racist / isolationist views though.... (not my most eloquent post sorry... small child running around etc..)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 29, 2018, 09:49:14 am
We are beyond eloquence and detailed analysis merely reinforces the irrational anger of this cabal.
The very terms “rational” or “logical” are enough to spur them to even greater histrionics that serves to drown out any protest or resistance. Resistance that, regardless of how calmly stated or rooted in fact, is loudly branded “whining” and those who resist “Snowflakes”.

All seems rather hopeless.
Let them eat their cake.
It might be the only way they’ll learn.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on September 29, 2018, 02:58:18 pm
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/brett-kavanaugh-and-the-innocence-of-white-jocks-christine-blasey-ford

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 29, 2018, 06:26:44 pm
Politic here is also polarised and crazy but doesn’t seem to have the angry, white, patriarchal overtones.

Thanks Tom, Matt, Ben and others. Yes, its grim, grim, grim, depressing and frightening.

ps. apologies to any FB friends for last night's profanity laden post. I'm sick of it.  >:(
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on October 01, 2018, 02:47:04 pm
Some other useful links (the first two are long but worththe read).

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/08/why-everyone-should-oppose-brett-kavanaughs-confirmation

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/01/kavanaugh-clerk-hire-casts-light-on-link-to-judge-forced-to-resign-in-metoo-era
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 01, 2018, 04:57:22 pm
It is a small thing, but plenty of people do recognise what is happening; the legacy of this cabal is more likely to be a stain on history, than some new Neo-Con revolution:

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/matilda-roald-dahl-trump-30-years-buckinghamshire-childrens-book-a8562821.html?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538400140 (https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/matilda-roald-dahl-trump-30-years-buckinghamshire-childrens-book-a8562821.html?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538400140)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 01, 2018, 11:54:09 pm
Trump leaves Rose Garden listeners punch-drunk … even without alcohol

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/01/trump-nafta-usmca-speech-rose-garden-reporter-attack?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 03, 2018, 10:23:35 pm
I’ll just put this here...

https://bigthink.com/ideafeed/thank-global-warming-for-the-tapeworm-in-your-brain?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538594365 (https://bigthink.com/ideafeed/thank-global-warming-for-the-tapeworm-in-your-brain?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538594365)

Correlation, causation, coincidence or certainty?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mugabe251 on October 04, 2018, 08:20:17 pm
It is a small thing, but plenty of people do recognise what is happening; the legacy of this cabal is more likely to be a stain on history, than some new Neo-Con revolution:

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/matilda-roald-dahl-trump-30-years-buckinghamshire-childrens-book-a8562821.html?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538400140 (https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/matilda-roald-dahl-trump-30-years-buckinghamshire-childrens-book-a8562821.html?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538400140)

Thought I heard the sound of someone doing some wet farts, but as it turns out, it's just you blathering on about your political convictions again  ;)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on October 04, 2018, 08:24:26 pm
That's uncivil.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on October 04, 2018, 08:39:41 pm
It is a small thing, but plenty of people do recognise what is happening; the legacy of this cabal is more likely to be a stain on history, than some new Neo-Con revolution:

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/matilda-roald-dahl-trump-30-years-buckinghamshire-childrens-book-a8562821.html?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538400140 (https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/matilda-roald-dahl-trump-30-years-buckinghamshire-childrens-book-a8562821.html?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538400140)

Thought I heard the sound of someone doing some wet farts, but as it turns out, it's just you blathering on about your political convictions again  ;)
No it’s you being a knob. Just in case you are not aware in the UK a Trump is another name for a fart.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 04, 2018, 08:59:00 pm
It is a small thing, but plenty of people do recognise what is happening; the legacy of this cabal is more likely to be a stain on history, than some new Neo-Con revolution:

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/matilda-roald-dahl-trump-30-years-buckinghamshire-childrens-book-a8562821.html?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538400140 (https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/matilda-roald-dahl-trump-30-years-buckinghamshire-childrens-book-a8562821.html?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538400140)

Thought I heard the sound of someone doing some wet farts, but as it turns out, it's just you blathering on about your political convictions again  ;)

That just about rounds out your personal discription of your own intellect, doesn’t it.
Pretty sure my dog curled down something more politically astute than you earlier. She’d eaten a half kilo of carrots, but I think it was still more solid than your logic.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fatneck on October 12, 2018, 11:21:58 am
What the actual fuck!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=19&v=A5UvELIBFcg
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 12, 2018, 12:30:42 pm
What the actual fuck!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=19&v=A5UvELIBFcg

Actually, it’s so bloody disheartening, to see mental illness cast in this light.
The man needs help, not parading around as a freak show act.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on October 12, 2018, 12:48:37 pm
How do you know he has a mental health problem and isn't just a dickhead?

If it's because he's giving out a stream of consciousness which sounds perplexing to a bystander, I don't think anybody has ever said we shouldn't be putting a microphone in front of Johnny Dawes.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dunnyg on October 12, 2018, 01:17:28 pm
Someone must have said that at some point?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on October 12, 2018, 01:21:07 pm
I had assumed with Kanye that he’d just had so much smoke blown up his ass, he thinks everything that pops into his head is some sort of profound revelation.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 12, 2018, 01:22:07 pm
How do you know he has a mental health problem and isn't just a dickhead?

If it's because he's giving out a stream of consciousness which sounds perplexing to a bystander, I don't think anybody has ever said we shouldn't be putting a microphone in front of Johnny Dawes.

I’m quite open to the possibility that he is both ill and a dickhead.
But, he has been moderately candid in regards to his mental health:
https://news.sky.com/story/kanye-west-reveals-mental-condition-11395000 (https://news.sky.com/story/kanye-west-reveals-mental-condition-11395000)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: cheque on October 12, 2018, 01:24:12 pm
How do you know he has a mental health problem and isn't just a dickhead?

In the summer he said that he'd been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. He's always been a dickhead (pretty much standard for a celebrity musician of course) but since his Mum died at the end of 2007 he's clearly been on the slide mentally.

I used to love Kanye West's music but now I find the very thought of him utterly depressing. He's emblematic of so much of what I feel has changed for the worse in the last 15 years- the regression of hip-hop as a musical form, the rise of style over substance in popular art in general, the creedence given to popular figures who demonstrably have no idea of what they're talking about, the rise of opiod abuse and even, incredibly, the acceptance of extreme-right political ideas in political discourse. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on October 12, 2018, 01:48:00 pm
Ah right, I'd assumed it was all assumption.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 12, 2018, 02:04:51 pm
Ah right, I'd assumed it was all assumption.

I start one of my lectures with a Steven segal quote from ‘under seige’. The one where he’s the ninja cook and the lass from bay watch jumps out of a cake topless (well that’s what I remember it for anyway).

Anyway - he quite profoundly states “assumption is the mother of all fuck ups”.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 12, 2018, 02:33:13 pm
Ceteris paribus.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 12, 2018, 02:34:54 pm
Ah right, I'd assumed it was all assumption.

I start one of my lectures with a Steven segal quote from ‘under seige’. The one where he’s the ninja cook and the lass from bay watch jumps out of a cake topless (well that’s what I remember it for anyway).

Anyway - he quite profoundly states “assumption is the mother of all fuck ups”.

Standard military parlance, tri-service.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mr chaz on October 12, 2018, 02:55:35 pm
To assume the assumed makes an ass ass out of u u and me me D... or something like that
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on October 19, 2018, 11:27:39 am
The latest shameful statement.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/18/trump-greg-gianforte-assault-guardian-ben-jacobs
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on October 19, 2018, 05:28:10 pm
Ah right, I'd assumed it was all assumption.

I start one of my lectures with a Steven segal quote from ‘under seige’. The one where he’s the ninja cook and the lass from bay watch jumps out of a cake topless (well that’s what I remember it for anyway).

Anyway - he quite profoundly states “assumption is the mother of all fuck ups”.

Standard military parlance, tri-service.

Standard newsdesk comment to cub reporters too.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 24, 2018, 07:45:30 am
A quote from Trump about the Saudi journalist murder:
Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump spoke contemptuously about the murder plot: “They had a very bad original concept. It was carried out poorly and the cover-up was one of the worst in the history of cover-ups.”

Later at a dinner with military leaders, he returned to theme of how the crime was performed: “They did a bad job of execution and they did a bad job of talking about it or covering it up.”

One of the worst, perhaps since a business magnate rigged the US election with Russian assistance, and simultaneously tried to mask his history of appalling personal behaviour?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on October 27, 2018, 12:42:25 pm
Interesting Guardian article on Trump meeting young black leaders. It seems to indicate the growing US divide is party ideological even in the black community; so many Republicans are either blind or just loyally refuse to challenge his idiocy. Besides, there is some funny-if-it-wasn't-so-worrying fact checking on his accelerating number of lies. Try and imagine such a  meeting with young black leaders in the UK!

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/26/trump-young-black-leadership-summit-white-house-east-room
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 27, 2018, 03:46:20 pm
I don't really know what to say anymore. My wife and I actually watched the speech to the young black activists live thinking I might say meaningful about the arrest of the bombing suspect (we missed the entirely trite one minute he devoted to it at the start). At the end, we were at loss to explain what we'd just watched (and why we'd watched it). He is ever more out of control; the lead up to the midterms feel increasingly fraught and tense.

The speech itself was insane - and crazy racist too. But don't be fooled by that audience; the ideological divide is very largely racial too. In reality his support among the black community is very low and it is likely that black people, and black women in particular, will be absolutely critical to Democratic fortunes in a number of key races, such as Stacy Abrams in Georgia's gubernatorial race (just as it was black women who got Doug Jones elected over Roy Moore in Alabama). Trump is a white president for white people, and the white supremacy is increasingly naked and undisguised.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 27, 2018, 04:37:03 pm
There's a shooting happening right now at a synagogue in Pittsburgh; at least eight dead. Earlier in the week a white men shoot dead two black people in a grocery store in Kentucky after first trying to get into a black church. As he left the scene he was approached by another armed white man; the shooter said "don't shoot, whites don't shoot whites." A week or two ago a white man killed two black cops in an ambush in South Carolina. The pipe bomber is a white supremacist (despite being at least part Filipino). And the president regularly uses anti-semitic dog whistles - such as he did yesterday with "globalist," which provoked a shout of "Soros!" from the audience, who knew exactly what he was referring to. Perhaps the Pittsburgh shooting will prove to be radical Islamism or random, but I wouldn't bet against it being more white supremacy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 27, 2018, 05:32:02 pm
The guy’s name is Robert Bowers.

Not a particularly Islamic sounding name and described as a “heavy set, white male”, so...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 27, 2018, 05:37:52 pm
It’s really fucked up. I can’t come up with anything more intellectual or any sort of explanation. Everything the man does seems to surpass his last act...

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on October 27, 2018, 08:44:58 pm
This is what fascism does.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 27, 2018, 09:21:09 pm
So, back from a family lunch, to even worse news. This was obviously an antisemitic hate crime. Trump has been stoking antisemitism for months and antisemitic views, codes and memes have been mainstreamed. This is Trump's to own, but he never will. He will paint himself the victim somehow (he was already doing that at a rally last night, the day the pipe bomber was arrested). Institutions are durable but they are not impervious.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on October 30, 2018, 12:43:01 pm
Interesting article on the similarities between Trump’s behaviour and better known fascists. Worth reading to the end.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/30/trump-borrows-tricks-of-fascism-pittsburgh (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/30/trump-borrows-tricks-of-fascism-pittsburgh)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 30, 2018, 01:53:29 pm
Yes, I would recommend this too (Snyder is an historian of the holocaust and fascism).

This morning's news is the announcement that he will end birthright citizenship using an executive order. There is overwhelming consensus that this would be unconstitutional. The executive order may or may not be issued but this will not come to pass. Its a stunt ahead of the midterms, as is the vile, racist scaremongering around the migrant caravan, which poses literally zero threat to the US. The only game they have left is to motivate the base to get out next Tuesday (which cannot come soon enough).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 30, 2018, 03:17:04 pm
Whilst I hope to be pleasantly surprised.
I don’t see these midterms giving the relief some would like. I actually think there are just too many who, overtly or secretly, love the racism.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 30, 2018, 03:51:17 pm
Whilst I hope to be pleasantly surprised.
I don’t see these midterms giving the relief some would like. I actually think there are just too many who, overtly or secretly, love the racism.

I think we're likely to see a very mixed picture, with advances and setbacks. I expect the Democrats to take the house - all house seats are up next week. Dems need a gain of 23 and that looks more than possible. I expect to see the GOP loosing seats in the suburbs in states that were once reliably red but are undergoing demographic change (e.g. Virginia). My house district, currently red, is looking sure to go blue after being redrawn (PA has - or had - just about the worst gerrymandering in the country until earlier this year). A Democratic house can act as an important check on the president and can start all kinds of investigations with subpoena powers etc. There will be some Dem losses too, for example in some Western states, but probably not enough to counteract the gains.

However, I feel the Senate is very unlikely to flip and for reasons of simple electoral math; only about a third of senate seats are contested this year and simply too few of those that are look vulnerable to flipping; e.g. they're just too deep red.

Its important to remember that however vocal and vile, the base is not enough to win the election by itself. In 2016 it formed a coalition with college educated whites (men and women) as well as traditional Republicans who simply wanted a tax cut and de-regulation - some members of both of those two groups (which overlap) will definitely have been turned off in the meantime. But there is still a) much gerrymandering b) unbelievable voter suppression (see Georgia) and c) the fact the electoral college assigns far greater weight to the individual voter in a largely rural (and solidly GOP) state such as Montana than it does to the individual voter in California or New York, making all elections an uphill battle for the Dems.

There are some very important Gubernatorial races too, Florida and Georgia especially.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on October 30, 2018, 05:01:46 pm
..... Gubernatorial ......

I have just learnt a new word.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on October 30, 2018, 08:54:06 pm
..... Gubernatorial ......

I have just learnt a new word.

You never read the MASH books back in the 70's/80's  :P
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 30, 2018, 11:03:38 pm
Whilst I hope to be pleasantly surprised.
I don’t see these midterms giving the relief some would like. I actually think there are just too many who, overtly or secretly, love the racism.

I agree with you Matt, extremely sadly Trump knows exactly what he's doing and is pulling out all the stops to give himself the best chance of a win in both houses. Almost every policy detail recently has at least in part been to this end. Securing the release of Andrew Bronson from Turkey to cement some more of the evangelical vote for instance. From this side of the pond it seems that the democrats really don't know what they are or how to react to Trump. Spluttering indignation at his crassness and bigotry might be an understandable reaction - it's probably how I feel about him - but it seems unlikely to win votes where it matters.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 31, 2018, 09:30:09 am
From https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/27/politics/trump-jba-death-penalty-pittsburgh/index.html
President Donald Trump said Saturday that the outcome of the deadly shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue would have been different had an armed guard been in place.
"If there was an armed guard inside the temple, they would have been able to stop him," he said to reporters before boarding a flight to a pair of events later in the afternoon.

from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-mass-shooting-in-pittsburgh-and-a-trump-visit-expose-a-divided-america/2018/10/30/93cbb0d4-dbc8-11e8-85df-7a6b4d25cfbb_story.html?utm_term=.a717bf45c374
America’s biggest tragedies often provoke moments of “thoughtful introspection and self-examination that we so rarely see in public life,” President Barack Obama said in the wake of the killing of nine worshipers at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, S.C., three years ago.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on October 31, 2018, 10:19:37 am
From https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/27/politics/trump-jba-death-penalty-pittsburgh/index.html
President Donald Trump said Saturday that the outcome of the deadly shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue would have been different had an armed guard been in place.
"If there was an armed guard inside the temple, they would have been able to stop him," he said to reporters before boarding a flight to a pair of events later in the afternoon.

He said similar after the Parkland school shooting:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/22/donald-trump-insists-arming-teachers-guns-shootings (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/22/donald-trump-insists-arming-teachers-guns-shootings)

blaming the victims for not being armed in an environment where guns seem entirely inappropriate.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on October 31, 2018, 10:26:45 am
If anyone wants to find something to smile about among this unremitting awfulness do a Twitter search on Surefire Security and Jason Wohl.

Unfortunately when you stop laughing you will be hit with the realisation that these people actually have influence over people's thoughts and voting intentions.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 31, 2018, 10:41:49 am
From this side of the pond it seems that the democrats really don't know what they are or how to react to Trump. Spluttering indignation at his crassness and bigotry might be an understandable reaction - it's probably how I feel about him - but it seems unlikely to win votes where it matters.

Yes and no. A lot of people on the left are deeply unhappy with the Democratic establishment, who have refused to learn from 2016 and have done everything they can to resist the movement on the progressive wing of the party. But party structures are much looser than in the UK and there's a lot of decentralization during elections, with many campaigns, especially if they are more progressive, operating in a semi-detached fashion and reacting in tailored ways to local contexts and issues. In other words, the big picture (Pelosi, Schumer etc.) is very far from being the whole picture. This comes from direct experience; I know candidates at State and Federal levels, many people running or working for campaigns, and am involved myself as a volunteer.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 31, 2018, 03:13:02 pm
From https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/27/politics/trump-jba-death-penalty-pittsburgh/index.html
President Donald Trump said Saturday that the outcome of the deadly shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue would have been different had an armed guard been in place.
"If there was an armed guard inside the temple, they would have been able to stop him," he said to reporters before boarding a flight to a pair of events later in the afternoon.

He said similar after the Parkland school shooting:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/22/donald-trump-insists-arming-teachers-guns-shootings (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/22/donald-trump-insists-arming-teachers-guns-shootings)

blaming the victims for not being armed in an environment where guns seem entirely inappropriate.

Sorry to disrupt the 'burn the witch-athon' here but..


We place armed guards in lots of places in the UK - airports, cities, important institutions, in patrol cars; and our population *isn't* allowed anything near the freedom to own firearms that US citizens are.
In a country with very different gun-ownership laws to the UK, is a suggestion to have armed guards at American schools, and synagogues (and mosques..?) a sign of anything other than a logical line of thought?

The response following gun massacres in the UK has been to tighten gun-ownership so that it's now almost impossible to get your hands on semi-automatic rifles or pistols.
That approach is unlikely to happen in the US for various historical reasons. Therefore placing armed guards in vulnerable targets is an obvious and rational response, but clearly less than the ideal of not having any nutters with guns (which everyone should realise is impossible to implement in the US)

Trump might be crass and a lot of other more dangerous things but FFS, if I lived in the US and sent my children to school there I'd rather it had armed guards than not.. because the country's full of gun-owning human-beings/nutters, duh.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on October 31, 2018, 03:25:39 pm
Sorry to disrupt the 'burn the witch-athon' here but..


We place armed guards in lots of places in the UK - airports, cities, important institutions, in patrol cars; and our population *isn't* allowed anything near the freedom to own firearms that US citizens are.
In a country with very different gun-ownership laws to the UK, is a suggestion to have armed guards at American schools, and synagogues (and mosques..?) a sign of anything other than a logical line of thought?

The response following gun massacres in the UK has been to tighten gun-ownership so that it's now almost impossible to get your hands on semi-automatic rifles or pistols.
That approach is unlikely to happen in the US for various historical reasons. Therefore placing armed guards in vulnerable targets is an obvious and rational response, but clearly less than the ideal of not having any nutters with guns (which everyone should realise is impossible to implement in the US)

Trump might be crass and a lot of other more dangerous things but FFS, if I lived in the US and sent my children to school there I'd rather it had armed guards than not.. because the country's full of gun-owning human-beings/nutters, duh.

The crux of it is, as you've identified, that it would be far preferable to have fewer people walking around with guns so that you didn't have to have armed guards in nearly all public spaces. To say that gun control is incomprehensible is to be too pessimistic and short-term in your thinking: the NRA might not always be so dominant. If you raise a generation who reject the need to personally own a gun, then you can overcome the NRA and begin to make inroads to better gun control. Teaching children from the earliest age that they cannot be safe unless a "good guy" with a gun is nearby is not the best way to go about that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 31, 2018, 03:40:22 pm
That may or may not be true.

And even if it was completely true, it doesn't address the issue for at least another generation. In which time...

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on October 31, 2018, 03:47:25 pm
I'm not sure where having armed guards at every gathering place would fit in with the whole land of free/home of brave stuff.

Wasn't there a police or rentacop present at one of the recent school shootings who proved entirely ineffectual (the frequency of the shootings makes it depressingly difficult to remember the details of each one)? How many guards would you actually need to cover a school with thousands of pupils, one per class? 

State schools in the US seem to be in a similar state or worse than those in the UK in terms of funding; maybe Trump could raise taxes and give more money to schools, but stipulate that it can only be used to buy guns and ammo and not teaching supplies.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 31, 2018, 03:54:30 pm
You could debate the details to the nth degree. I'm simply commenting that the principle of having armed guards seems to me at least to have some merit in the short-term, and doesn't necessarily have to be a sign of anything other than a rational proposal to help mitigate against a nasty problem.
Certainly a more effective immediate preventative measure than 'teach the next generation not to want to own guns' (although that would be good too).
Various other immediate solutions to preventing gun massacres exist too, not just 'arm everyone'.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 31, 2018, 03:57:59 pm
Unfortunately, the gun cat is well and truely out of the bag, the room, the building and, probably, the post code.

The only people who would comply with any future control order or amnesty, will be those least likely to need such.

So, guarding likely targets is the best option in the worst circumstances. To do anything else is delusional.

In the specific case of the Pitsburgh incident, there seems little likelihood that an armed guard would have made much difference. Note the injured, trained and armed men; who arrived in full knowledge of an armed incident.
Defence requires depth, unavailable to that scenario without a ridiculous imposition.

Now, imo, given the perfect shit storm of a heavily armed population (where the greater the mental instability, the better armed, elements of this population will be) and the sheer size of that population; having an Orange Baboon slinging shit and stirring their rage, smacks of some real “end times” crap.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 31, 2018, 04:04:21 pm
There were armed officers at both the Parkland and Pulse Nightclub shootings, as there are at almost all mass shootings, and it made zero difference. Its even harder to think of a situation in which an armed member of the public stopped a mass shooting (the man who killed 26 at a church in Texas last year was chased and killed by a member of the public but that occurred after the killing had stopped and he'd left the church).

I do send a child to a public school in the US and I sure as hell don't want an armed presence there (let along, god forbid, armed teachers, as one school district very near us has just permitted). They had an active shooter drill a couple of weeks ago - the whole thing is fucking insane.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on October 31, 2018, 04:30:29 pm
Quote
author=petejh to

Sorry to disrupt the 'burn the witch-athon' here but..



I think you've missed the point. The reason he is being called out is not because this is a bad idea but because it's a fucking shitty and callous response to a shooting. It's because after these shootings it's always too soon to talk about gun control but never too soon to talk about putting more guns on the street. It's like going to an assault victim and saying it's your own fault for going there dressed like that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 31, 2018, 04:50:15 pm
 :agree:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 31, 2018, 06:25:56 pm
Quote
author=petejh to

Sorry to disrupt the 'burn the witch-athon' here but..



I think you've missed the point. The reason he is being called out is not because this is a bad idea but because it's a fucking shitty and callous response to a shooting. ...

..

Trump might be crass and a lot of other more dangerous things...

I didn't miss that point.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 31, 2018, 06:32:55 pm
I do send a child to a public school in the US and I sure as hell don't want an armed presence there (let along, god forbid, armed teachers, as one school district very near us has just permitted). They had an active shooter drill a couple of weeks ago - the whole thing is fucking insane.

It might well seem/be insane. But that's the country you've chosen to go and live in and this latest outrage isn't anything new for the US. There's a long history of gun massacres by armed civilians there.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 31, 2018, 07:15:32 pm
I do send a child to a public school in the US and I sure as hell don't want an armed presence there (let along, god forbid, armed teachers, as one school district very near us has just permitted). They had an active shooter drill a couple of weeks ago - the whole thing is fucking insane.

It might well seem/be insane. But that's the country you've chosen to go and live in and this latest outrage isn't anything new for the US. There's a long history of gun massacres by armed civilians there.

Yes, I was quite aware of that. However, I don't believe that also means I simply have to accept the status quo, let alone the considerable deterioration that would be represented by having armed guards in every place of worship and learning. The child in question is my stepdaughter and has always lived and been schooled in the US.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 31, 2018, 07:46:19 pm
Nobody mentioned accepting the status quo. Actually the status quo would be to carry on as before.

You said 'they had an active shooter drill' in the school and commented that the whole thing is 'fucking insane'. It might not be how anyone would like things to be but I think that's sensible; like doing hurricane drills is sensible.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 31, 2018, 07:49:18 pm
Active shooter drills/training are primarily a money making venture by "security consultants" (e.g. ex-cops) that school districts feel compelled to purchase. There's little or no proof of their efficacy.

My insane comment refers to the overall situation in which an advanced, wealthy nation in which the rule of law largely prevails thinks it utterly normal for its citizens to be murdered en masse on a regular basis, for places of worship and learning to need armed guards, for children just a few years old to regularly receive training on what to do if someone tries to murder them and their classmates in school using a perfectly legal gun (to give a few examples).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 31, 2018, 07:52:30 pm
Nobody mentioned accepting the status quo. Actually the status quo would be to carry on as before.

You said 'they had an active shooter drill' in the school and commented that the whole thing is 'fucking insane'. It might not be how anyone would like things to be but I think that's sensible; like doing hurricane drills is sensible.

Yes but you can’t stop hurricanes with legislation...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 31, 2018, 07:53:31 pm
Active shooter drills/training are primarily a money making venture by "security consultants" (e.g. ex-cops) that school districts feel compelled to purchase. There's little or no proof of their efficacy.

That's beside the point though isn't it. The principle of having drills for emergencies is generally a good principle. That it might have been used by evil capitalists for profit motive doesn't alter drills being worthwhile - even if they only reduce anxiety and make people feel like they're 'doing something' it could be argued is a worthwhile outcome.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 31, 2018, 07:54:09 pm
Nobody mentioned accepting the status quo. Actually the status quo would be to carry on as before.

You said 'they had an active shooter drill' in the school and commented that the whole thing is 'fucking insane'. It might not be how anyone would like things to be but I think that's sensible; like doing hurricane drills is sensible.

Yes but you can’t stop hurricanes with legislation...

Great line!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 31, 2018, 07:57:45 pm
Pretty much the one thing they do achieve is to increase anxiety.

ps. apologies, I expanded my last comment when you and TT were writing.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on October 31, 2018, 08:00:20 pm
There's little or no proof of their efficacy.

doesn't alter drills being worthwhile - even if they only reduce anxiety and make people feel like they're 'doing something' it could be argued is a worthwhile outcome.

Sound like you would have enjoyed hiding under tables during Cold War nuclear drills!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 31, 2018, 08:00:36 pm
It is insane.

Andy is right to be distressed and exasperated.

But Pete is right too.

It’s actually too late. Any attempt to remove these weapons from circulation would be met with extreme violence.
I’m an absolute believer in gun control. I don’t even believe anyone “needs” any projectile weapon, outside of a range, least of all for “sport” (aka hunting).
This is not a problem of Trump’s creation, he’s just exploiting the situation for his own political ends; because he’s a psychopath.

No amount of moral “correctness” will disarm the lunatics. No hand wringing will stop a school shooter. No change in the law now, will remove those guns from the hands of the nut jobs.

On the other hand, it might, over time, have an impact. It has to be worth a try.

In the meantime, active shooter drills and armed guards are the only feasible course of action.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 31, 2018, 08:07:06 pm
I'm unconvinced by your arguments against drills for emergencies.

Agree with you on some level that it's 'insane for a wealthy advanced country etc etc'. It isn't however insane to try to mitigate against said insanity. Including attempts to stop at source (legislation) but also to defend against (guns). 
To turn it around - it's because it's utterly normal for citizens to be murdered en masse on a regular basis, that places of worship and learning could be said to need armed guards. Since when have humans been totally sane?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 31, 2018, 08:07:38 pm
One final comment (as this has gone off topic) is that my other objection to armed guards, drills etc. (beyond the fact there's no evidence they work and may very often be counterproductive) is that they further entrench the normalization of gun violence as an ineradicable and acceptable feature of the culture.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 31, 2018, 08:09:48 pm
Sound like you would have enjoyed hiding under tables during Cold War nuclear drills!

We used to be taught, in the case of a small tactical nuclear weapon detonating in our vicinity, to lie face down in whatever small depression in the ground I could find and tuck my arms under me so they wouldn't be ripped off by the blast wave.. and then to brush ourselves off of the falling radioactive dust with tree branches... oh yeah everything is fine  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on October 31, 2018, 08:11:44 pm
As long as it felt like you were ‘doing something’  ;D
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 31, 2018, 08:17:56 pm
Sound like you would have enjoyed hiding under tables during Cold War nuclear drills!

We used to be taught, in the case of a small tactical nuclear weapon detonating in our vicinity, to lie face down in whatever small depression in the ground I could find and tuck my arms under me so they wouldn't be ripped off by the blast wave.. and then to brush ourselves off of the falling radioactive dust with tree branches... oh yeah everything is fine  :thumbsup:

Remember Combo pens?

Nine seconds to get suit and mask on and jab it in your thigh...

Yeah. Right.

As for being off topic. I think not.

We’re witnessing the rise of Trump’s “second amendment people”, that he’s been calling out to since before the election.

I think I’ve seen about an hour or so of clips of him inciting such acts, in neat little montages, this past week.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on November 01, 2018, 10:58:38 am
I think a big concern over the whole “armed guards in schools” is efficacy of it. I can understand Pete’s point, i.e. people are being shot in schools, introduce people who are capable of stopping this happening – armed guards.

However, taking out a “shooter” in an attempted school massacre seems like quite a hard task and would require someone with a pretty advanced skill set in managing the situation without increasing the injury/death toll so, who will be employed as these armed guards? I have zero military/police experience but I would say this would take a lot of training to get an effective armed guard.

Having seen a bit of coverage of what seems to be being implemented (training teachers to be armed/installing rent-a-cop style individuals) the armed response would be at best ineffectual and at worst exacerbate the situation whilst also, to echo Andy P’s point, “further entrench the normalization of gun violence as an ineradicable and acceptable feature of the culture.”
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 01, 2018, 11:39:44 am
.... the armed response would be at best ineffectual and at worst exacerbate the situation whilst also, to echo Andy P’s point, “further entrench the normalization of gun violence as an ineradicable and acceptable feature of the culture.”

^ this.

I think the argument for armed personnel in schools etc has merit if you think potential shooters are going to shelve their plans as a result, or are going to be stopped by the guards so that it results in fewer lives lost.

I don’t think the former is especially likely; shooters will know their lives are over one way or another post attack. The latter is as likely to produce better armed shooters as it is to stop them imo.

The UK police face armed criminals daily but don’t habitually carry guns: arms races don’t necessarily make people safer.

These aren’t simple issues though Trump and his ilk would like us to think otherwise. This article about the dangers of wearing bike helmets by Chris Boardman makes very interesting reading.
It may be more relevant than you think: real world outcomes can be very counterintuitive. Have a look:
https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/article/20171126-Chris-Boardman-0 (https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/article/20171126-Chris-Boardman-0)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 01, 2018, 11:58:33 am
OT, but a friend of mine doesn't wear a helmet because she read a study that said that motorists are more likely to be careful around you if you aren't wearing them. Of course this doesn't account for the ones that "didn't see you" or falling off of your own account (which she did recently and banged her head quite hard).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 01, 2018, 02:01:25 pm
The UK isn't a good country to use as a comparison. It has some of the most restrictive gun laws, and ownership of handguns has been prohibited entirely since Dunblane.
The US has some of the most nonrestrictive gun laws, and ownership - and the carrying in public - of handguns is allowed.

The arguments above put forward against armed guards aren't backed up by any conclusive evidence.
Neither can I find much evidence for armed guards.
Conclusion, ideological views at play against anything that supports the continuation of the current US gun laws. (no matter that it 'might' (unproven) actually stop some deaths).

I know what I think would be a more effective acute deterrent against a rogue person with a gun trying to kill people; and that's another person with a gun trained and employed to kill rogue shooters. But I'm not interested enough to think about it any further.

The original point was I don't think all shit to stick to Trump, just the shit that he warrants.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dunnyg on November 01, 2018, 02:05:09 pm
His argument seems reasonable but the statistics just seem overly simplified. E. g. heart disease is associated with obesity but id be very suprised if it isnt also associated with being old etc.. Interesting view point though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 01, 2018, 02:26:32 pm
I know what I think would be a more effective acute deterrent against a rogue person with a gun trying to kill people; and that's another person with a gun trained and employed to kill rogue shooters. But I'm not interested enough to think about it any further.

Regardless of what other points have been made, I think this in particular doesn't make sense if you're specifically talking about a deterrent. A lot of these people are effectively suicide shooters. They either kill themselves at the end or are killed by the police in an inevitable shootout. How many public shooters actually expect to escape with their lives? Whether there's one person on site who might shoot them, or a SWAT team who turns up ten minutes later who might shoot them, the outcome is very much the same for the perpetrator.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on November 01, 2018, 02:29:01 pm
The UK isn't a good country to use as a comparison. It has some of the most restrictive gun laws, and ownership of handguns has been prohibited entirely since Dunblane.
The US has some of the most nonrestrictive gun laws, and ownership - and the carrying in public - of handguns is allowed.

Are there not plenty of other countries with high levels of gun ownership and relatively lax ownership laws that don't suffer from the same problems with mass murderers? Canada always seems to come up as an easy comparison, but i'm not sure about the statistics


The arguments above put forward against armed guards aren't backed up by any conclusive evidence.

Hopefully there's not going to be enough shootings with and without guards to provide a statistically significant sample!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on November 01, 2018, 02:44:56 pm
Hopefully there's not going to be enough shootings with and without guards to provide a statistically significant sample!

Well, of the two big school shooting in 2018 (Stoneman Douglas and Santa Fee High Schools, 17 & 10 killed respectively) there were armed police officers* on site for both of them.

I think one had a sheriff's officer, i don't know the difference......
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 01, 2018, 05:06:42 pm

These aren’t simple issues though Trump and his ilk would like us to think otherwise. This article about the dangers of wearing bike helmets by Chris Boardman makes very interesting reading.
It may be more relevant than you think: real world outcomes can be very counterintuitive. Have a look:
https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/article/20171126-Chris-Boardman-0 (https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/article/20171126-Chris-Boardman-0)

Totally OT now but..

That article by Boardman. If the author is truly making an argument for doing physical activity as a defense against ill health, and isn't just trying to get more people to take up his particular ideology and livelihood, then the best option, instead of making arguments for cycling, would be to encourage any form of physical activity - many others are available.
 
I wonder if Boardman gets a wage from British Cycling as its Policy Adviser; or from Manchester City Council as its Cycling & Walking Commissioner...

Neither does he acknowledge the huge numbers of seriously injured cyclists among the 'Killed or Seriously Injured'. Many of who, no doubt, will have suffered head injuries. Instead focusing on a tiny fraction of the overall KSI by trying to make an argument based just on the number of those killed and the typical type of fatal accident.

And what teestub said - his use of stats on deaths from diabetes, cancer and heart disease at the end in an effort to make an argument based around the link between ill health and people not exercising.. Sure, it's a factor. But the author makes it sound to the reader as if old-age, bad diet (including high carbohydrate energy drinks and the link between high carbs and heart disease-causing artery damage...), and air pollution (...) don't exist as significant risk factors for those diseases.

I doubt that good arteries (carb-loaders maybe not) and cardio fitness will be of much comfort if you're struck with a serious head injury.

 ::)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 01, 2018, 05:17:34 pm
I think you fellas are mistaking the purpose of armed guards in general...

I was on of the security detail for the British High Commision in Lagos, Nigeria, for a brief stint, early 90’s, amongst other thingies and bits and bobs.

Number one is deterrent. This is the “bad neighbor” principle, whereby an overt presence encourages the attacker to pick a softer target. Obviously, this has limited effectiveness, where the target location is key to the attacker, rather than a social group.

However, the overt guard is not considered much more than symbolic. It is relatively easy to “get the jump” on such, or pick them off (bomb, sniping etc) prior to the attack; or it is relatively hard to protect the overt guard, depending on your viewpoint.

It is the combination of physical security measures and proximity of respose team that provide the depth, that allow the minimisation of the effectiveness of any attack.

Actually preventing the attack from occurring, is an entirely different bailiwick.

You’re asking if armed guards and response might prevent such attacks and that’s not their purpose, beyond that minor deterrent of the overt guard (who will prevent the less competent attacker, but is vulnerable to more sophisticated attacks).
However, they are certainly able to minimise the effectiveness of any attack.
Yes, many school shooters take their own lives and don’t intend to survive; but they usually only do so when confronted by a determined response or lack of targets.
Remove that response and they could carry on killing until they run out of ammo. Containing the shooter, protecting and evacuating potential targets, require an armed response.

So, yes, to a point, you are correct. A single, token, armed guard is pretty pointless, but I would hope the schools etc there are somewhat more nuanced...

Edit to reduce some personal details...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 01, 2018, 05:19:50 pm
The UK isn't a good country to use as a comparison.


If you thought of it as a comparator to the US, then you did not understand the point.

As an example of how the best approach may need some careful thinking ....

Obviously the genie’s out of the bottle, the question is how to contain it. I don’t have the answers, that would be a fatuous thing to think.  Gung-ho solutions might be appealing, but more thought is merited than that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on November 01, 2018, 05:55:37 pm
I think you fellas are mistaking the purpose of armed guards in general...

I appreciate what you said in your post (as you actually have the experience, I don't) but your reasons for the guard and the role they perform isn't what is being sold to the American public by Trump or the pro gun lobby. They repeatedly say that the armed guard would be able to shoot the perpetrator and therefore save lives.

Also re deterrent, it hasn't worked it the case of the two biggest school shootings this year (schools are very personal targets, it's never "any" school ut the school of the gunman) and if the purpose is to steer the gunman to a softer target, i.e. a school without an armed guard, then that doesn't seem like a great scenario either.

I would add, my leftie social media bubble also seems to tell me it's not just introducing armed guards into schools but arming the teachers. It would take more than a 2 day course over the summer break to give the R.E. teacher the skills to react in a manner that controlled the situation when a former pupil bursts into the classroom with a semi automatic assault rifle. I would imagine it would just lead to a greater proportion of the dead being teachers as they might be armed.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 01, 2018, 06:18:51 pm
I think you fellas are mistaking the purpose of armed guards in general...

I appreciate what you said in your post (as you actually have the experience, I don't) but your reasons for the guard and the role they perform isn't what is being sold to the American public by Trump or the pro gun lobby. They repeatedly say that the armed guard would be able to shoot the perpetrator and therefore save lives.

Also re deterrent, it hasn't worked it the case of the two biggest school shootings this year (schools are very personal targets, it's never "any" school ut the school of the gunman) and if the purpose is to steer the gunman to a softer target, i.e. a school without an armed guard, then that doesn't seem like a great scenario either.

I would add, my leftie social media bubble also seems to tell me it's not just introducing armed guards into schools but arming the teachers. It would take more than a 2 day course over the summer break to give the R.E. teacher the skills to react in a manner that controlled the situation when a former pupil bursts into the classroom with a semi automatic assault rifle. I would imagine it would just lead to a greater proportion of the dead being teachers as they might be armed.

Oh God! I’m not supporting the NRA/Trump/GOP line!
They are talking out of their collective arses, as I said; the overt guard is only a token, to deter only the most cursory or impromptu.

Armed response teams require extensive training and aptitude. I couldn’t do it, I get red mist (I was alright organising them though).
I can’t imagine anything worse than Joe public with a gun.

I’m sure Pete remembers plenty of, supposedly, highly selected, well trained, individuals; who he would never trust wit a sharpened tea spoon outside of a combat situation. I know I do (though, any Matelot with a gun is terrifying and I was often not allowed to play with bang sticks, where my superior was wearing a green uniform...).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 01, 2018, 08:42:48 pm
The UK isn't a good country to use as a comparison.


If you thought of it as a comparator to the US, then you did not understand the point.

As an example of how the best approach may need some careful thinking ....

Obviously the genie’s out of the bottle, the question is how to contain it. I don’t have the answers, that would be a fatuous thing to think.  Gung-ho solutions might be appealing, but more thought is merited than that.

The genie isn't fresh out of the bottle, in the US it's been out for decades. There's nothing new here.

Of course it requires careful thought, that should go without saying. There are all sorts of other measures. I picked up on armed guards because people have used it to slate Trump (who is most definitely a cunt), but if Obama had suggested it I think we'd be having a very different discussion.
It's an obvious point that you can't stop an armed intruder intent on killing you, with policy. You might prevent another armed intruder years down the line. But the gun laws and having the right to bear arms written into the constitution in the US simply aren't going to change significantly in any short time-frame and armed attacks aren't going to stop happening. Seems more prudent to me to put in place whatever other measures you can until policy has an effect.

Another point for those who think guards are ineffective - it isn't actually that difficult to become good with a pistol or rifle. It's far less to do with being some gung-ho killer and more to do with calmness, breathing and technique. Much like climbing actually. Being a civilian guard employed for the purpose of guarding a school or church definitely doesn't preclude you from being highly competent with a pistol or rifle under pressure. Certainly no reason that they should be any less competent than a civilian attacker. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 01, 2018, 09:49:05 pm


 
The genie isn't fresh out of the bottle, in the US it's been out for decades. There's nothing new here.

Of course it requires careful thought, that should go without saying. There are all sorts of other measures. I picked up on armed guards because people have used it to slate Trump (who is most definitely a cunt), but if Obama had suggested it I think we'd be having a very different discussion.

That’s a considerable understatement.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster)

And I thought it was common knowledge.

Pete’s wrong though. I could use a rifle (personal best was a headshot on a reindeer, at 350mtrs with a first gen Arctic Warfare (L96Athingy or whatever) and a fancy sight. No record breaker, but not bad for a Matelot.
On the other hand, I had to qualify with a 9mm (Browning? Can’t remember) and it took quite a while before I could actually get a round in a target on the range I was actually in, rather than the adjacent one, or an innocent passerby or the range staff. The Booty Seargent in charge had many words to share, some of which I had not heard before.
I was not alone in this, we all struggled with hand guns at anything greater than 30’ or so.
They had us try this “snap shooting” thing at one point (single hand, from holstered) and how no one was killed is still a mystery to me.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 02, 2018, 08:08:01 am
The president’s most inflammatory remarks concerned the actions of US troops at the border: “Anybody throwing stones, rocks … we will consider that a firearm because there’s not much difference when you get hit in the face with a rock.”

Really. The NRA will be happy with rocks as well then.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 02, 2018, 11:00:17 am
Saw this on the news this morning. Trump's clearly lining up for an ugly confrontation.



(http://)

Pete’s wrong though. I could use a rifle (personal best was a headshot on a reindeer, at 350mtrs with a first gen Arctic Warfare (L96Athingy or whatever) and a fancy sight. No record breaker, but not bad for a Matelot.
On the other hand, I had to qualify with a 9mm (Browning? Can’t remember) and it took quite a while before I could actually get a round in a target on the range I was actually in, rather than the adjacent one, or an innocent passerby or the range staff......

It's a personal thing. I was good with both. I have some medals for pistol snap-shooting competitions and was always good with a rifle. Get me.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 02, 2018, 12:51:38 pm
It's interesting that Matt and Pete's views are reasonably aligned on this, and that normally you would expect them to disagree on political issues, and that they are the two people (as far as I'm aware) who are contributing to this thread who have actually served in the forces.

I'm not sure exactly what that says but I think it says something.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 02, 2018, 01:33:13 pm
I'm not sure exactly what that says but I think it says something.

I'm not it sure its says much at all; the military and law enforcement have very different roles in society, even if many cops here are veterans. This summer a cop shot and killed an unarmed man (of colour) a mile from my house. The man was acting erratically (its on video) but in the view of many the situation did not require lethal force. The cop had only been in the force for a few months and had only recently left the army, where he'd served tours in Iraq (I believe). In this situation he seems to have acted much more as a soldier in combat rather than a cop whose priority should have been de-escalation. In short, military experience isn't necessarily good preparation for being a cop. Cops here also receive ludicrously little training - literally a few weeks I think, but that's another issue.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 02, 2018, 01:33:56 pm
I have to say I very much respect Matt and Pete's opinions on this as they have far more firearms experience than I will ever have, having only shot 22 on a range and pheasants / ducks with a shotgun.

I can see that armed guards might be a tempting short term measure but Trump's enthusiasm for it has nothing to do with any thought through plan or evidence, merely the fact that it will appeal to his voter base.
Much like his foreign policy or immigration policy, his interest seems to be entirely in retaining and extending his power, rather than government of the country he is supposed to be president of.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 02, 2018, 03:45:05 pm
I'm not sure exactly what that says but I think it says something.

I'm not it sure its says much at all; the military and law enforcement have very different roles in society, even if many cops here are veterans. This summer a cop shot and killed an unarmed man (of colour) a mile from my house. The man was acting erratically (its on video) but in the view of many the situation did not require lethal force. The cop had only been in the force for a few months and had only recently left the army, where he'd served tours in Iraq (I believe). In this situation he seems to have acted much more as a soldier in combat rather than a cop whose priority should have been de-escalation. In short, military experience isn't necessarily good preparation for being a cop. Cops here also receive ludicrously little training - literally a few weeks I think, but that's another issue.

The inaptitude (even ineptitude) of an individual does not a compelling case make...

And, an armed guard or response team, are very different beasts from patrolling law enforcement.

A surprisingly large number of servicemen and women transition quite well into civilian society without turning into Rambo. Possibly because they’re humans, you know, with human like tendencies and mushy sentimental bits, even (shock! Horror!) EMPATHY!

Some individuals do not, and that is tragic and the lack of support for them is shameful.

It is not something limited to former Service personnel though. My own father took early retirement after 24 years as a Copper (and a selection of gongs and commendations), when he lost it with a gobby teen as he was returning from attending the fifteenth cot death of his career. No one was hurt, but he knew he could not trust himself again. That was a gritty, wise, 40 something, self aware enough to listen to vibes in his own head; where such “snapping” takes place in a younger, less experienced mind... ouch!


Actually, overall, your argument seems to be more that the personnel in question are too hastily assembled and poorly trained, and that maybe.

The fact that there is a need for them, is bloody awful. We only really need firearms to protect places where physical security cannot work, in this country.
I mean, places where you can’t just lock the door.
Because firearms are less of an issue, a locked door is a significant barrier. A school can lock the doors, once the kids are inside, and your knife attacker can hack at it with his twelve inch carving knife, all day, and not be a threat.
But, as we have seen, open spaces, airports, stations etc are vulnerable to attacks by non-firearm weilding nutters, who can create mass casualties. Despite on at least one occasion, a well trained officer trying to stop such an attacker with non-lethal force (a baton, I believe), only the intervention of an armed response team ended the incidents.

It sucks, but they’re needed.

You know, rough men, standing ready, and all that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 02, 2018, 04:39:40 pm
She had me at hello.

Compare that to this tosser ( sorry, is that biased? Replace it with “nice guy” or something):

http://www.khq.com/story/39387853/spokane-valley-representative-under-scrutiny-for-leaked-manifesto (http://www.khq.com/story/39387853/spokane-valley-representative-under-scrutiny-for-leaked-manifesto)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 02, 2018, 09:08:55 pm

A surprisingly large number of servicemen and women transition quite well into civilian society without turning into Rambo. Possibly because they’re humans, you know, with human like tendencies and mushy sentimental bits, even (shock! Horror!) EMPATHY!



On a side note, Trump has empathy, in fact he is very gifted in this respect. The problem is that along with his great understanding of what other people feel, he really doesn't give a stuff about their welfare.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 02, 2018, 09:32:38 pm

A surprisingly large number of servicemen and women transition quite well into civilian society without turning into Rambo. Possibly because they’re humans, you know, with human like tendencies and mushy sentimental bits, even (shock! Horror!) EMPATHY!



On a side note, Trump has empathy, in fact he is very gifted in this respect. The problem is that along with his great understanding of what other people feel, he really doesn't give a stuff about their welfare.

Is that empathy?
Surely empathy is the actual “feeling” of anothers distress/joy/whatever, not merely recognising which emotion another is experiencing and playing to it?

I believe this is called “the mask of sanity”, no more empathic than an algorithm that recognises a sad face.
A bit like my O level physics master.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 02, 2018, 10:02:55 pm
As I understand it empathy is the capacity to understand the emotion others feel. Giving a damn is a whole different ballgame...


I'm not trying to be picky with you, I just wanted to highlight how emotionally clever he is. Moral qualities are another issue entirely!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on November 02, 2018, 10:40:32 pm
He is about as empathetic as a block of concrete. Anyone is taken in by his pretence must be seriously emotionally challenged but as that appears to be half of the most powerful nation in the world.
I think we might be in the shit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 05, 2018, 05:06:51 pm
It's nothing new is it. Some people have extremely high empathy and some have extremely low empathy while most are somewhere in the middle of the bell curve. Society reflects that and there are suitable places and roles for nearly all types. It isn't a requirement to have high empathy to be a good, moral. loving and successful person.


Empathy Quotient
Systemizing Quotient
Aspergers Quotient

You should take those three Habrich. Bet you're low on empathy and high on systemizing..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on November 05, 2018, 06:18:01 pm
It's nothing new is it. Some people have extremely high empathy and some have extremely low empathy while most are somewhere in the middle of the bell curve.

How is empathy measured and has anyone any compelling evidence that it’s normally distributed?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: duncan on November 05, 2018, 06:44:58 pm
There is a thriving academic industry in Empathy. The EQ is one of the earliest and most popular measures. It was developed by Simon Baron-Cohen (brother of...) and colleagues but is but one of many similar scales.

Testing psychometric properties, including normality of distribution in a “typical” population, is considered good practice before releasing your new measure into the wild. Most researchers also check the normality of their data before embarking on any more detailed analysis.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 05, 2018, 07:08:13 pm
There is a thriving academic industry in Empathy. The EQ is one of the earliest and most popular measures. It was developed by Simon Baron-Cohen (brother of...) and colleagues but is but one of many similar scales.

Testing psychometric properties, including normality of distribution in a “typical” population, is considered good practice before releasing your new measure into the wild. Most researchers also check the normality of their data before embarking on any more detailed analysis.

Good job they didn’t conduct their research in this forum, really.

Boiled Onions!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 05, 2018, 10:58:01 pm
Well, here go. In some ways this feels as important as 2016. Now there are no excuses. We know he's incompetent, we know he's confused, out of his depth, and desperately insecure and narcissistic. We know he's a racist running a racist administration. We know the GOP has been almost completely captured by nativism and white supremacy. There's no claiming you didn't know what he was like or what was coming. So if you vote Republican now you embrace all they stand for. Let's see how many in this country are willing to do that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on November 06, 2018, 07:56:35 am
Fingers crossed for a good set of results Andy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 06, 2018, 09:48:12 am
Going to be interesting for sure..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on November 06, 2018, 09:38:24 pm
What are the implications of the Dems gain control of the Congress but not the Senate? Does this mean they can veto all legislation or can the Senate set their own laws without Congress?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 06, 2018, 10:49:38 pm
What are the implications of the Dems gain control of the Congress but not the Senate? Does this mean they can veto all legislation or can the Senate set their own laws without Congress?

I'm not sure on that, though it undoubtedly makes legislating harder for the GOP. What it does mean is that the Democrats can launch official investigations with subpoena powers etc.

I just spent three hours canvassing a polling station in a rural part of the state, a very Trumpy area. Voting was heavy, worryingly so - the Trump base might well be as motivated as the Democrats. We progressives think the stakes could not be higher, but they actually feel just the same, that socialist/immigrant hordes are coming for them.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 06, 2018, 11:22:27 pm
the Trump base might well be as motivated as the Democrats. We progressives think the stakes could not be higher, but they actually feel just the same, that socialist/immigrant hordes are coming for them.

Fingers crossed for you. It has come to something when the potus repeatedly lies openly and appears to have not a shred of contrition or humanity. At least Nixon tried to cover up. I also worry about how effective Trump's cynical appeals to the baser instincts of his supporters have been.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 07, 2018, 01:07:49 am
Yes, I'm relatively confident about the House, especially as we're now seeing some numbers.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 07, 2018, 01:27:10 am
Confidence declining rapidly. Its always been thin, in reality.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 07, 2018, 01:45:56 am
Actually, we could well be completely fucked.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 07, 2018, 03:22:43 am
Yes, swinging back on the house  and a handful of midwest governorships.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 07, 2018, 07:25:10 am
Woke up to the mixed news..... after going to bed with lots of hope.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 07, 2018, 08:18:17 am
It looks decidedly better now than it did at 02:30.

Like us, a very divided nation. All those racists that were hiding their light...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 07, 2018, 08:35:47 am
Seems the polls were right this time. The expected Democrat House and Republican Senate gains are close to predictions.

This interview, linked to Martin Lewis's new book on the subject, discusses  the worrying effect of Trump on government departmental functions.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/sep/22/michael-lewis-trump-gambling-america

The new house majority will lead to better investigation of this and the other issues around Trump's bad behaviour that is much more publicised. As Nancy Pelosi said, checks and balances will be back in place.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 07, 2018, 08:41:20 am
This will play into Trumps hands.

He now has a Congress he can blame for every failure or lack of progress.
Meanwhile, the PoTUS, The Senate and the SoCUS will be chipping away the constitution, just enough to secure minority rule for the foreseeable.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 07, 2018, 09:30:08 am
Just a reminder of how flawed and “open to interpretation” the constitution is.
It isn’t necessary for the GOP to change the constitution, to reach their White supremacy goals; only pervert the interpretation, via SoCUS.
Beware all you who are not “white” people:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagat_Singh_Thind (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagat_Singh_Thind)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 07, 2018, 09:55:56 am
This will play into Trumps hands.

He now has a Congress he can blame for every failure or lack of progress.
Meanwhile, the PoTUS, The Senate and the SoCUS will be chipping away the constitution, just enough to secure minority rule for the foreseeable.

I'm optimistic as I'm amazed Trump has lasted as long as he has. His 'half life' in terms of spontaneous random self destructiveness must be much less than a full term so arguably he has already been lucky but it could see the end of him at any time. On top of that lets see what happens once all these house investigations start (Trumps ego again being his biggest risk but there are many government areas where real problems will be exposed and probably improved) and the fall out of the trade wars and what looks like a probable stock bubble and the ongoing Mueller investigations.  There are also positive signs for democrats  in terms of demographics, and much bigger youth voting numbers (linked to the campaigns around gun controls).  I also can see GOP turning on him if things turn sour in any big way.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 07, 2018, 12:12:27 pm
Still digesting it, including a lot of races that are probably not on the radar in the UK. I'm glad the Dems took the House, obviously, but it is a very mixed picture, and not one that has dramatically increased my optimism.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 07, 2018, 12:30:54 pm
Still digesting it, including a lot of races that are probably not on the radar in the UK. I'm glad the Dems took the House, obviously, but it is a very mixed picture, and not one that has dramatically increased my optimism.

Quite.

But a swift check (and please confirm), taking the House means the Dems now control some serious committees:

Ethics.
Judiciary.
Oversight.
Intelligence.
Ways and Means.
(Need to actually find out what the last one does, precisely...)

So, investigations galore?
GOP subpoenaed to death and political stalemate?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 07, 2018, 12:36:28 pm
Yes, politically (in terms of the make up of Congress) its a marked improvement on total GOP control. But, if we look at voting patterns, I don't think it paints a particularly rosy picture of the state of the nation. A lot of people are only holding even tighter to Trump. This has not made a Trump win in 2020 feel impossible to imagine.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on November 07, 2018, 01:09:47 pm
I've always assumed that Trump will be a two terms president as the economy is fairly rosy and he hasn't betrayed his core constituency. I will not update my prior until strong evidence is given to the contrary
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 07, 2018, 02:44:16 pm
I've always assumed that Trump will be a two terms president as the economy is fairly rosy and he hasn't betrayed his core constituency. I will not update my prior until strong evidence is given to the contrary

Nothing would surprise me now.

Hey! The Good’ole boys just elected a guy who’s been dead three weeks, into office. Nowt wrong with that system...

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/dennis-hof-nevada-assembly_us_5be299fce4b0e84388917409 (https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/dennis-hof-nevada-assembly_us_5be299fce4b0e84388917409)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 07, 2018, 05:37:22 pm
Some comedy gold from the Guardian:

Trump is asked what he’d do if the Democrats try to obtain his tax returns.

He says “people don’t understand tax returns” and his returns are super complicated and processed by top firms and besides summaries he’s submitted (?) are more comprehensive.

Also his company is huge and continuously under audit - the same excuse he was making two years ago: “And it is a very big company, far bigger than you would even understand.”

“Nobody turns over a return when you’re under audit,” Trump says – as if it ever comes up.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Yossarian on November 07, 2018, 06:35:56 pm
I’d love to see a US climbing forum discussing the intricacies of early day motions, turnout comparisons with the last Rochester and Strood by-election, and Keir Starmers haircut...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on November 07, 2018, 06:57:03 pm
Yeah, but do you have a blatantly racist reality-TV star gunning for the prime minister post? If not, there's better entertainment value to be had elsewhere...

And be careful what you wish for. Having suffered ridiculously ill informed articles in international media (not so much in German media though) about the last elections in France and in Sweden...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Yossarian on November 07, 2018, 07:02:47 pm
That was kind of my point...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on November 07, 2018, 08:36:54 pm
Yeah, but do you have a blatantly racist reality-TV star gunning for the prime minister post?


Sort of, Johnson owes his early fame to his Have I Got News for You appearances. Not quite reality TV but close
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Yossarian on November 07, 2018, 08:59:58 pm
I’ve had arguments with a number of Johnson fans who basically love him because of that exact thing. It’s amazing that a programme that originated as anti-establishment satire unwittingly unleashed / made palatable not just him but also Farage. And Rod Liddle too, to a certain extent. It gave them a platform to perfect their act without being held to account.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on November 07, 2018, 09:17:24 pm
Sessions fired. Rosenstein on his way to the WH.  Trump visibly rattled and furious during the presser earlier.  I hope Bob M has indictments and subpeonas already filed...

This is madness!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 07, 2018, 09:23:05 pm
I’ve had arguments with a number of Johnson fans who basically love him because of that exact thing. It’s amazing that a programme that originated as anti-establishment satire unwittingly unleashed / made palatable not just him but also Farage. And Rod Liddle too, to a certain extent. It gave them a platform to perfect their act without being held to account.

I don’t think it was “unwitting” in the least. Both of those arses have been relentlessly promoted by the BBC for almost a decade.

.......

I see Trump has accelerated his coup...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on November 07, 2018, 09:31:31 pm
Yeah, but do you have a blatantly racist reality-TV star gunning for the prime minister post?


Sort of, Johnson owes his early fame to his Have I Got News for You appearances. Not quite reality TV but close

That's me told. So I should start to pay attention then?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Yossarian on November 07, 2018, 09:46:04 pm
I’ve had arguments with a number of Johnson fans who basically love him because of that exact thing. It’s amazing that a programme that originated as anti-establishment satire unwittingly unleashed / made palatable not just him but also Farage. And Rod Liddle too, to a certain extent. It gave them a platform to perfect their act without being held to account.

I don’t think it was “unwitting” in the least. Both of those arses have been relentlessly promoted by the BBC for almost a decade.

.......

I see Trump has accelerated his coup...

In between coke-fuelled binges at the Groucho and dealing with Angus Deayton’s prediliction for prostitutes, I’m sure those television comedy producers had loads of time to orchestrate a global popular nationalist conspiracy...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 07, 2018, 10:13:55 pm
I’ve had arguments with a number of Johnson fans who basically love him because of that exact thing. It’s amazing that a programme that originated as anti-establishment satire unwittingly unleashed / made palatable not just him but also Farage. And Rod Liddle too, to a certain extent. It gave them a platform to perfect their act without being held to account.

I don’t think it was “unwitting” in the least. Both of those arses have been relentlessly promoted by the BBC for almost a decade.

.......

I see Trump has accelerated his coup...

In between coke-fuelled binges at the Groucho and dealing with Angus Deayton’s prediliction for prostitutes, I’m sure those television comedy producers had loads of time to orchestrate a global popular nationalist conspiracy...

So....

You actually think comedy is the BBC’s sole programming endeavour and neither of the above mentioned fuck nuggets have been featured on any, I don’t know, “Current affairs” type programs?

And you think I said anything about “orchestrating a global nationalist conspiracy”?

Are you getting enough roughage and B12 in your diet?

Edit:
Having a bad day and feeling a little too prickly.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 08, 2018, 05:06:37 pm
Talking of editing...

FFS:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jim-acosta-trump-cnn-press-conference-pass-white-house-infowars-sarah-sanders-a8623441.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jim-acosta-trump-cnn-press-conference-pass-white-house-infowars-sarah-sanders-a8623441.html)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: AMorris on November 09, 2018, 12:59:57 pm
Talking of editing...

FFS:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jim-acosta-trump-cnn-press-conference-pass-white-house-infowars-sarah-sanders-a8623441.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jim-acosta-trump-cnn-press-conference-pass-white-house-infowars-sarah-sanders-a8623441.html)

Christ.

The irony of Jim Acosta having his hard pass revoked for brushing the arm of a female intern trying to snatch his microphone away, whilst questioning a man who is known to be sexually aggressive towards women.

I am feeling anxious, where did I put my soma?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 09, 2018, 01:13:35 pm
Apropos the gun debate, California proved again how hard it is to defend against these attacks. Obviously, Trump didn't cause this problem (even if several extremely bad shootings have taken place so far in the less than two years of his presidency) but he's shown his response is quite as facile and weak as any other politician's.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2018, 01:51:34 pm
Apropos the gun debate, California proved again how hard it is to defend against these attacks. Obviously, Trump didn't cause this problem (even if several extremely bad shootings have taken place so far in the less than two years of his presidency) but he's shown his response is quite as facile and weak as any other politician's.

Hmmm...

As I write this, there’s a breaking news story about an Active Shooter in a school in NC.

Interesting to see the difference in response in Australia overnight, where the attacker was not carrying a fire arm. I watched the vid of several officers trying very hard to bring him down with batons and non-leathal methods, for around ten minutes; before the armed response guys dropped him.
They couldn’t  stop him without bullets. Thankfully, the gas cylinders in the car didn’t unwrap...

The Thousand Oaks incident, I would suggest, only came to an end when it did; because the shooter knew he now had determined, trained, responders to deal with. His level of training would have meant nothing else except running out of ammo or bad luck, would have stopped him.

It’s not the responders or the guards that are the problem, it’s the prevalence of guns in that society. As I said earlier, unless they are willing to (pretty much) engage in Civil War, there’s no way to put that genie back in the bottle.
So, guards it is.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 09, 2018, 02:13:35 pm
It’s not the responders or the guards that are the problem, it’s the prevalence of guns in that society. As I said earlier, unless they are willing to (pretty much) engage in Civil War, there’s no way to put that genie back in the bottle.
So, guards it is.

Absolutely, its the prevalence of guns that is the problem. I just think it is too pessimistic to argue that the only response is a continuing escalation of that prevalence (which is the current reality) and the inevitable escalation of the resulting carnage. AR-15 style weapons were banned before and they can be again, for example (Calif is extremely unusual in that the shooter used a handgun).

More guns is a counsel of despair.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 09, 2018, 04:08:17 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/voters-sent-a-message-in-the-midterms-enough-is-enough-on-guns/2018/11/08/0053f3be-e2d7-11e8-ab2c-b31dcd53ca6b_story.html?utm_term=.ddc28db9328b
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 09, 2018, 05:06:00 pm
It’s not the responders or the guards that are the problem, it’s the prevalence of guns in that society. As I said earlier, unless they are willing to (pretty much) engage in Civil War, there’s no way to put that genie back in the bottle.
So, guards it is.

Absolutely, its the prevalence of guns that is the problem. I just think it is too pessimistic to argue that the only response is a continuing escalation of that prevalence....

More guns is a counsel of despair.

The problem is whether more guns makes you safer. There could be many specific instances where armed guards make for a less deadly outcome. But that isn’t the question. Rather, would the ubiquity of armed personnel in public areas result in lower loss of life than now?

Consider the sad events of the last few weeks. Should schools now be guarded by armed personnel? Churches? Shopping malls? Yoga studios?

If yoga studios need armed guards then surely every public venue needs armed guards? And if everywhere needs guarding you are recommending a massive militarisation of public space.

Will the US be safer as a result?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on November 09, 2018, 07:03:37 pm
on the gun issue -
We got to this point by people saying we need better access to guns to protect against wackos with guns.  So now there are more people with guns overall, leading to a higher number of wackos with guns (it's just a percent question isn't it) and now the answer again is more guns.  Just wait until the armed guard at the school goes postal and starts shooting kids.  Then what?  tanks?

The #1 problem we have is how easy it is to get and own guns and the lack of responsibility in connection with gun ownership.  Increase the registration and ownership requirements (maybe like cars), increase the training required, increase the background checks, and increase the penalties to lack of personal control over the firearm.  If someone takes your gun and uses it to kill someone, you can be held criminally liable for lack of control (not for murder).  This will lead to fingerprint safeties (the technology exists), and such.  Everyone is right that the guns are out there, but to think that more guns are the answer is to repeat history and therefore I call you a fool and/or moron. 

On the vote republican=trump supporter issue - Voting republican in the Western USA, particularly in local, governor, and senate races is not really a trump issue.  It is a philosophical issue, but moral turpitude isn't generally being rewarded.  Rather than a referendum favoring trump, this was more of a standard question of philosophy.  A democrat won the senate seat in Montana - A MASSIVELY RED state, because his opponent was morally corrupt.   I think there is a big difference when you get to the midwest and south.   I think in the south this is very much a trump issue.  There is still a massive amount of residual and continuing racism, both personal and structural, that is becoming more and more apparent. 

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 10, 2018, 07:51:28 am
US democracy is in crisis. But Trump is only the symptom

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/09/us-democracy-trump-white-rural-minority-majority?

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 10, 2018, 09:32:09 am
Norm Ornstein, a resident scholar at the AEI, said in Thursday’s panel discussion: “If you look at the House votes and project that on to a presidential election next time, Donald Trump could lose the popular vote by eight or nine million and still win the electoral college. Popular will is declining as a force in American politics. By 2040, 70% of Americans will live in 15 states, which means that 30% of Americans will elect 70 of the 100 senators.”

from: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/10/donald-trump-midterm-elections-2020-democrats-republicans

30% which is  disproportionately conservative and disapproving of gun regulation.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 10, 2018, 10:11:22 am
Our electoral system has many ‘issues’ (imho) but at least the size of constituencies is loosely scaled to population size...

Though you could argue that skews things towards cities.

Some interesting commentaries I’ve read this week comparing it to confederate/union splits....

Anyway. One thing I’m glad of with Trump is that he usually takes the weekends off - so we get a small break from his insanity... (relatively)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 10, 2018, 10:35:37 am


Though you could argue that skews things towards cities.

Ummm... Good?

A democracy is supposed to represent the majority of the people, not the square acreage they occupy.
(Even if I personally think the franchise should be earned, not automatic. Never been a great fan of “the people”. “The People” give you agues like “X Factor”, “The Kardashians” and “Tommeh”).

(Oh, and “Dance Moms”.... That is possibly the nadir of human cultural evolution. A harbinger of the end times, even more ominous than Trump attending his next press briefing, naked and clutching a scale figurine of Cthulu).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 10, 2018, 11:11:05 am
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/09/malibu-wildfire-caitlyn-jenner-lady-gaga-celebrities-evacuated
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 10, 2018, 12:19:35 pm


Though you could argue that skews things towards cities.

Ummm... Good?


I think it’s fairer on balance - but the rural/urban argument is more nuanced than just population.

Rural areas typically suffer from poorer facilities/spending/whogivesafuckaboutthem etc.. per head because they are more spread out. Less economic for services etc... not coming down on either side - just saying.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 10, 2018, 02:50:07 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/10/nancy-pelosi-donald-trump-whitaker-acting-attorney-general-constitution
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 10, 2018, 05:46:40 pm
They just keep coming.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/10/trump-midterm-recount-election-rigging-arizona-georgia-florida
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on November 10, 2018, 06:30:41 pm
Paging Fiend https://thehardtimes.net/harddrive/dd-party-member-with-3-charisma-keeps-trying-to-fucking-roll-deception/ (https://thehardtimes.net/harddrive/dd-party-member-with-3-charisma-keeps-trying-to-fucking-roll-deception/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 10, 2018, 06:42:07 pm
😂
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 10, 2018, 11:21:08 pm


Though you could argue that skews things towards cities.

Ummm... Good?


I think it’s fairer on balance - but the rural/urban argument is more nuanced than just population.

Rural areas typically suffer from poorer facilities/spending/whogivesafuckaboutthem etc.. per head because they are more spread out. Less economic for services etc... not coming down on either side - just saying.

Whatever the niceties the fact that a vote in Wyoming is effectively 67 times more powerful than a Californian vote cannot be couched as a legitimate democracy
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 11, 2018, 11:25:27 am
Its the US ... its gun rated equality. California clearly needs more gang members not more people to improve the ratio.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 13, 2018, 01:30:15 am
Armed black security guard apprehends shooting suspect. Police arrive and shoot black security dead. More guns really solved that problem:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/jemel-roberson-security-guard-killed-illinois.html?fbclid=IwAR3XhRVOsSdtxPJ4UDlcZ2Q-ebZYmhPJ5JpWGTOTk8O7IF9xecP9eUuWxTE
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 14, 2018, 10:29:57 pm
(https://image.ibb.co/jocizf/A43-A2-C62-023-C-4-FDB-98-E8-B861-E49604-FC.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 20, 2018, 08:39:48 am
Trump ready to begin drawdown of troops at US-Mexico border

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/19/trump-ready-to-begin-drawdown-of-troops-at-us-mexico-border?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

This is really worrying. Trump is employing every classic technique of an autocratic regime to erode democracy. Also see the Jim Acosta incident.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 20, 2018, 01:56:16 pm
Yes, it was just a stunt, as was obvious all along.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 20, 2018, 02:48:39 pm
Yes, it was just a stunt, as was obvious all along.

What was that movie, where they invented a war to distract from a presidential scandal? Hoffman was the PR guru, I think.
(I remember someone claining that movie was the genesis of the whole “Crisis actor” mythology).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 20, 2018, 02:54:07 pm
Wag the Dog
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 20, 2018, 03:32:16 pm
Yes, it was just a stunt, as was obvious all along.

What was that movie, where they invented a war to distract from a presidential scandal? Hoffman was the PR guru, I think.
(I remember someone claining that movie was the genesis of the whole “Crisis actor” mythology).

And house of cards season 5
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 20, 2018, 03:42:18 pm
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 20, 2018, 04:56:55 pm
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

This was the point I was trying to make to Will, on the other thread. The Liberal penchant for trying to see the other point of view, that leads to a false equivalency. Climate science, Flat earth, vaccines, the “Alt Right”, Brexit....  :ang:

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 25, 2018, 10:23:10 am
A gold-dust quote from a Gary Young article in the Guardian the other day:

Or as George Clooney put it about Trump: “I grew up in Kentucky. I sold insurance door to door. I sold ladies’ shoes. I worked at an all-night liquor store. I would buy suits that were too big and too long and cut the bottom of the pants off to make ties so I’d have a tie to go on job interviews. The idea that I’m somehow the ‘Hollywood elite’ and this guy who takes a shit in a gold toilet is somehow the man of the people is laughable.”
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on December 01, 2018, 10:11:20 am
"I don't like him. I don't know much about him, but I know he's a blowhard. And I'm not too excited about him being a leader,"  George Bush Sr
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 01, 2018, 12:09:30 pm
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qzt7JvsYIuI (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qzt7JvsYIuI)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 01, 2018, 10:59:17 pm
If Trump goes to prison, will it be his first, ever, complete sentence?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on December 01, 2018, 11:25:43 pm
If Trump goes to prison, will it be his first, ever, complete sentence?

 :lol: is that your gag or was that pinched? If someone could just steal his phone to stop him posting on Twitter it'd be a start. If Trump went to prison it'd be satisfying enough for me to almost not mind about Brexit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 01, 2018, 11:38:11 pm
If someone could just steal his phone to stop him posting on Twitter it'd be a start.

We're relying on his Twitter feed for the self-incrimination.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 02, 2018, 12:13:19 am
If Trump goes to prison, will it be his first, ever, complete sentence?

 :lol: is that your gag or was that pinched? If someone could just steal his phone to stop him posting on Twitter it'd be a start. If Trump went to prison it'd be satisfying enough for me to almost not mind about Brexit.

Definitely nicked. Unfortunately, I read it in passing and couldn’t find the tweet when I scrolled back. Still, too good to not share.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: WilliCrater on December 02, 2018, 04:49:58 am
If Trump goes to prison, will it be his first, ever, complete sentence?

Not if he gets parole (or pardoned).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 07, 2018, 08:38:22 am
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/12/trump-white-house-has-no-plan-counter-mueller-report/577417/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/12/trump-white-house-has-no-plan-counter-mueller-report/577417/)

 :popcorn:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mugabe251 on December 07, 2018, 02:08:21 pm
"I don't like him. I don't know much about him, but I know he's a blowhard. And I'm not too excited about him being a leader,"  George Bush Sr

Asking this just out of curiosity, but why does something that George Bush Sr says carry any weight to you? It's just a phenomenon that's quite funny, how American democrats and liberal-minded British people are happy to dogpile onto Trump alongside powerful Republicans (namely Bush Jr and Sr) who were responsible for some quite nasty goings-on in Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan that killed a good few hundred thousand people
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 07, 2018, 03:06:27 pm
"I don't like him. I don't know much about him, but I know he's a blowhard. And I'm not too excited about him being a leader,"  George Bush Sr

Asking this just out of curiosity, but why does something that George Bush Sr says carry any weight to you? It's just a phenomenon that's quite funny, how American democrats and liberal-minded British people are happy to dogpile onto Trump alongside powerful Republicans (namely Bush Jr and Sr) who were responsible for some quite nasty goings-on in Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan that killed a good few hundred thousand people

Were they?

B Jnr wasn’t the sharpest tool and certainly played into the hands of the hawks, lusting for blood after that little incident in 2001.
But, remind me, what did Bush Snr do in Kuwait? Iraq? Afgan?

I mean, I saw the results of some unpleasant crap, carried out by the Iraqis, in Kuwait, during their occupation of it and heard some awful witness accounts from others that arrived before I did (Fighting was done, a few days earlier, when I got there).
During Desert Shield, I was in Turkey, counting heads, as the Kurdish refugees came in. I didn’t speak to any directly, but drank copiously with some of the Red Crecent guys and listened to their tales, secondhand. (Bearing in mind, drinking was Haram for most of those guys, but the shit they heard/dealt with was enough to waive that Surah for a while).

You often seem to present a very one dimensional view of the world. Granted I do too, sometimes, but thats usually just because I’m debating Pete (or someone) and don’t want to admit I half agree with him.

Your going to say something about it all “not being about the people” but all about the “Oil” or “Business interests” aren’t you?

Duh!

War and violence suck. Even bumping up against the edges, as I did, is deeply scaring and sickening, with knobs on.

But, everyone else (because Mr Mugabe won’t), close your eyes and, for a few moments, imagine the oil stops flowing...

Did you see it?

Almost every aspect of our lives ground to a halt.

Our societies couldn’t cope, they’d collapse.

We’re like a junky, without even the prospect of surviving cold turkey, more like a Vampire without blood.



PS: I don’t for one second, think this is a “good” thing. If we can’t end our fossil fuel dependence pronto, we’re dead anyway.


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on December 08, 2018, 01:57:15 am
A big day today..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 08, 2018, 09:02:03 am
A big day today..

Odd, isn’t it. It’s all across the US media, but no menton over here.

Still, a big difference between “could be charged” and “has been charged”.

The only other thing I wonder about, is if this has been dripped out now, does that mean Mueller has something much bigger coming or Xmas?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on December 08, 2018, 10:17:06 am
Mueller seems very assiduous about how information is released - so I’m half expecting something we had no idea about to come out in the big reveal.

Maybe this is a ‘let trumps team prepare for this’ ruse whilst keeping something else back.

There’s probably a load about his past tax payments/deals and the US has some pretty draconian racketeering rules iirc
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 08, 2018, 01:23:34 pm
A big day today..

Indeed, and not the only one recently (see Flynn filing last week too). The most concrete thing from yesterday is that prosecutors fully believe Cohen's claim that he paid off Stormy Daniels at Trump's direction and in order to influence the election: they are saying that Trump did violate campaign finance laws. He won't be indicted for that however. More significant but as yet less concrete are the Russia aspects, which Mueller is beginning to sketch. However, I'm sure he knows much more than he has yet revealed. He's planning a very canny game.

In some ways this all feels frustratingly extraneous. He's been in blatant violation of the emolument clause since the day he was inaugurated ...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 08, 2018, 01:28:44 pm
"I don't like him. I don't know much about him, but I know he's a blowhard. And I'm not too excited about him being a leader,"  George Bush Sr

Asking this just out of curiosity, but why does something that George Bush Sr says carry any weight to you? It's just a phenomenon that's quite funny, how American democrats and liberal-minded British people are happy to dogpile onto Trump alongside powerful Republicans (namely Bush Jr and Sr) who were responsible for some quite nasty goings-on in Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan that killed a good few hundred thousand people

Were they?

B Jnr wasn’t the sharpest tool and certainly played into the hands of the hawks, lusting for blood after that little incident in 2001.
But, remind me, what did Bush Snr do in Kuwait? Iraq? Afgan?

I mean, I saw the results of some unpleasant crap, carried out by the Iraqis, in Kuwait, during their occupation of it and heard some awful witness accounts from others that arrived before I did (Fighting was done, a few days earlier, when I got there).
During Desert Shield, I was in Turkey, counting heads, as the Kurdish refugees came in. I didn’t speak to any directly, but drank copiously with some of the Red Crecent guys and listened to their tales, secondhand. (Bearing in mind, drinking was Haram for most of those guys, but the shit they heard/dealt with was enough to waive that Surah for a while).

You often seem to present a very one dimensional view of the world. Granted I do too, sometimes, but thats usually just because I’m debating Pete (or someone) and don’t want to admit I half agree with him.

Your going to say something about it all “not being about the people” but all about the “Oil” or “Business interests” aren’t you?

Duh!

War and violence suck. Even bumping up against the edges, as I did, is deeply scaring and sickening, with knobs on.

But, everyone else (because Mr Mugabe won’t), close your eyes and, for a few moments, imagine the oil stops flowing...

Did you see it?

Almost every aspect of our lives ground to a halt.

Our societies couldn’t cope, they’d collapse.

We’re like a junky, without even the prospect of surviving cold turkey, more like a Vampire without blood.



PS: I don’t for one second, think this is a “good” thing. If we can’t end our fossil fuel dependence pronto, we’re dead anyway.

Almost to a person the American liberals I know were disgusted by the sanctification of H W over the last couple of weeks, and we don't need to turn to Kuwait to find reasons to criticize him. For example he is reviled in the LGBQT communities for his action/inaction during the AIDS crisis.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 08, 2018, 08:34:05 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/08/congress-will-have-start-impeachment-process-after-cohen-filings-former-nixon-counsel-says/?utm_term=.7e0c5623a79b (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/08/congress-will-have-start-impeachment-process-after-cohen-filings-former-nixon-counsel-says/?utm_term=.7e0c5623a79b)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 09, 2018, 08:05:01 pm
https://www.newsweek.com/lot-republicans-think-trump-wont-finish-term-1251056?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=NewsweekFacebookSF (https://www.newsweek.com/lot-republicans-think-trump-wont-finish-term-1251056?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=NewsweekFacebookSF)

 :whistle:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on December 12, 2018, 08:57:36 am
Proud to shut down government !!??


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/11/trump-oval-office-meeting-pelosi-schumer-shut-down-government
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on December 12, 2018, 01:22:02 pm
None of the participants of that meeting come out of the footage looking better....

Except Pence. Who possibly is a waxwork.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on December 13, 2018, 08:56:41 pm
This Maria Butina thing seems significant. I don't recall a Russain who has been overtly involved in trying to influnce the election getting this close to the Trumps (unless you count Putin I suppose!). Also strange she has fessed up to so much, surely that wouldn't have happened unless her handlers back home told her it was ok to do so? I'm hoping it means the Russians have decided to pull the plug on Trump but I don't think we'd be that lucky.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 13, 2018, 09:07:14 pm
This Maria Butina thing seems significant. I don't recall a Russain who has been overtly involved in trying to influnce the election getting this close to the Trumps (unless you count Putin I suppose!). Also strange she has fessed up to so much, surely that wouldn't have happened unless her handlers back home told her it was ok to do so? I'm hoping it means the Russians have decided to pull the plug on Trump but I don't think we'd be that lucky.

There’s probably every bit as much capital in destabilising the US, as controlling Trump (who actually seems to be achieving little).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on December 13, 2018, 09:50:15 pm
Yup it’s win win for Russia. Whatever their level of actual involvement.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on December 13, 2018, 11:16:01 pm
I get that but why now? If they really have something on him they could put the hurt on him anytime they wanted with the same divisive results, so why not let him carry on sowing chaos for a bit longer. He might not be able to lift sanctions but he is making NATO weaker, probably putting a break on the Chinese economy and leaving the Russians to do as they please in Syria so still useful 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on December 14, 2018, 06:36:21 pm
Lifted from the Washington Post comments section.
"Is this the fake news? Or Trump double-talk fantasy?
Caught in a "witch hunt", no escape from reality
Open your eyes, look up to the skies and see
It’s just Bob Mueller, he needs no sympathy
Because he’s a tough cop, tough bro, no reality TV show
Any way Cohen blows doesn't really matter to me, to me

Ivanka.... we let the Saudi prince kill a man!
Put a rope around his neck, garroted, bone-saw, now he's dead.
Melania, our Whitehouse had just begun
But now I've gone and thrown it all away!
Jared, ooh, didn't mean to make you cry,
If I'm not back again this time tomorrow
Sell everything & Jr. Don, as if nothing really matters

Too late, my time has come
"Impeach" sends shivers down my spine, I'm hating all the time
Goodbye, fellow accessories,
I've got to go Gotta leave you all behind and face the Mueller
Ivanka, ooh, (Any way collusion blows)
I don't wanna be indicted
I sometimes wish I'd never even run at all!

Oh can't carry on, have to shut it down!
Government doesn't matter, Nothing does at all
Nothing really matters, but meeeee...."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 18, 2018, 05:59:12 pm
Ummmm...
Sounds like the Judge very nearly said “Treason”:

https://wapo.st/2R9lL2S (https://wapo.st/2R9lL2S)

And lovely news about the Strumpet’s charity. Great to see them admit to the wrong doing...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: joel182 on December 18, 2018, 06:29:23 pm
Ummmm...
Sounds like the Judge very nearly said “Treason”:

https://wapo.st/2R9lL2S (https://wapo.st/2R9lL2S)

And lovely news about the Strumpet’s charity. Great to see them admit to the wrong doing...

On the Trump con law podcast (https://trumpconlaw.com/27-treason) they make some convincing arguments about why Trump can't be guilty of treason (because of how treason is defined in the constitution)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on December 18, 2018, 07:04:39 pm
17 concurrent criminal investigations into 45's business, political and personal affairs. 

The Trump charity dissolved with immediate effect after charges of illegality.

Flynn's sentencing postponed + being accused of Treason (Wrongly as you can only commit treason with an enemy who is legally at war with the US) by the judge.

Roger Stone settling out of court in a defamation case.

Cohen and David Pecker both collaborating with the FBI and the SDNY.

Butina and the NRA.

All this coupled with the Deutsche Bank raids and European mafia roll-up a couple of weeks back.

Tick Tock....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 18, 2018, 07:38:55 pm
Ummmm...
Sounds like the Judge very nearly said “Treason”:

https://wapo.st/2R9lL2S (https://wapo.st/2R9lL2S)

And lovely news about the Strumpet’s charity. Great to see them admit to the wrong doing...

On the Trump con law podcast (https://trumpconlaw.com/27-treason) they make some convincing arguments about why Trump can't be guilty of treason (because of how treason is defined in the constitution)

Yes, and the Judge knew that, which is why he only “almost” said it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on December 21, 2018, 12:16:59 am
The latest, very worrying, departure:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/20/jim-mattis-defense-secretary-retires-trump
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 21, 2018, 07:48:30 am
Ten minute read.

Forbes, surely, has one of the best intelligence networks in private hands.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2018/12/16/mueller-exposes-putins-hold-over-trump/#1643ca1348f6 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2018/12/16/mueller-exposes-putins-hold-over-trump/#1643ca1348f6)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on December 23, 2018, 10:00:39 am
Absolutely terrifying, the safety of the planet is in the undersized hands of a spoilt old man with the intellect and behavioural traits of a spoilt six-year-old at Christmas. 
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/23/donald-trump-government-shutdown-syria-mattis-mcgurk-yemen

Bell pointed out that under the US command and control system, there is no institutional brake on Trump ordering a nuclear launch.
“The world must also come to grips with the fact that we have placed an inordinate amount of faith in the ability of individual leaders to behave rationally. By choice or miscalculation, President Trump and President Putin could end the world today and there’s little any of us could do to stop them. What’s worse is that’s the way we designed it.”

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 23, 2018, 10:13:40 am
Absolutely terrifying, the safety of the planet is in the undersized hands of a spoilt old man with the intellect and behavioural traits of a spoilt six-year-old at Christmas. 
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/23/donald-trump-government-shutdown-syria-mattis-mcgurk-yemen

Bell pointed out that under the US command and control system, there is no institutional brake on Trump ordering a nuclear launch.
“The world must also come to grips with the fact that we have placed an inordinate amount of faith in the ability of individual leaders to behave rationally. By choice or miscalculation, President Trump and President Putin could end the world today and there’s little any of us could do to stop them. What’s worse is that’s the way we designed it.”


Now, I’d normally comment, but some people reckon I’m too alarmist...





Seriously, we’re fine. It’s not as if Putin is going to order his flunky to do that, is it?

Now would be a good time to start learning Russian.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on December 23, 2018, 11:02:40 am
You're probably at greater risk of dying from a chronic illness associated with the stress of continually being across all the things in the world that could go wrong, than from a nuclear attack..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on December 24, 2018, 12:00:36 pm
You need to read Black Swan... big terrible events being unlikely doesn't mean they can't happen and when you mulitply probability by consequence they become pretty important considerations. The Cuban missle crisis was real and there is no way we should have someone like Trump, especially as he gradully boots out the remaining adults from his close advisors, in charge of the US arsenal.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Swan:_The_Impact_of_the_Highly_Improbable

His effects on the markets have led directly to an emrgency treasury intervention being reported today.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/dec/24/us-markets-mnuchin-to-convene-crisis-team-amid-white-house-chaos
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 24, 2018, 12:42:04 pm
Isn’t there a story about a relatively junior Soviet officer, who essentially saved the world by not launching a retaliatory strike to an American first strike, that all their equipment was telling them was inbound? He waited to see if the first detonation actually happened, instead of following protocol. I belive I and most of you, were about four minutes from not existing any longer?
I’ll google it.
Anyway, did anyone read this, last summer? Because, it might be a more likely scenario than you realise, because the insults thrown at Trump, are actually just accurate descriptions of him and his cronies:

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/sep/27/this-guy-doesnt-know-anything-the-inside-story-of-trumps-shambolic-transition-team?CMP=fb_gu (https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/sep/27/this-guy-doesnt-know-anything-the-inside-story-of-trumps-shambolic-transition-team?CMP=fb_gu)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on December 24, 2018, 12:48:43 pm
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Arkhipov

Arkhipov, there’s a Converge song called Arkhipov Calm
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Wil on December 24, 2018, 12:55:35 pm
Radiolab (https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/nukes) made an interesting story about what happened to an Air Force Major who queried what would happen if he received the order from the president to fire nukes. What if he thought the president want in his right mind, or drunk? It turns out there isn't really a check and balance on it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 24, 2018, 01:02:47 pm
Yep.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Petrov (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Petrov)

Now imagine Trump in a similar position. How measured and rational is he likely to be?

We really are sailing on a ship of fools and he really holds the reigns. Someone further, up the thread, thought it was funny that we should be avidly discussing Trump and how odd it would be if some Yank climbing forum was discussing UK politics. Well, simply put, the UK could go bankrupt, fail as a state, and the world would shrug and trundle on. No one person has the capacity to order our Nuclear forces to launch, it’s actually quite likely that individual commanders would question any order recieved, particularly in a first strike scenario.
This is certainly not the case under the US system.

Still, as Pete says, it’s unlikely. However, plenty of other aspects of this will have negative connotations for us, as a nation.
If the UK takes a dump on the world’s lawn, it’s like an aged Bull dog letting go; if the US drops one, it’s a thousand strong herd of incontinent Bison tsunami.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 24, 2018, 01:25:15 pm
So...

While I was typing, Teestub even found another single person, who stopped Armageddon...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on December 24, 2018, 04:38:59 pm
Merry Xmas Matt. Getting to read about two people who most probably saved the world  is much nicer than market crashes partly caused by presidential idiocy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 24, 2018, 06:20:16 pm
What I'm worried about is the erosion of democracy, the damage to institutions and the degradation of civil society.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on December 24, 2018, 07:58:18 pm
You need to read Black Swan... big terrible events being unlikely doesn't mean they can't happen and when you mulitply probability by consequence they become pretty important considerations.

I've read it.

Big terrible events are pretty important considerations? For who?! They might be an important consideration for a tiny number of people directly involved or who are genuinely able to influence events - that isn't anybody here. I'd argue events like that become considerations once they've happened.
I don't believe you or OMM go about your daily lives with a list of potential global terrible events taking up mental capacity as pretty important considerations. What could be gained from that? A (false) feeling of being in control or being important maybe. Actually maybe you do.. (joke, sort of).
I'm happy to mentally file under 'events I have zero control over and which are very unlikely; if they happen either I'll deal with or die/suffer hardship'.

What I'm worried about is the erosion of democracy, the damage to institutions and the degradation of civil society.

That's something I agree is worthwhile being concerned about.

Merry xmas :)

 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 28, 2018, 10:49:12 am
An interesting piece, more a general insight into extremist ideology and populism at large, really.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/following-trump-off-cliff-psychological-analysis-reveals-14-key-traits-explain-presidents-die-hard-supporters/ (https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/following-trump-off-cliff-psychological-analysis-reveals-14-key-traits-explain-presidents-die-hard-supporters/)

I guess I recognise some of those things in my own personality, which isn’t quite as Pete perceives it, certainly a greater threat awareness than is normal.
I think it has kept me alive in many instances and put me in leadership positions from an early age; where my superiors recognised it as “situational awareness”.

I certainly started out as a very conservative political personality, with a decidedly black and white view of the world, but somewhere in my military time that morphed into a yearning for justice and then, with experience, it’s shifted to “fairness”...

Oh, and big terrible events, too big to worry about, etc etc. Interesting point, made by someone who is every bit as reliable a contributor to this and similar threads, as myself; with a well informed opinion to share.

Almost as if he’d spent time, I don’t know, um... worrying about it?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 05, 2019, 09:30:25 am
An interesting perspective, perhaps it should be in the Brexit thread but I liked the line in reference to Corbyn's 'jobs first Brexit' tripe, saying that you don't hear Nancy Pelosi advocating a 'migrants first wall'

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/04/democrats-battling-trump-brexit-labour
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on January 16, 2019, 08:02:37 am
 The administration effect on Science.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/16/trumps-war-on-science-how-the-us-is-putting-politics-above-evidence
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 16, 2019, 12:32:49 pm
I should try and write something really, but I don't even know where to begin.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 16, 2019, 01:32:20 pm
I should try and write something really, but I don't even know where to begin.

Relax, have a Hamberder, and try again...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 25, 2019, 12:50:04 pm
Nothing like a nice fresh indictment to kick the weekend off.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on January 25, 2019, 02:15:15 pm
Yeah, might not be Trump's best idea to stop paying the FBI, it's only going to annoy them!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on January 25, 2019, 02:52:45 pm
Roger Stone - glorious!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 25, 2019, 02:56:45 pm
Roger Stone - glorious!

I literally punched the air.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 25, 2019, 10:27:21 pm
Oh, double joy! Utter humiliation over the wall/shutdown to end the day.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 25, 2019, 10:45:23 pm
And, the “High ranking Trump campaign official” mentioned in the indictment has since been named a Bannon.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 26, 2019, 07:51:37 am
A tweet from Robert Reich:

Conversation
Robert Reich
Robert Reich
@RBReich
The Art of the Shutdown:
1) Generate crisis at the border, deploying troops.
2) Back out of a deal, shutting down the govt.
3) Spread lies on national TV, stoking fear.
4) Throw tantrum.
5) Ask for less funding.
6) Get nothing.
7) Declare victory

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 26, 2019, 01:53:58 pm
He lost so heavily yesterday, a complete defeat driven by his ego, hubris, and incompetence. There is nothing he can salvage from it. This, more than Mueller, could be the final nail in his presidency.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 08, 2019, 07:25:57 pm
This, in the end, is aimed at the President. Definitely worth watching and I think I like this woman.
I don’t recall saying that about a politician, before.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/2/8/18216884/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-video-campaign-finance (https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/2/8/18216884/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-video-campaign-finance)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on February 10, 2019, 10:20:04 am
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/matthew-whitakers-five-minutes-are-up/2019/02/08/ffdeb8e6-2bed-11e9-984d-9b8fba003e81_story.html?utm_term=.dbd76ff8275b

An amusing critique of the acting Attorney General and a nice exposition of the kind of people whom Trump is happy to hire to senior administrative positions.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 10, 2019, 06:11:16 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/matthew-whitakers-five-minutes-are-up/2019/02/08/ffdeb8e6-2bed-11e9-984d-9b8fba003e81_story.html?utm_term=.dbd76ff8275b

An amusing critique of the acting Attorney General and a nice exposition of the kind of people whom Trump is happy to hire to senior administrative positions.

Whitaker is a complete joke - how he ever ended up in charge of the DoJ, even temporarily, is completely mind boggling.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on February 10, 2019, 10:49:58 pm
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-s-word-will-scupper-democrats-2020-hopes-wfhfv7kh3

A very convincing argument of why Trump, as things stand, is pretty much guaranteed a second term. Well argued, evidenced, and profoundly depressing.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 10, 2019, 11:01:43 pm
I can't read it (paywalled) but I'm sceptical about Ferguson - that's not to say Trump can't win a second term though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on February 10, 2019, 11:22:10 pm
He basically argues that the young Democrats arguing for things like a pan US high speed rail network and all energy from renewable resources with no nuclear ultimately play into the hands of right wing Republicans who will call socialism, which will not win 2020 for them. He argues that the Democrats can win as liberals but not socialists.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 10, 2019, 11:45:01 pm
I guessed that was the argument; I'm not fully convinced.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Schnell on February 11, 2019, 11:36:41 am
Not that I post very often but the "realism" argument RE Democratic election strategy needs to be challenged. Medicare for All and the Green New Deal are both overwhelmingly popular policies. Second, how did establishment liberalism fare against Trump in 2016? It's a lifeless and technocratic ideology that has no answers to blood and soil nationalism.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 11, 2019, 12:00:32 pm
Not that I post very often but the "realism" argument RE Democratic election strategy needs to be challenged. Medicare for All and the Green New Deal are both overwhelmingly popular policies. Second, how did establishment liberalism fare against Trump in 2016? It's a lifeless and technocratic ideology that has no answers to blood and soil nationalism.

The problem is, winning a popular majority is not going to win the Dems power in 2020.
They won that in 2016.

The Dems cannot succeed unless they win over the rural, evangelical, conservative minority. And the “S” word is the ultimate dog whistle, to those peoples.
As long as the GOP close ranks, contain their distaste for Trump and keep up the “Fake News” and “SOCIALISM!!!” mantra, the Dems will struggle.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 11, 2019, 12:41:33 pm
The Dems cannot succeed unless they win over the rural, evangelical, conservative minority.

Yes they can. In fact they have precisely zero hope of ever winning those folks over. More than that, targeting them would almost certainly guarantee losing as it would mean adopting positions that would alienate others for no gains. What they need to do is not lose states such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin - states that they threw away in 2016 through complacency and neglect. Winning those states means refinding their appeal to working class whites, continuing to peel off the college educated increasingly disgusted by Trump (women especially), and not taking minority votes for granted, as they continue to do.

A story that probably didn't really appear in the UK is that over the last few days people have started receiving their 2018 tax refunds and a lot of people are very, very disappointed. Twitter blew up with the hashtag #GOPtaxscam (I think that's right); lots of disgruntled Trump voters.

Another shutdown is now looking likely, starting on the 15th. The Dems completely won the PR war over the last one and Trump was definitely damaged. If they can pull that off again, great. Even better would be capitulation from him on the wall as that would alienate some in his base.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on February 11, 2019, 06:44:53 pm
He basically argues that the young Democrats arguing for things like a pan US high speed rail network and all energy from renewable resources with no nuclear ultimately play into the hands of right wing Republicans who will call socialism, which will not win 2020 for them. He argues that the Democrats can win as liberals but not socialists.

I wouldn't trust a word offered by this man on the subjecf as he is a past Republican advisor and strongly opposed Obama (nothing like a radical democrat) . Clinton arguably blew the last election simply  by campaigning in the wrong places.

There are many routes to a Democratic President, not the least of which might just be to sit back and watch Trump continue to self destruct. Most white male college educated americans voted for Trump and some of these must be becoming pretty disgusted with his behaviour and frightened of the chances of their natural party of choice, with him at the helm.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niall_Ferguson
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: joel182 on February 11, 2019, 06:54:09 pm
Clinton arguably blew the last election simply  by campaigning in the wrong places.

She won the popular vote by 2%, or around 3 million votes. I try not to remember that too often.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 11, 2019, 07:10:09 pm
Clinton arguably blew the last election simply  by campaigning in the wrong places.

She won the popular vote by 2%, or around 3 million votes. I try not to remember that too often.

And she lost the electoral college by a much smaller margin: literally just 10s of thousands of votes in a handful of key states.  The campaign stupidly assumed somewhere like Pennsylvania would never be in play and largely neglected to campaign here.

I was trying to be polite, but no, I don't trust Ferguson at all.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 12, 2019, 10:47:58 pm
This seems surprisingly encouraging
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/02/12/senate-just-passed-decades-biggest-public-lands-package-heres-whats-it/?utm_term=.02aad846a11a
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 12, 2019, 10:57:43 pm
Yes, this has come out of nowhere: I'd seen no discussion before today.

In other good news, he looks to be completely cornered over the wall/shutdown. I can't see a way out for him that is in any sense a win. It seems the GOP has realised that leaving him in this position is preferable to another shutdown.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 15, 2019, 11:20:04 am
Dear God, so I looks like we're going to be heading into a "national emergency" later this morning. We've been in a national emergency since January 2017.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: cheque on February 15, 2019, 11:28:10 am
I was surprised to learn that the US is currently in 31 other states of national emergency, the oldest being 39 years old (https://www.pri.org/stories/2019-01-11/us-currently-31-other-national-emergencies-heres-what-means).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 16, 2019, 09:34:00 am
So, this is playing well with his base:

https://www.newsweek.com/ann-coulter-donald-trump-scam-stupidest-base-national-emergency-1333033 (https://www.newsweek.com/ann-coulter-donald-trump-scam-stupidest-base-national-emergency-1333033)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 16, 2019, 02:04:48 pm
So, this is playing well with his base:

https://www.newsweek.com/ann-coulter-donald-trump-scam-stupidest-base-national-emergency-1333033 (https://www.newsweek.com/ann-coulter-donald-trump-scam-stupidest-base-national-emergency-1333033)

Its not playing well with Coulter but its probably playing fine with the base.

I watched the announcement yesterday live (something I never really do) and it was fucking insane. Just unhinged.

I have a lot of problems with Nancy Pelosi but she has played an absolute blinder since taking back the house; by yesterday morning he basically had three options and all of them involved losing badly.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: largeruk on February 17, 2019, 01:48:39 pm
This is one of the best summations of Trump's character, as seen from a British sensibility, that I've read. A witty, articulate and brutal assessment.

"If being a twat was a TV show, Trump would be the boxed set."

https://qr.ae/TUKTVu (https://qr.ae/TUKTVu)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on February 17, 2019, 02:57:21 pm
I watched the announcement yesterday live (something I never really do) and it was fucking insane. Just unhinged.

I watched it when I got home from work on Friday.  You're right, it was all of those things and more.  It was weird when he kept pausing as if he was at a rally and was expecting applause.  It's way beyond 25th amendment time.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on February 20, 2019, 09:54:06 pm
Oh my - its worth listening to all of this. A not aired interview between Rutger Bregman (the Dutch historian who gave a speech at Davos pointing out a few hypocracies) and a Fox News Anchor... a systematic take down....

https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1098282209834950657?s=20
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 20, 2019, 10:10:59 pm
Sounds interesting. Any chance of a summary?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 20, 2019, 10:43:21 pm
He points out Carlson's hypocrisy: Carlson flips out and tells him to go fuck himself. Its pretty funny.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 20, 2019, 11:41:43 pm
I see the Cheese Puff is trying to get the NYT on the list of “work place massacres”, after trying set his zombies on the SNL crew, again.

Bizarre, that this is the US, that I’m talking about, and not some tinpot, third world, dictatorship.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on March 01, 2019, 03:18:58 pm
How the craven house Republicans continue to cover for Trump in the face of clear evidence of criminality.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/01/michael-cohen-hearing-republicans-trump
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on March 12, 2019, 11:08:24 pm
The President of the United States on the recent controversy post second 737 max crash:

Trump’s intervention on Twitter:
The president said manufacturers were “always seeking to go one unnecessary step further, when often old and simpler is far better. Split second decisions are needed, and the complexity creates danger. All of this for great cost yet very little gain.”

He added: “I don’t want Albert Einstein to be my pilot. I want great flying professionals that are allowed to easily and quickly take control of a plane!”


What the fuck is this idiot talking about? He sounds like a participant in a third rate local radio phone in. With every day he becomes more like a spoilt five year old with a serious ego problem. He is the only human being who has a chance of making Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn look like they might know what they're doing.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 12, 2019, 11:25:34 pm
That's actually one of the more sensible things I've heard him say in many months (I'm not saying it is sensible, just more sensible than most other things).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on March 13, 2019, 09:41:57 am
That's actually one of the more sensible things I've heard him say in many months (I'm not saying it is sensible, just more sensible than most other things).
I don't disagree with you, Andy. My point still stands, what the fuck is he talking about? It beggars belief that this man is in charge of a country, he is just in the wrong job:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-47533237/would-president-trump-make-a-good-comedian
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on March 22, 2019, 11:58:20 pm
We'll this is it folks, the report is finished. End of the beginning, beginning of the end or a damp squib?

My personal guess is that there will be a litany of reprehensible behaviour documented, much of it illegal involving corruption and money laundering but no direct collusion. Any right minded person will be appalled and his base will probably crow about no collusion. It was always going to be like this and not a single mind will be changed.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on March 23, 2019, 07:12:11 am
Seems likely; to mix metaphors, there will likely be no smoking gun for Trump, but probably a smelly miasma of white-collar criminality surrounding his associates.  At best, I hope for something substantial attaching to the likes of Jared Kushner or Trump Jr.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on March 23, 2019, 09:59:22 am
... and that Mueller has handed off a shitload of additional crimes for investigation by the SDNY and the DOJ. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on March 23, 2019, 06:14:17 pm
.... also, the phrase 'no further indictments' is an interesting one.  That doesn't discount that many sealed indictments may have already been filed.  John Dean (that John Dean of Nixon era) thinks that there may be another report that's subject to NatSec restrictions which doesn't have to go through the AG and will have landed on Adam Schiff's desk as chair of the House Intel Committee. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: joel182 on March 23, 2019, 06:29:56 pm
.... also, the phrase 'no further indictments' is an interesting one. 

Also worth remembering that "Mueller has charged 34 people and obtained guilty pleas or convictions for seven" (http://) when Trump and allies present "no further indictments" as though the investigation found nothing
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 23, 2019, 07:01:25 pm
I never expected the report to recommend indicting the President (the consensus seems to sitting presidents can't be indicted. Impeachment is a job for congress) but that doesn't mean it contains nothing; for example it could present a very clear case of obstruction of justice by the President. But even so, I'm not overly optimistic, whatever it contains. His blatant corruption seems to count for nothing with many people. A 2020 victory remains highly plausible.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on April 02, 2019, 11:27:51 am
Thought this was hillarious.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/apr/02/donald-trump-golf-28-club-championships
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on April 10, 2019, 05:48:22 am
More worrrying news:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/09/dojs-new-stance-on-foreign-payments-or-gifts-to-trump-blurs-lines-experts 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mugabe251 on April 15, 2019, 03:34:55 pm
This situation reminds one of a quote by Robert Anton Wilson who once said, "The thinker thinks and the prover proves".

That is to say that, it seems that the consensus among you is that you've already made your mind up, as if: "The investigative report found no evidence to confirm my suspicions about Trump, therefore the team behind the investigation must be corrupt or withholding information". This is the power of the disconfirmation bias. The result is very disappointing and hard to swallow - so why swallow it at all?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 15, 2019, 03:37:36 pm
This situation reminds one of a quote by Robert Anton Wilson who once said, "The thinker thinks and the prover proves".

That is to say that, it seems that the consensus among you is that you've already made your mind up, as if: "The investigative report found no evidence to confirm my suspicions about Trump, therefore the team behind the investigation must be corrupt or withholding information". This is the power of the disconfirmation bias. The result is very disappointing and hard to swallow - so why swallow it at all?

This in no way represents the thinking of any the liberals/progressives that I know here in the US. For one thing, we as yet have extremely little idea of what the report actually says.

Nice try though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mugabe251 on April 15, 2019, 03:51:42 pm
But my completely anecdotal evidence about liberals/progressives attitudes towards the investigation is contrary to yours.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 15, 2019, 04:20:21 pm
Except that your anecdotal evidence (whatever it is) cannot prove that your blanket "you" is correct, whereas my anecdotal evidence (which I also suspect is more robust) can prove that your blanket "you" is incorrect. I thought my point was obvious?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 15, 2019, 06:12:45 pm
But my completely anecdotal evidence about liberals/progressives attitudes towards the investigation is contrary to yours.

Interesting.

What do you consider a “Liberal/Progressive”?

Do you feel that all “Conservatives” should be Trump supporters and that anyone who is not such a supporter, must be a Liberal?

Asking for a friend, obviously.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on April 18, 2019, 06:49:40 pm
So redacted Muller report is out.

Would I be right in saying it shows he’s pretty much guilty of loads of bad stuff - but not guilty enough to be done for it?

(I don’t have the heart to dig into it in detail - it really depresses me reading about it..)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on April 18, 2019, 07:13:55 pm
this seems to be a pretty representative excerpt from the Guardian coverage:

“If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state,” the report continues. “However, we are unable to reach that judgment.

“The President’s efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests,” the report says.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: largeruk on April 18, 2019, 07:14:15 pm
As Hugo Rifkind says: "Mueller's report is basically "it's not for me to say he tried to strangle a dog but here are at least 10 incredibly detailed accounts of him putting his tiny hands round a dog's throat and squeezing it in a manner clearly designed to make it die"."

Mueller effectively also adds: "He did try to get me fired twice though so you know..."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on April 18, 2019, 07:17:38 pm
As Hugo Rifkind says: "Mueller's report is basically "it's not for me to say he tried to strangle a dog but here are at least 10 incredibly detailed accounts of him putting his tiny hands round a dog's throat and squeezing it in a manner clearly designed to make it die"."

Mueller effectively also adds: "He did try to get me fired twice though so you know..."

Excellent summary.... but he’ll probably get away with strangling the dog. Unfortunately.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 19, 2019, 12:16:29 pm
This from the report:

“The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.”

The report is damning and effectively invites Congress to consider to impeachment. But the "total exoneration" narrative may well prevail.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 19, 2019, 01:29:55 pm
I’m wondering, if an Un redacted version isn’t about to drop; in the event of things “going quiet”.
Mueller must be close to retirement, already as tarnished as he could be and more than clever enough to find a way to drop the lot; whilst keeping his hands fairly clean...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 19, 2019, 01:41:16 pm
So..
 That last post, was me sitting down for cuppa at work and scrolling UKB, because it was too hot to down.
Opened up my news feed straight after posting.
Reckon the Spunk Gibbon, has his incontinence panties in a right wad (he’s obviously not as upset as Mugabe251 (and a 1/4)).
https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/politics/trump-tweets/ (https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/politics/trump-tweets/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 19, 2019, 01:46:41 pm
I don't think the redactions were that heavy in the end and relate to ongoing investigations - at least a dozen I believe (some of which are potentially more damaging for Trump). Incidentally, I don't think anyone sees Mueller as tarnished - at least I've never really seen that expressed.

The really interesting question is why, in the end, its possible none of this will matter. A report like this would probably have been enough to end any previous presidency. What has changed in society's norms such that they will be able to convince enough people that their lies are the truth?

Anyway, I've long thought that they only sure way to defeat him is at the ballot box.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mugabe251 on April 19, 2019, 02:22:17 pm
Except that your anecdotal evidence (whatever it is) cannot prove that your blanket "you" is correct, whereas my anecdotal evidence (which I also suspect is more robust) can prove that your blanket "you" is incorrect. I thought my point was obvious?

Neither us of 'proved' anything (a bit like this investigation really) and there's nothing robust about an anecdote, whoever your circle of friends are. And I'm not attacking you Andy, or anyone - just putting an idea across.

*farts*
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 19, 2019, 02:40:30 pm
I don't think the redactions were that heavy in the end and relate to ongoing investigations - at least a dozen I believe (some of which are potentially more damaging for Trump). Incidentally, I don't think anyone sees Mueller as tarnished - at least I've never really seen that expressed.

The really interesting question is why, in the end, its possible none of this will matter. A report like this would probably have been enough to end any previous presidency. What has changed in society's norms such that they will be able to convince enough people that their lies are the truth?

Anyway, I've long thought that they only sure way to defeat him is at the ballot box.

You asked a question, Mugabe answered.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 19, 2019, 03:44:51 pm
This seems pertinent.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/no-one-listens-to-the-president/587557/?utm_term=2019-04-19T10%3A00%3A58&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_content=edit-promo&fbclid=IwAR0cbo42fWAWYLDWXQCGSd0m_G-m9m0-LqW-M09FRGk3xXusO4t5S3VOD4M (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/no-one-listens-to-the-president/587557/?utm_term=2019-04-19T10%3A00%3A58&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_content=edit-promo&fbclid=IwAR0cbo42fWAWYLDWXQCGSd0m_G-m9m0-LqW-M09FRGk3xXusO4t5S3VOD4M)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on April 19, 2019, 04:15:43 pm
Didn't know Dave Graham wrote that well (actually looks like him too!).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 01, 2019, 10:40:05 pm
Ouf! Here’s a writer who really doesn’t mince her words:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/01/trump-regime-america-insurrection (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/01/trump-regime-america-insurrection)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on May 02, 2019, 10:23:44 am
Ouf! Here’s a writer who really doesn’t mince her words:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/01/trump-regime-america-insurrection (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/01/trump-regime-america-insurrection)

Also of recent interest re Trump, last Friday's episode of the beyond today podcast, very interesting interview with a federal prosecutor. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 29, 2019, 04:32:44 pm
Is it me, or did Mueller, fairly specifically but not quite, just say that Trump committed a crime but as president, the DoJ were not allowed to charge/ Indict Trump only as a matter of policy; then resign in a huff?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 29, 2019, 04:43:44 pm
I think the statement had two purposes. The first was to (re)assert the legitimacy of the investigation, that it was the right and proper thing to do; indeed that it had to be done (Trump's principal line of attack is that it was illegitimate from the very beginning). The second was to again explain that no exoneration can be claimed. The line that if it was possible they would have clearly said the President did not commit a crime was pretty striking though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 29, 2019, 09:26:01 pm
Now being widely interpreted as a call for Congress to do its work and impeach.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 29, 2019, 10:57:39 pm
My god, these people really are fuckwits:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/29/energy-department-molecules-freedom-fossil-fuel-rebranding
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 29, 2019, 11:15:04 pm
My god, these people really are fuckwits:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/29/energy-department-molecules-freedom-fossil-fuel-rebranding

Well, yes, fuckwits for sure.

Which wouldn’t be quite so bad if only they weren’t total Cμπ+∫ as well. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 29, 2019, 11:23:23 pm
My god, these people really are fuckwits:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/29/energy-department-molecules-freedom-fossil-fuel-rebranding

Well, yes, fuckwits for sure.

Which wouldn’t be quite so bad if only they weren’t total Cμπ+∫ as well. in power.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 30, 2019, 08:51:05 am
https://www.vox.com/2019/4/23/18510850/democrats-impeachment-pelosi-mueller-trump (https://www.vox.com/2019/4/23/18510850/democrats-impeachment-pelosi-mueller-trump)

In a nut shell. The GOP is broken, ergo the Government is broken.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: joel182 on May 30, 2019, 01:41:58 pm
The Daily has put out some interesting podcasts on Trump's wealth.
This episode from last year (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/31/podcasts/the-daily/fred-donald-trump-tax-investigation.html) questions the whole 'self-made man' thing with a look at Donald and Fred's taxes.
This one from last week (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/23/podcasts/the-daily/trump-deutsche-bank.html) looks into some huge (>$2 bn) loans Trump got from Deutsche Bank.
Really recommended for anyone who likes podcasts and feeling upset about the state of the world.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 01, 2019, 08:45:55 am
So when Trump says " I've  actually  studied it very hard" about the conservative leadership race, actually what he means is, that hes watched fox and friends everyday, like he always does, right?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 01, 2019, 12:26:13 pm
 ... at best.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 02, 2019, 08:40:10 am
Trump's ignorant comments about UK politics are frankly infuriating.  I'm all for according him a state visit as he is a head of state,  but unfortunately one who behaves like a spoilt five year old. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: monkoffunk on June 02, 2019, 09:20:34 am
Trump's ignorant comments about UK politics are frankly infuriating.  I'm all for according him a state visit as he is a head of state,  but unfortunately one who behaves like a spoilt five year old.

Of the 34 visits to the UK by 12 American Presidents, I think I’m right in saying that only two, Barack Obama and George W. Bush were honoured with state visits.

I see absolutely no reason at all why Trump deserves one and plenty that show he absolutely does not. This is a political move to stroke the ego of a man who seems to only consist of ego, and it is shameful and debasing.

That’s just what I think anyway.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on June 03, 2019, 02:07:55 pm
That's interesting about previous visits MOF.

It would be great to know the detail behind the planning of this visit.

I don't agree with arguments citing our historic alliance with the USA.
However, perhaps another question is "What are the relative merits of giving Trump the full fanfare treatment, vs making a stand? In what way do we achieve the most, for instance, looking at ways of influencing Trump's environmental policy?".

(Good running item in the National Geographic:
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/03/how-trump-is-changing-science-environment/ )

How much is a stand a reaction? Are there opportunities too? Are we welcoming the USA as a nation, as much as we are Trump?
Trump represents a lot of what it means to be British - prejudice, divisiveness, hate. Of course, that's not a serious argument in support of his visit, although it seems far more painful, and truer than we may have known.

Is a stand, a choice? That's not a question I'm asking because I think I know the answer.

Can we apply a bit of "shibbuwichee" - to use Trumps influence in our favour? Imagine if we could sell it to Trump that he could save the world?

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 03, 2019, 10:49:09 pm
It would be great to know the detail behind the planning of this visit.
I don't agree with arguments citing our historic alliance with the USA.

It's ultimately a diplomatic relations exercise put on for the dday anniversary isn't it, so much as I profoundly dislike him I feel that the UK really has to accord a us president a similar visit on an occasion like that. Shit I don't know how anyone can moan, the person I really feel sorry for is her majesty the Queen, she actually has to sit down and have dinner with the fat boring tosser. She probably just wanted a quiet night in with the corgis and the horse racing on the TV
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on June 04, 2019, 12:28:53 am
It would be great to know the detail behind the planning of this visit.
I don't agree with arguments citing our historic alliance with the USA.

It's ultimately a diplomatic relations exercise put on for the dday anniversary isn't it, so much as I profoundly dislike him I feel that the UK really has to accord a us president a similar visit on an occasion like that. Shit I don't know how anyone can moan, the person I really feel sorry for is her majesty the Queen, she actually has to sit down and have dinner with the fat boring tosser. She probably just wanted a quiet night in with the corgis and the horse racing on the TV

I know! I think you're right there.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 04, 2019, 04:20:38 pm
It’s a long shot, but amusing to think it might be accurate:

https://www.indy100.com/article/donald-trump-uk-visit-the-queen-burmese-ruby-tiara-troll-theory-8943386?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1559656492 (https://www.indy100.com/article/donald-trump-uk-visit-the-queen-burmese-ruby-tiara-troll-theory-8943386?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1559656492)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 05, 2019, 08:02:57 pm
Just when you thought he couldn't get any dumber ...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/05/ireland-visit-donald-trump-arrives-leo-varadkar-discussions

(its worth watching the embedded clip).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 05, 2019, 11:04:07 pm
Just when you thought he couldn't get any dumber ...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/05/ireland-visit-donald-trump-arrives-leo-varadkar-discussions

(its worth watching the embedded clip).

I often baulk at shrill denunciations of Trump by some of the left in the US; but watching that clip I am struck that his rambling repetition and non sequiturs bears a striking  resemblance to symptoms of dementia.  I do incidentally work with people with dementia every day.  I'm now more convinced of a basic cognitive unfittness to govern. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 06, 2019, 12:15:38 am
It would be interesting to see a proper analysis of the scope of his vocabulary, which seems rather limited, shall we say.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on June 06, 2019, 06:50:29 am
An anecdote rather than proper analysis, but Martin Amis made an interesting observation in a 2017 interview:

Looking back over the decades, he thinks Trump has suffered a horrific mental decline. “If you look at old tapes of him on [US talkshow] Charlie Rose, using words like ‘chagrin’ correctly. And with a certain amount of ironic reserve.” There is, Amis says, a question of “dementia”.


Another interesting passage, suggesting an international crisis might have an upside but also warning about the power of his far-right base:

The question of impeachment, Amis suspects, is wishful thinking, though he suggests that a particular order of world event could push Trump over the edge. “I am, in a way, thirsty for an international crisis,” he says, perhaps unaware of how this comes across. “Not with North Korea; he’s itching to do that and thinks he’ll get the Nobel peace prize if he wipes it off the map. But I want something really ticklish, like the hostage crisis after the Iranian revolution, where he’s not going to reach for the button, but people are going to see him under stress.”

But, Amis adds, we shouldn’t underestimate Trump’s talent for stoking up unrest. “Trump is trying to stock up an army of neo-Nazis who, if he gets ousted before his term is over, are going to think it’s a coup. They’ve all got huge guns; that’s a sword to hold over the situation. That’s what they’re scared of.” This neo-Nazi element, which predates Trump, but which he has been very shrewd at exploiting, is something Amis sees as the last stand against Obama by the kind of American who “before 2008 could look out of his trailer and say, I may not be much, but I’m better than a black man. Then they see Obama, so handsome and witty and learned, and think, can I really say that?” Racism exists in Britain, of course, but he considers it a category difference. “It’s not to do with hatred from the gut.”


full article
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/16/martin-amis-miss-the-english-homesick (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/16/martin-amis-miss-the-english-homesick)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slab_happy on June 06, 2019, 07:44:44 am
It would be interesting to see a proper analysis of the scope of his vocabulary, which seems rather limited, shall we say.

Some analysis and discussion:

https://www.statnews.com/2017/05/23/donald-trump-speaking-style-interviews/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-language-level-speaking-skills-age-eight-year-old-vocabulary-analysis-a8149926.html
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/06/opinion/trump-speech-mental-capacity.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 06, 2019, 10:56:21 am
It would be interesting to see a proper analysis of the scope of his vocabulary, which seems rather limited, shall we say.

Some analysis and discussion:

https://www.statnews.com/2017/05/23/donald-trump-speaking-style-interviews/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-language-level-speaking-skills-age-eight-year-old-vocabulary-analysis-a8149926.html
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/06/opinion/trump-speech-mental-capacity.html

Thanks slab_happy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: fatneck on June 06, 2019, 01:25:41 pm
Quote from: andy popp
It would be interesting to see a proper analysis of the scope of his vocabulary, which seems rather limited, shall we say.

Is this not a deliberate affectation to appeal to the masses?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 06, 2019, 01:40:16 pm
Quote from: andy popp
It would be interesting to see a proper analysis of the scope of his vocabulary, which seems rather limited, shall we say.

Is this not a deliberate affectation to appeal to the masses?

No, I really think it represents his actual cognitive abilities.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 06, 2019, 11:23:44 pm
Quote from: andy popp
It would be interesting to see a proper analysis of the scope of his vocabulary, which seems rather limited, shall we say.

Is this not a deliberate affectation to appeal to the masses?

No, I really think it represents his actual cognitive abilities.

I'd expect any political figure to be tailoring their accent, vocabulary, phrasing as well as every aspect of their appearance to appeal to potential voters. Until I saw trump in Ireland I'd have said that he probably was. However, if he's putting that on he's so far down the rabbit hole he might as well be a fucking set of dimly glowing synapses in a test tube, just about showing a distant glimmer of a suggestion of cognitive ability.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on June 07, 2019, 07:44:05 am
I was listening to an interesting episode of the Illusionist podcast yesterday, which had an excerpt about identifying liars.  Supposedly, "expert" interrogators and polygraphs have, at best, around a 54% success rate at spotting lying i.e. barely better than a coin toss. 

What does work, with reportedly 85% accuracy, is to feed transcripts of interviews to an algorithm that compares the number of words said with the number of unique words used.  Liars tend to use markedly few unique words.  The computational demand of having to internally monitor what they say for consistency with past lies results in a restricted vocabulary. 

I suspect Trump is basically brain-addled but I do wonder if a contributory factor to his stumbling, repetitive speech patterns is that his brain is seizing up from the strain of continual lying.  His terrible interviews are then partly a manifestation of a glitched brain, grinding, sticking and skipping as it struggles to assess whether the planned sentence will give-away a past lie. 

That said, I suspect Trump is one of the (hopefully) few who cares so little about the truth and / or possibly believes his own bull-shit, that lying involves no internal strain whatsoever; he probably has the same relationship to the notion of truth as psychopaths have to the well-being of their fellows.

https://www.theallusionist.org/allusionist/criminallusionist?rq=criminallusionist (https://www.theallusionist.org/allusionist/criminallusionist?rq=criminallusionist)

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on June 08, 2019, 11:06:20 am
This one shouldn't be missed.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jun/07/trump-moon-is-part-of-mars-tweet-nasa
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 08, 2019, 11:24:51 pm
This one shouldn't be missed.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jun/07/trump-moon-is-part-of-mars-tweet-nasa

Indeed. I see now that my previous assessment of a distant glimmer of cognitive ability was a massive over estimate and Trump really does have the intelligence of a toilet brush
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on June 09, 2019, 08:09:50 am
Interesting piece on politics in a Pennsylvanian county, looking at the sort of issues involved in Trump's bid for relection in 2020.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/09/will-trump-win-2020-voters-pennsylvania-county-indicator-chances
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 09, 2019, 09:29:31 am
Given his consistently appalling syntax, it is quite possible the sentence references the moon as a part of the space project which includes Mars.

Presidents should be able to write comprehensible sentences though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 09, 2019, 12:40:46 pm
Interesting piece on politics in a Pennsylvanian county, looking at the sort of issues involved in Trump's bid for relection in 2020.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/09/will-trump-win-2020-voters-pennsylvania-county-indicator-chances

This is basically where I live - I'm in adjacent Lehigh County (which voted for Clinton) but the city I live in is contiguous with Bethlehem. The Guardian ran a series of articles from Northampton County over the year following the 2016 election, going back to speak to the same people, many of whom they speak to again for this piece. The series became increasingly frustrating: as it kept talking to the same handful of people, most of them white and older, it made it seem as though there was no change going on. It also failed to capture the complexity of the area.

Lehigh and Northampton counties are a contrasting mix of rural, suburban, and urban and that maps on to demographics. The rural areas and towns are overwhelming white and "Pennsylvania Dutch" - that is of German of ethnic origin (the Dutch is a corruption of Deutsch – the man with hat and beard pictured in the article looks like a classic “Dutchy”) - a distinct culture that is deeply rooted and naturally conservative. To give an example, gun rights are absolutely sacrosanct (hunting is so big here that schools close on the first day of hunting season in the fall), Many rural towns and villages, based either in farming or resource extraction (coal and slate) are really struggling, if not dying. These people feel embattled and are entrenched. There are pockets of difference - Stroudsberg in northern Northampton has become primarily hispanic in recent years - but by and large rural eastern PA voted Trump in 2016 and will do so again in 2020.

The suburbs are also largely white but much more affluent and growing apace, mainly through in migration - the whole Lehigh Valley offers a good and affordable standard of living as much of northern New Jersey, closer to NYC, becomes completely unobtainable (from Easton, east of Bethlehem, its possible to commute to NYC). I see some of this suburban life by taking my daughter to swim meets at surrounding country clubs, a world full of wealthy aspiration. American suburbia, particularly once summer arrives, can be deceptively seductive. It can seem that life is good and nothing is wrong with the world – it’s a bubble. You don't have to go downtown, you don't have to mix with people who don't look like you. It’s easy to be complacent, even as a Democrat. But these people are also college educated and might consider themselves small L liberal, even if they often vote Republican in the hope of tax cuts. There could be many critical swing votes here, especially among younger women.

But the cities - Allentown (the fastest growing city in the state) and Bethlehem - are very different. In particular they are majority minority (e.g. ethnic minorities together form the majority, Allentown is about 70% black and brown) and poor, in pockets extremely poor, and badly served - Allentown School District is an absolute crisis currently and the local criminal justice system is often highly racist. An attempt at regenerating the main street downtown, which 50 years ago was absolutely thriving, like main streets all over the country, has stalled, sucking tax dollars away from the city, and, in any case, completely ignored the needs or surrounding black and brown neighborhoods. The picture is a bit more mixed in Bethlehem, both demographically and economically. Both cities have significant but ageing groups of retired or redundant blue collar workers - again overwhelming white - who switched from Democrat to Republican in 2016 (accounting, no doubt, for the pick-ups with Trump stickers that are a common sight). But the issue among black and brown voters is one of disengagement, they rightly feel that no-one is much interested in their views or needs. Black voter turnout fell significantly here and nationally in 2016.

These articles from the Guardian have, I think, very largely failed to capture any of this; for example, I can't recall if they've ever spoken to someone of color. In speaking only to older, white (often rural) voters the series has fallen into the trap of thinking this is the "real" Pennsylvania - maybe it once was, but no longer. The Clinton campaign fell into a similar trap and lost the state by less than 1% - a few tens of thousands of votes. It assumed PA was already in the bag and did not campaign here - her first appearance in the state during the campaign was a rally in Philadelphia the night before the election (and the rally also took the form of what proved to be a very premature victory party). Trump came here time and time again and has continued to do so since the election. The article is right that there is an irreducible base for him, but I think there’s little chance to he can add many new voters. In other words, turn out is critical.

But Pennsylvania (along with Michigan and Wisconsin, which also flipped to Trump in 2016) are there for the taking by an energetic campaign on behalf of the right Democratic candidate. There's no doubt, for example, that many people would be receptive to a more radical message on healthcare. Personally, I think current frontrunner Joe Biden will repeat the same mistakes that Clinton did and will be mired in complacency and caution.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 09, 2019, 03:28:55 pm
Interesting insight; thanks.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on June 09, 2019, 03:34:45 pm
Great post Andy. Thanks for taking the time to write that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 16, 2019, 09:54:19 am
Donald Trump attacks Sadiq Khan in tweets over deaths in London

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/16/trump-attacks-sadiq-khan-over-upsurge-in-london-violence?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

So there a major international crisis in the middle east,  a trade war with China and Trump is retweeting talentless pretend journalists like Hopkins.  Leader of the free world eh, what a  fucking joke.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on June 17, 2019, 04:33:04 pm
Welcome to the kakistocracy!

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/16/the-best-people-review-trump-swamp-cabinet

Plus an older review I had missed.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/02/siege-review-michael-wolff-trump-fire-and-fury
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 06, 2019, 10:00:08 am
Donald Trump wants to be a dictator. It’s not enough just to laugh at him

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/05/donald-trump-dictator-not-enough-laugh?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 06, 2019, 11:48:37 am
Donald Trump wants to be a dictator. It’s not enough just to laugh at him

True, but laughing at him is also important and yesterday was the perfect opportunity.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 06, 2019, 12:40:53 pm
Donald Trump wants to be a dictator. It’s not enough just to laugh at him

True, but laughing at him is also important and yesterday was the perfect opportunity.

Bloody Colonials, putting thier grubby paws, all over His Majesty’s Airports...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 10, 2019, 09:13:12 pm
(https://scontent.fphl1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/66308836_1603470819783590_9030298709845344256_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_oc=AQlrN6FnmhbniSaEpZbiYPQObxLuhUALXdi1IjwmRQBOALooOSNbQHwY1uMNa3nm-_4&_nc_ht=scontent.fphl1-2.fna&oh=062723aecf11a469678df7b12b2356b8&oe=5DC05CC5)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 13, 2019, 01:23:24 pm
Kim "See: the more you crush, the more they bend"  DT "Hey, I like the blue ones but do they come in black and brown?"

Yet another book:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/13/american-carnage-review-tim-alberta-politico-trump-republicans
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Moo on July 13, 2019, 10:35:36 pm
Whoever allowed that crumpled red ball to get in shot has probably been executed by now.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 15, 2019, 12:55:00 am
In case anyone was in any doubt, Trump confirms his out and out racism.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on July 15, 2019, 11:46:17 am
To be fair up til now, he had me conned with his subtle rhetoric and sophisticated use of the English language.  ::)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on July 15, 2019, 12:15:12 pm
(https://external-preview.redd.it/6-MUdIdXQEIUhQbkJIMQ0avwR2N7wU8Leic-x6E1G-8.jpg?auto=webp&s=6b616f589fa1f2d4616e2f6e6f8b86ea664dfa29)

Thought this was very telling. Although as someone pointed out, he wouldn't be this polite and ask for permission.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on July 15, 2019, 03:27:20 pm
In case anyone was in any doubt, Trump confirms his out and out racism.

What is profoundly disturbing (to me) is that this is being 'gently' reported in the UK press in my view - no outright horror/outrage. Depressingly this leads me to wonder whether this is now being normalised which is a great danger....

edit - just seen the BBC etc.. and its reporting Theresa Mays 'utterly unaccpetable' response to Trumps words. Good.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 15, 2019, 03:46:43 pm
In case anyone was in any doubt, Trump confirms his out and out racism.

What is profoundly disturbing (to me) is that this is being 'gently' reported in the UK press in my view - no outright horror/outrage. Depressingly this leads me to wonder whether this is now being normalised which is a great danger....

edit - just seen the BBC etc.. and its reporting Theresa Mays 'utterly unaccpetable' response to Trumps words. Good.

Yes, the May response is something (though it could have been stronger in my view) and there have been good responses from others in Britain (Lammy, Khan) and across Europe.

But there has been total silence from senior Republicans; they either agree or are petrified of him. But yes, it is becoming normalised I think - or perhaps he is simply surfacing just how deeply racist America really is.

Of course, last night and this morning he has launched further vicious attacks on AOC and the others, claiming that it is they who are the racists.  Combined with today's move to make claiming asylum almost impossible at the southern border it is obvious that the election strategy is now set: crude, raw nativism and anti-migrant racism. There will be no attempt to expand appeal beyond the base.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 15, 2019, 04:42:07 pm
The other feeling today is one of low background dread. It feels like he might do anything at any moment.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on July 15, 2019, 10:20:23 pm
The other feeling today is one of low background dread. It feels like he might do anything at any moment.

Well no one will stop him will they? You've probably seen the clip that has reemerged of Lindsay Graham calling him a vile racist in 2015 but is now one of his biggest cheer leaders. It's the same in this country, Amber Rudd has just come out for No Deal to curry favour with our next PM. It beggars belief. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: al on July 18, 2019, 05:34:04 pm
Andy, Just heard some audio from the greenville rally, feeling the dread for US (and us when johnson gets in)  :(
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 18, 2019, 05:46:52 pm
Andy, Just heard some audio from the greenville rally, feeling the dread for US (and us when johnson gets in)  :(

You mean the rally that had “20,000 in the crowd” according to Trump’s campaign manager, but was held in an arena with a max capacity of 8000?

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: al on July 18, 2019, 06:00:09 pm
Not sure about that matt, it's the rally where the crowd chants "send her back"
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 18, 2019, 06:41:30 pm
Andy, Just heard some audio from the greenville rally, feeling the dread for US (and us when johnson gets in)  :(

Thanks Al. Yes, its both sickening and frightening.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 18, 2019, 07:10:29 pm
Not sure about that matt, it's the rally where the crowd chants "send her back"

Yes. Same rally.
Beyond parody now.

https://www.indy100.com/article/trump-brad-parscale-north-carolina-rally-attendance-crowd-size-9010496 (https://www.indy100.com/article/trump-brad-parscale-north-carolina-rally-attendance-crowd-size-9010496)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: UnkArl on July 18, 2019, 08:49:48 pm
Minges Colosseum  :blink:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 18, 2019, 09:56:09 pm
Minges Colosseum  :blink:

I guess he figured he could really grab them there...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 18, 2019, 10:13:35 pm
Not sure about that matt, it's the rally where the crowd chants "send her back"

Yes. Same rally.
Beyond parody now.

https://www.indy100.com/article/trump-brad-parscale-north-carolina-rally-attendance-crowd-size-9010496 (https://www.indy100.com/article/trump-brad-parscale-north-carolina-rally-attendance-crowd-size-9010496)

From farce to fascism.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 04, 2019, 03:55:16 pm
Trump has blood on his hands, again. There is a direct line to be drawn between his racist rhetoric and incitements to violence and the white supremacist terrorism of Pittsburgh (11 dead), Poway (1), Gilroy (3), Charlottesville (1), and El Paso (20) (and others, including Dayton, in all probability).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on August 04, 2019, 05:38:43 pm
You're absolutely right Andy. This is white nationalist terrorism being perpetuated from the very top. Unfortunately I don't think Trump and Republicans care. They lack even a shred of empathy.

Looking for the positives, the queues of locals at the blood donation centres was heartening. At least a lot of ordinary people do care about their communities.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 04, 2019, 06:16:55 pm
According to the Texas Lieutenant Governor, it’s because kids don’t pray in school anymore.
.
.
.
.
.
.
What the absolute fuck is wrong with these twats.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 04, 2019, 06:22:32 pm
Unfortunately I don't think Trump and Republicans care. They lack even a shred of empathy.

The country - and the GOP in particular - face a moral crisis and a moral choice; whether to continue supporting or to repudiate an undisguised racist who foments violence. Unfortunately, I think you're right. Just about every American FB friend I know has at least one Trump supporting FB friend, often a family member. I have not seen one saying "enough, this has to stop." Indeed I have see many already today deflecting and distracting, vehemently arguing that none of this is to do with Trump, even that it is anything to with guns.

This column by arch-conservative Jennifer Rubin makes the case against Trump very well: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/04/there-is-no-excuse-supporting-this-president/?utm_term=.e009cd46537e
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on August 04, 2019, 08:36:07 pm
Thats a good article. The rise in hate crimes is really worrying. But the same thing has happened here I believe.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 04, 2019, 08:45:27 pm
Thats a good article. The rise in hate crimes is really worrying. But the same thing has happened here I believe.

But thankfully hate crimes here are not expressed via mass shootings. The US has had 200+ More mass shootings than the UK in 2019*

*UK is zero. Mass shootings definition varies but it seems to generally be 4+ people being shot (wounded or killed) in once incident.

I spent half an hour or so looking at global distributions/rates of mass shootings - and it is truly shocking how many there are in the US.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 04, 2019, 09:31:31 pm
Would they correlate with the distribution of guns in private citizens' ownership by any chance?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 04, 2019, 09:55:49 pm
Would they correlate with the distribution of guns in private citizens' ownership by any chance?

Not linearly....

USA - 112.6 guns per 100 residents
Serbia - 75.6
Yemen - 54.8
Switzerland - 45.7
Cyprus - 36.4
Saudi Arabia - 35
Iraq - 34.2
Uruguay - 31.8
Sweden - 31.6
Norway - 31.3

Iirc if you don’t include countries in/recently at war (eg Iraq and yemen) Canada was next on the mass shootings list with 4.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 04, 2019, 11:14:22 pm
Thanks tt. If I understood correctly that means the US is a real aberration then, no other peacetime country comes close to the incidence of mass shootings, relative or otherwise.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 04, 2019, 11:56:08 pm
This article (Nov 2017) is excellent on this topic. To summarize the argument, and paraphrase Bill Clinton, its the guns, stupid (definitely not directed at anyone here):

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html?fbclid=IwAR38c4p67Py4Q36NcSYCPWPKm8J5Vsir2CQzmPgUOPIv4pdnp4qILD2IAjU
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 05, 2019, 06:07:53 am
This article (Nov 2017) is excellent on this topic. To summarize the argument, and paraphrase Bill Clinton, its the guns, stupid (definitely not directed at anyone here):

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html?fbclid=IwAR38c4p67Py4Q36NcSYCPWPKm8J5Vsir2CQzmPgUOPIv4pdnp4qILD2IAjU

Skip to the second graph in the above article where gun ownership and mass shootings are normalised by population.

Interestingly, the article doesn’t explicitly cover hate crimes of whether those mass shootings are linked to racial/religious/homophobic motivations - which is a narrative that is starting to be explored more.

Thanks Andy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 05, 2019, 10:54:51 am
Some final sentence there. :no:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 05, 2019, 10:57:21 am
Interestingly, the article doesn’t explicitly cover hate crimes of whether those mass shootings are linked to racial/religious/homophobic motivations

Part of the problem is that how crimes are recorded (essentially how they are prosecuted) can be highly uneven and almost arbitrary - to the extent that its something of a surprise that the authorities have already said El Paso will likely be prosecuted as a hate crime. In other words the data isn't very reliable. Sometimes reliable information on motivation is missing. As far as I know investigators have been able to ascribe no motive at all to the vast mass killing in Las Vegas.

In the US there is a great reluctance to recognize white supremacist terrorism as such. Trump has already dismissed El Paso as due to mental illness.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on September 24, 2019, 09:41:47 pm
Sounds like Pelosi is about to launch impeachment.  The whistleblower is going to testify this Friday.  McConnell has also just _maybe_ (unless he’s playing games) allowed the whilsteblowers report to be released to Congress.  This could be it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 24, 2019, 10:21:35 pm
Aaaaaand......

She did it.

What a frickin day! Mop haired twunts both sides of the Atlantic facing consequences.

May right prevail.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 24, 2019, 10:55:39 pm
This does indeed appear to be it. Pelosi has been unwavering in her reluctance to contemplate impeachment, making a political calculation that it will a) fail and, having failed, b) strengthen Trump's persecution narrative, strengthening his base. Trump has been incriminating himself for days, almost goading the Democrats to act. Something has shifted. Does Pelosi know something we do not? That's what a lot of us are hoping right now. (Our House rep is a moderate in a swing seat but also came out in favor of impeachment today, no doubt after receiving a briefing). We will see what the transcript brings tomorrow and then testimony on Friday.

There are huge risks and uncertainties. Articles of impeachment will pass in the House but almost certainly fail in the Senate.  There are some vulnerable Republican Senators, like Susan Collins in Maine, but probably not enough - or not enough with enough backbone. The question then is the degree of fallout in next year's election. But its getting to the point where not acting also carries real risks. To not act will at some point attract accusations of weakness and cowardice from Republicans. And in the end, no matter if impeachment is doomed from the beginning, it must at some point become a moral imperative, to not impeach for tactical reasons is to become complicit at some point.

Who knows how the electorate will react. I asked a FB friend's raging Trumper relative if it would be a problem if the accusations were proven and he did say yes, it would. But I suspect he will always find a reason to excuse Trump, a way to wriggle out of admitting he supports a deeply corrupt and venal man.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 26, 2019, 02:10:07 pm
Well, it’s out.
I read it, it seems to be much more than just the call and that multiple individuals are involved in the complaint, that the complainant is very senior and that he/she has been “elected” to front a broader body.
Impressions only, of course.

The whole thing is in this article:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/whistleblower-complaint-trump-ukraine-call-declassified_us_5d8c2872e4b0ac3cdda2fa74 (https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/whistleblower-complaint-trump-ukraine-call-declassified_us_5d8c2872e4b0ac3cdda2fa74)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 26, 2019, 04:54:18 pm
I've only briefly scanned the complaint so far. I thought the "transcript" released yesterday was absolutely damning. I think all the focus should be on that. I fear the whistleblower complaint could be used to muddy the waters. What it does add is the cover up and involvement of others. Others have noted that they (the whistleblower) appear to be someone very senior.

In some ways, the whole thing is maddening - he's been in clear breach of the emoluments clause since the day he was inaugurated.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on September 26, 2019, 05:13:31 pm
I've read through both, and I think in combination they are amazingly damning. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on September 26, 2019, 06:15:07 pm
I suspect the person who actually sought to conceal the transcript is in big trouble but there will be plausible deniability for that from Trump. As for the conversation itself it's damning to anyone with critical facilities so the base will just shout witch hunt. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on September 27, 2019, 08:44:29 am
BBC shamefully kowtow wrt the orange loon

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/naga-munchetty-bbc-trump-go-back-home-aoc-bias-racism-a9121786.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on September 27, 2019, 09:16:40 am
BBC shamefully kowtow wrt the orange loon

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/naga-munchetty-bbc-trump-go-back-home-aoc-bias-racism-a9121786.html

All because of one complaint apparently...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 27, 2019, 09:42:47 am
BBC shamefully kowtow wrt the orange loon

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/naga-munchetty-bbc-trump-go-back-home-aoc-bias-racism-a9121786.html

All because of one complaint apparently...

Probably from “John Miller”, NY...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 04, 2019, 09:00:13 am
Have they finally got him? The overnight released US <> Ukraine diplomatic texts seem damning.... plus his tv performances....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 04, 2019, 10:10:02 am
How many times, have we hit the “surely this is it” wall?

The Teflon Twat, has powerful backers.

We can only hope the stress proves too much for him and he resigns.

Scratch that.

He’s too thick to actually understand, and therefore be truly stressed.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 04, 2019, 11:09:04 am
I wonder - if (as appears) the growing evidence against him is overwhelming - then the GOP will start to use the deteriorating presidential mental health excuse/reason to pivot against him? Provides them with the only face saving option imho
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 04, 2019, 12:41:48 pm
I think we're a million miles from any serious pivot happening in the GOP. Maybe I'll be proved wrong, but I don't think it's going to happen.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 04, 2019, 09:03:18 pm
(https://i.ibb.co/D4PYzss/26-AF2548-4-B55-4-E31-9-D5-A-306-E1557-A347.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/C8XFJdc/17-C5-CF66-341-C-43-CE-8464-E8-C3813-FC8-A2.jpg)

Credit: Tom the dancing bug.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fiend on October 04, 2019, 10:03:11 pm
Well I know who I'd much rather has as dictator-in-chief and el-presidente-for-life...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 07, 2019, 08:06:03 pm
It might be that “They” are turning on him:
 https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-official-who-heard-call-says-trump-got-rolled-turkey-has-no-spine-1463623?utm_campaign=NewsweekFacebookSF&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook (https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-official-who-heard-call-says-trump-got-rolled-turkey-has-no-spine-1463623?utm_campaign=NewsweekFacebookSF&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook)
And a second “whistleblower”.
And a federal judge rules against him in regard to his tax returns.
And Lindsey Graham turning on him.
And Guilliano  raving and waving printouts from conspiracy sites, whilst calling them “affidavits”, then being laughed at by his MSNBC host.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 07, 2019, 08:19:00 pm
For the first time ever I'm beginning to feel there's something that might bring him down. But I stress might, not will. For now many GOP politicians figure there's more risk turning away than sticking with him, but at some point that calculation might flip. If the dam breaks he'll be washed away. For now it just as a few cracks.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on October 07, 2019, 09:29:58 pm
Precisely https://www.amazon.com/Private-Truths-Public-Lies-Falsification/dp/0674707583
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 07, 2019, 09:48:25 pm
Precisely https://www.amazon.com/Private-Truths-Public-Lies-Falsification/dp/0674707583

I've seen estimates that 30-35 Republican Senators would vote for impeachment if it was a secret ballot (20 are needed to vote for it if impeachment is to succeed). No doubt many Republicans are privately appalled, hence the huge numbers who have announced at that they won't be running again.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 07, 2019, 09:53:08 pm
They’re not welcome in the new GOP:
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/feature/inside-the-christian-legal-army-weakening-the-church-state-divide (https://talkingpointsmemo.com/feature/inside-the-christian-legal-army-weakening-the-church-state-divide)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 08, 2019, 11:56:49 pm
Full steam ahead to complete lawlessness:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2019/oct/08/trump-news-today-live-impeachment-syria-turkey-polls-latest-updates
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 09, 2019, 11:05:01 pm
Day 2 of complete lawlessness.

Meanwhile, here's a little local (to me) colour: https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2019/10/09/famously-secluded-amish-are-target-republican-campaign-drum-up-pennsylvania-votes-trump/ - I don't think it will ever be a great success.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on October 10, 2019, 07:47:12 am
Has this been accurately reported? I find Trump’s reasoning for downplaying the danger to the Kurds of the Turkish offensive started now US troops have withdrawn from Syria very bizarre, to say the least:

Quote
(Trump) ...downplayed the US debt to Kurdish fighters, saying: “They didn’t help us in the second world war, they didn’t help us with Normandy … but they’re there to help us with their land.”

This from a draft dodger, about a war that the Kurds had no involvement in. Very strange.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 10, 2019, 09:19:48 am
Has this been accurately reported? I find Trump’s reasoning for downplaying the danger to the Kurds of the Turkish offensive started now US troops have withdrawn from Syria very bizarre, to say the least:

Quote
(Trump) ...downplayed the US debt to Kurdish fighters, saying: “They didn’t help us in the second world war, they didn’t help us with Normandy … but they’re there to help us with their land.”

This from a draft dodger, about a war that the Kurds had no involvement in. Very strange.

Except that it comes from a man who has no grasp of history, foreign affairs, or basic standards of human behaviour.  To be honest it's just as shit thick and ignorant as almost everything he says. He only knows about Normandy because he had to go there recently,  before he legged it to go and cheat at golf instead. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 10, 2019, 10:37:51 am
The Syria thing looks so bizarre a decision that I wonder what the underlying games at play are. Turns out the US only had 50 personnel in northern Syria: not a division, brigade, battalion or even a company of troops. And US troops are remaining in the rest of Syria.
They're hardly 'bringing our brave troops homeTM'

Wonder what deal has been agreed between Trump and Erdogan. Weapons sales possibly? (instead of Turkey purchasing more Russian made). A regional emergency as distraction from impeachment? Which Trump later about turns and 'solves' to great fanfare? Maybe Putin has something on Trump which he could drop into the impeachment process... unless he cedes northern Syria..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 10, 2019, 11:12:40 am
The Normandy comments are accurately reported.

The decision came immediately after a phone call with Erdogan and without consultation with any military or security/intelligence advisors; I think he simply got played by a much smarter person.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 10, 2019, 11:57:19 am
The Syria thing looks so bizarre a decision that I wonder what the underlying games at play are. Turns out the US only had 50 personnel in northern Syria: not a division, brigade, battalion or even a company of troops. And US troops are remaining in the rest of Syria.
They're hardly 'bringing our brave troops homeTM'

Wonder what deal has been agreed between Trump and Erdogan. Weapons sales possibly? (instead of Turkey purchasing more Russian made). A regional emergency as distraction from impeachment? Which Trump later about turns and 'solves' to great fanfare? Maybe Putin has something on Trump which he could drop into the impeachment process... unless he cedes northern Syria..

https://www.f35.com/global/participation/turkey-industrial-participation (https://www.f35.com/global/participation/turkey-industrial-participation)

Or, possibly more apropos:

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/06/07/turkish-suppliers-to-be-eliminated-from-f-35-program-in-2020/ (https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/06/07/turkish-suppliers-to-be-eliminated-from-f-35-program-in-2020/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 10, 2019, 11:29:52 pm
Aaand:

https://god.dailydot.com/lindsey-graham-russian-pranksters/ (https://god.dailydot.com/lindsey-graham-russian-pranksters/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Eddies on October 11, 2019, 12:23:27 pm
The Syria thing looks so bizarre a decision that I wonder what the underlying games at play are. Turns out the US only had 50 personnel in northern Syria: not a division, brigade, battalion or even a company of troops. And US troops are remaining in the rest of Syria.
They're hardly 'bringing our brave troops homeTM'

Wonder what deal has been agreed between Trump and Erdogan. Weapons sales possibly? (instead of Turkey purchasing more Russian made). A regional emergency as distraction from impeachment? Which Trump later about turns and 'solves' to great fanfare? Maybe Putin has something on Trump which he could drop into the impeachment process... unless he cedes northern Syria..
Putin has everything on Trump!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 12, 2019, 09:33:27 pm
☝️🤞
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 12, 2019, 09:50:06 pm
The weird language as to whether Giulani is still his attorney makes me think he is close to the tipping point where he is too toxic for lawyers to work for him.

I think this is actually a case of Giuliani becoming too toxic for Trump following the arrest of his two associates this (NYT reports he is under direct investigation himself, as well). But there are signs of cracks appearing, particularly the testimony yesterday of former ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch against the instructions of the administration and testimony next week of Gordon Sonland, again against the instructions of the regime. There's a breaking point somewhere at which it becomes less risky and damaging to jump ship than to stay on board. If we reach that point he's finished. Its just not clear yet where that point lies.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 12, 2019, 10:06:14 pm
The Post were speculating/implying/hinting  that the number of whistleblowers has increased significantly beyond the two known already.
So, possibly the tipping point has already been reached and it just isn’t public yet...?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 12, 2019, 10:10:07 pm
Possibly. A friend who works at a law firm in DC told us Thursday night about rumours of a very big resignation that might be forthcoming.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 12, 2019, 10:40:03 pm
Actually, I cannot find the article.
So, might not have been the Post, but sure I read it this morning over coffee....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 12, 2019, 11:22:29 pm
There have been many reports of multiple whistleblowers.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on October 15, 2019, 09:15:48 am
By pulling troops out of Syria I definitely didn’t mean it was ok for you to move into that area  :blink:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on October 15, 2019, 12:10:42 pm
Latest

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/14/fiona-hill-testimony-trump-impeachment-inquiry

Someone like John Bolton calling Guiliani a hand grenade is telling!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 17, 2019, 06:00:30 pm
I feel like another grenade went off.
Drowned out by the Brexit clamour and Syria massacre, it seems quite destructive, nevertheless.
 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/17/gordon-sondland-testimony-trump-giuliani-ukraine?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1571324417 (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/17/gordon-sondland-testimony-trump-giuliani-ukraine?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1571324417)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 17, 2019, 08:44:58 pm
Unbelievable: he only went and awarded next year's G7 event to his own Doral resort in Florida ...


... I mean, I say unbelievable, but of course, it isn't really unbelievable at all.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 17, 2019, 11:18:19 pm
Further self-impeachment from the GOP: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/17/impeachment-is-now-slam-dunk/?fbclid=IwAR2hzIu_XB3YcCM583PjewI0gFYgTh908wqWGgjU7vpsiC_ycjKd3rCKp2Q
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 18, 2019, 12:10:20 am
I recently saw the Ukrainian affair described as "Watergate for morons," which is pretty much perfect.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on October 18, 2019, 11:21:27 am
Another op ed:

"Our Republic Is Under Attack From the President
If President Trump doesn’t demonstrate the leadership that America needs, then it is time for a new person in the Oval Office.
By William H. McRaven. Admiral McRaven is a former commander of the United States Special Operations Command."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/opinion/trump-mcraven-syria-military.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Plus some detailed analysis on the public views on impeachment.

https://www.people-press.org/2019/10/17/modest-changes-in-views-of-impeachment-proceedings-since-early-september/

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 20, 2019, 10:16:25 am
An excoriating article which sums up what anyone who doesn't own a make America great again cap thinks, I'd have thought.  Of all the things to be enraged about af the moment,  the callous sacrifice of the Kurds and total ignorance of a situation in which he may well have reignited ISIS as a stronger force than they were before is to my mind the most glaring.

The Observer view: a week that shows us why Donald Trump is unfit for high office

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/20/the-observer-view-week-shows-why-donald-trump-unfit-for-office?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on October 20, 2019, 10:33:36 am
It continues to be beyond farcical:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/20/donald-trump-scraps-plan-to-host-g7-at-his-doral-resort-blaming-irrational-hostility
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 20, 2019, 10:56:16 am
There was an excellent episode of the Beyond Today podcast last week about the Syrian war. The BBC Middle East correspondent is almost beside himself with anger about what has happened, he (Quentin Sommerville) normally sounds quite flat and unemotional.  Well worth listening to. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 06, 2019, 06:06:20 pm
This probably isn't getting much attention in the UK, but a good set of local election results last night. The headline news is the Dems taking the governorship of Kentucky, where Trump held one of his typically insane rallies on behalf of the GOP incumbent on just Monday night. But this quote stood out to me, not least as Bucks County is adjacent to mine (and a good friend was one of the lead organizers for the Democratic slate there):

“Taking a step back from KY and looking at all the elections last night, GOP should be most concerned about what happened in local elections in Chester, Delaware and Bucks County, PA,” Josh Holmes, a McConnell confidant and political strategist, wrote on Twitter. “That is genuinely alarming if you know the voting history.”

This hints for real trouble for the Republicans next year. Pennsylvania was one of three critical states Trump won by a very slim margin in 2016. They really do deserve to be crushed at the polls.

Dems also dominated in Lehigh, where I live, but its a more reliably blue county anyway.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/kentucky-outcome-embarrasses-trump-and-worries-many-republicans-ahead-of-2020/2019/11/06/e6dac50c-0049-11ea-8501-2a7123a38c58_story.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 06, 2019, 06:38:19 pm
Moscow Mitch is a Kentucky delegate, isn’t he?

If he gets worried, Trump is done.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 06, 2019, 07:31:09 pm
Moscow Mitch is a Kentucky delegate, isn’t he?

Senate, but yes KY. I'm not getting to excited, it doesn't mean the state is a Democrat stronghold all of a sudden. But it does show some vulnerability; embracing Trump (and being embraced by him is no longer a guarantee of electoral success, even in a red state.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 06, 2019, 07:45:54 pm
I googled to check after posting. It turns out he has the lowest home state approval ratings of any Senator, both sides of the aisle.
This is a change since 2016
So, he may be feeling vulnerable.


If he’s capable of such self awareness.
Do Turtles have self awareness?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on November 14, 2019, 01:48:38 pm
Quote from: Trump Twitter

@RepRatcliffe
 asked the two “star” witnesses, “where is the impeachable event in that call?” Both stared straight ahead with a blank look on their face, remained silent, & were unable to answer the question. That would be the end of a case run by normal people! - but not Shifty!


A quote totally out of context. Their response was they were not the people to decide whether an impeachable offence had been committed, they were purely there to answer questions.

Surely the GOP must be feeling the heat? How long before some of them break ranks? Their “questioning” in the public hearing yesterday was awful - still peddling the same old shite.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 16, 2019, 10:47:21 am
A worthwhile read:

If Trump survives impeachment, it’s clear who he’ll have to thank

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/15/donald-trump-impeachment-inquiry-ukraine-watergate?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fiend on November 16, 2019, 11:02:49 am
He makes my skin crawl. Utterly vile  :sick:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 20, 2019, 03:42:13 pm
sounds like its all going off in the impeachment hearings right now with Sondlands testimony...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on November 20, 2019, 03:47:00 pm
It sounds pretty damning. I wonder how they will try to spin it...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 20, 2019, 03:52:40 pm
Several outlets running opinion  pieces, based on this week’s polling, that seem to suggest people have already made up their minds and aren’t really listening.
In fact, support for the impeachment investigation seems to have fallen.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 20, 2019, 04:00:42 pm
It's absolutely damning. But as Matt points out, it may make no difference.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 20, 2019, 04:16:36 pm
This must be it, surely??
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: cheque on November 20, 2019, 04:23:17 pm
 :popcorn:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 20, 2019, 04:25:43 pm
This must be it, surely??

How many times have we heard that before?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 20, 2019, 04:50:18 pm
Sadly, I think I may have copied and pasted that from earlier in the same thread..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 20, 2019, 06:06:42 pm
I’m writing a significant ‘opinion piece’ for the next issue of UFCK looking at the capitalist relationship between Trump and Honnold / free solo. Mind bending stuff

Looking at topics such as ‘the death drive’ ‘consumer culture and commoditisation of the love of death’ the distraction effect of rubbernecking and the illusion of free will.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 20, 2019, 06:20:04 pm
Great. I can't fucking wait.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 20, 2019, 06:38:52 pm
It’s quite epic, getting all that in 2 or 3 paragraphs. I could probably sum it up for you here? Some sort of equation or heuristic. My understanding is you won’t be reading the finished article.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 20, 2019, 06:40:13 pm
Anyway while you’re all focussed on trumps transparency it’s a great distraction from the neoliberal corrupt opposition.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 20, 2019, 07:46:01 pm
Blah, blah, blah.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 20, 2019, 08:06:48 pm
Who said that? No need to give Chris grief ffs....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on November 20, 2019, 08:08:44 pm
Go back to your thread Dan
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 20, 2019, 08:34:47 pm
OK Dan, so the last few posts on this thread (including my own) haven't been exactly scintillating - it happens - but you have a remarkable ability to destroy any conversation through a combination of tedium and narcissism.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 20, 2019, 08:39:12 pm
I was making a genuine point chaps, just offering some varying perspectives. Are you saying don’t post on here? Not sure how that’s narcissistic? Maybe masochistic given the history with Ukb.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 20, 2019, 08:41:51 pm
If you were making a genuine point it was very deeply obscured.

I would never tell anyone where or where not they can post, but I might reserve the right to say when I think (IMHO, to make things clear) they are or are not being constructive.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 20, 2019, 08:50:43 pm
I was making a genuine point chaps, just offering some varying perspectives. Are you saying don’t post on here? Not sure how that’s narcissistic? Maybe masochistic given the history with Ukb.

(https://i.ibb.co/2sS74Jf/D96-F20-E5-D299-4567-A922-31-D51-CDED00-F.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on November 20, 2019, 09:37:55 pm
I know nothing is surprising any more but I really thought this pic of Trump’s notes must be photoshopped

https://www.vox.com/2019/11/20/20974383/trump-big-sharpie-notes-on-impeachment-testimony
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 20, 2019, 09:47:08 pm
I know nothing is surprising any more but I really thought this pic of Trump’s notes must be photoshopped

https://www.vox.com/2019/11/20/20974383/trump-big-sharpie-notes-on-impeachment-testimony

Have you heard the rumours about his forgetting what he said a moment before, or calling someone on the phone and then not knowing why he’d called, etc?

If he resigns on health grounds (after securing immunity from state prosecutions (he can only get a presidential pardon for federal crimes)) then I think I might almost believe it’s true.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on November 20, 2019, 09:55:54 pm
I wish I could forget what he said a moment ago.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 20, 2019, 10:40:23 pm
If you were making a genuine point it was very deeply obscured.

I would never tell anyone where or where not they can post, but I might reserve the right to say when I think (IMHO, to make things clear) they are or are not being constructive.

No conscious attempt to derail the thread from me. I know very little about politics or trump to be fair. Erich Fromm describes leaders like trump as ‘Necrophiliacs’ in his book The Sane Society’ and it’s interesting how this is linked into the capitalist / consumer culture and concepts of alienation and reduced authenticity as well as increased patriotism and idolatry (The Honnold link) in ‘The Pathology of Normalcy’ I’m not sure I’m saying anything to obscure here.
I’m not worried about being told my posts aren’t constructive. The personalisation of it gets a bit wearing but I dig it. The posts may seem inarticulate and annoying or deliberately confusing. The ongoing personalised insults etc are a bit wearing. ‘Go back to where you came from’ ‘tedious narcissist’ having my name inserted into Matt’s cartoon etc. Just saying
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 21, 2019, 07:14:41 am
Thanks for coming back to explain. I must admit I woke up with some regrets. I think I spoke out of frustration last night, more than out of a desire to insult.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 21, 2019, 07:34:40 am
I’m writing a significant ‘opinion piece’ for the next issue of UFCK looking at the capitalist relationship between Trump and Honnold / free solo. Mind bending stuff

Looking at topics such as ‘the death drive’ ‘consumer culture and commoditisation of the love of death’ the distraction effect of rubbernecking and the illusion of free will.

Well if you’re trying to introduce a new idea or conversation to a thread then this is an overly obscure way to do it.

The narcissism comes from first promoting your own mag (whether ironically or not - I’m not really sure) - and time can’t really see how the second part fits a trump thread - any more than any other comment about society.

If your post is about the subjects and not about you - then I might expect no reply.. :)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 21, 2019, 07:58:04 am
Hey up Andy, no worries. I fully respect your opinion of course. I asked my wife if she thought I was narcissistic. She said her ex was a narcissist and I was probably ok. 😂

Hey up Tom, I’ll be down the wall today with the little one so happy to explain if I catch up with you there? ✌️💗. Your post above creates the much utilised moral high ground ‘double bind’. Classic in ukc opinion pieces and as a tool to win arguments. Guess I’m fucked on that account.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 21, 2019, 08:10:47 am
I asked my wife if she thought I was narcissistic. She said her ex was a narcissist and I was probably ok. 😂

I meant the post, not you, but my comment was badly phrased.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 21, 2019, 08:14:58 am
Hey up Andy, no worries. I fully respect your opinion of course. I asked my wife if she thought I was narcissistic. She said her ex was a narcissist and I was probably ok. 😂

Hey up Tom, I’ll be down the wall today with the little one so happy to explain if I catch up with you there? ✌️💗. Your post above creates the much utilised moral high ground ‘double bind’. Classic in ukc opinion pieces and as a tool to win arguments. Guess I’m fucked on that account.

Dan, I have mixed feelings, because I’m not fond of utilising ad hominem or mocking people, unless in direct response to the same.

However, in this instance, I responded to you in the context you chose to enter the conversation. Your post was a textual cartoon, a parody on “opinion pieces” and blunt in it’s mocking description of it’s own (mocking) importance and clearly written to be many of the things you have subsequently denied intending to imply.

I suspect all of your respondents feel a little ashamed at hitting back so hard, I know I do, but you have to understand why that was the initial response.

You were the unexpected Court Jester, leaping out behind us, shouting “Hey Nonny Nonny Ho!” And bouncing an inflated pigs bladder off the back of our heads, in the middle of a funeral. It is unsurprising that a few turned around and bounced a metaphorical fist off your metaphorically red painted nose.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 21, 2019, 08:36:31 am

I suspect all of your respondents feel a little ashamed at hitting back so hard, I know I do, but you have to understand why that was the initial response.


I don't.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 21, 2019, 09:04:05 am
Hey up Andy, no worries. I fully respect your opinion of course. I asked my wife if she thought I was narcissistic. She said her ex was a narcissist and I was probably ok. 😂

Hey up Tom, I’ll be down the wall today with the little one so happy to explain if I catch up with you there? ✌️💗. Your post above creates the much utilised moral high ground ‘double bind’. Classic in ukc opinion pieces and as a tool to win arguments. Guess I’m fucked on that account.

I’m nipping to the Wilton’s for a quick hit as it’s dry - sorry - the double bind (didn’t know that) was probably naughty on reflection. The overall post was just trying to point out how your posts can come across. Hope that came across. (This is so badly explained... so...)

When talking to you in person there’s a lot of secondary information coming across in facial expressions, body language, tone etc.. that makes what you say (to me) seem fine and in context - but as ever with online most of that gets lost and when you pop up in the middle of a thread with a - er - different kind of post then that’s gonna rock the boat a little (esp without the context etc..)

I expect there’s a fancy word for that.... :)

I’m going to take my foot out of my mouth now and go out. Enjoy DasDepot.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 21, 2019, 09:28:37 am
If you were a narcissist you wouldn’t have been sufficiently concerned to have posed the question.

Now, back to the matter in hand...
https://mobile.twitter.com/PulpLibrarian/status/677854293492371456/photo/1 (http://mobile.twitter.com/PulpLibrarian/status/677854293492371456/photo/1)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 21, 2019, 12:51:30 pm
I asked my wife if she thought I was narcissistic. She said her ex was a narcissist and I was probably ok. 😂

I meant the post, not you, but my comment was badly phrased.

On a different note, I’m sat reading OTE 63 (quite a good issue with Patta’s born slippy reported). Anyway I can see you lost a Staffordshire guide at the Roaches on the 9th of November 1996. Can’t help wondering if you got it back?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 21, 2019, 01:30:01 pm
Really? I found one there about that time...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 21, 2019, 08:24:58 pm
Just following on from genuinely trying not to derail the trump thread... I put some likely incoherent thoughts down


Thoughts on trump and a counterpoint in free solo. It’s hard to think about trump without considering the broader perspective of conscious and unconscious drives of the surrounding society. It goes without saying that trump is a very dangerous and unpleasant man, and at the same time is a scapegoat for a society / culture based on the illusion of the ‘American dream’. It’s easy to become enraged by his behaviour on all levels which is a helpful distraction from deeper issues of divide and alienation created by extreme consumerism / capitalism. Trump appears to me both a narcissist (in its true sense) a sadist and a man who appears to revel in death, (Hence Fromm’s Political leader as a necrophile) in a literal sense and an existential sense. His supporters and haters alike are alienated and disenfranchised, which for him is very useful. He’s a ‘container’ for hate and discontent which can be more comfortably experienced outside the individual. A kind of existential death of self. It’s an interesting idea that this ‘monster’ is (possibly) the product of a corrupt Democratic Party and people who through fear of embracing humanism gave birth to the trump administration. So trump is an idol, all be it an antichrist. I mentioned free solo as a counterpoint as this is a climbing forum and thought it was possibly an interesting way to explore what’s happening. In one sense you could imagine trump on one end of a seesaw and free solo on the other, I don’t believe one would exist without the other to balance it out. Not literally of course but as an illusion of free will and the pursuit of the American dream. Free Solo represents the ultimate accomplishment in this sense, a man with literally no bounds, choosing to deeply express his authentic self through this act of perfect death defying control, all captured for the eyes of a nation and held aloft as a superhuman idol (an alien to the alienated) In trump we experience the Death drive or hate and destruction, in  free solo the Life drive or love and procreation. Yet somehow it managed to be become the ultimate expression of the American dream. A story of a man driven by forces seemingly beyond his awareness and control bewildered and prepared to risk all and at the expense of those around him to conquer the ultimate symbol of El Cap. Leo Houlding tweeted this was death or ‘perfection’ which reminds me of quote by Spinoza who (I think) said ‘when you stare for long enough into the abyss, it begins to stare back at you’.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 21, 2019, 09:41:43 pm
I believe the abyss staring back was Nietzsche‘s nightmare.

That made more sense and I see where you are going with it, but I don’t believe one is dependent or axiomatically born of the other. I see Honold in the same light as any 6 year old climbing just a little further up the tree, where the child knows the branches are too thin, but the compulsion to push a little further is irresistible; rather than symbolic of “the American dream”.

Edit for clarity:

I think Honold, for reasons suggested elsewhere, never grew out of that “phase”, as most do, rather his trees grew with him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 21, 2019, 10:05:13 pm
Ah yes Nietzsche. Funnily enough a psychologist said to me recently, if a client starts quoting Nietzsche then I assume they’re a narcissist 😬
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 22, 2019, 12:05:43 am
Ah yes Nietzsche. Funnily enough a psychologist said to me recently, if a client starts quoting Nietzsche then I assume they’re a narcissist 😬

Interesting Dan, I was told by one of my literature professors that if someone starts using the phrase 'American dream' without a very specific context and explanation then all of the remainder of what they're saying will be total rubbish. Except they were rather less polite than that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 22, 2019, 05:43:11 am
Did he provide an example?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 22, 2019, 07:33:58 am
Did he provide an example?

Volunteering?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 22, 2019, 08:04:17 am
I’ll have a go.....

‘One time a very long number of days ago, there existed a ‘professor’  of literature... let’s call him Prof. Dick Snodeworthy. He lived in a red brick castle surrounded by many fawning gnomes. Not being entirely sure how he’d arrived there, but struggling with a seemingly un-scratchable itch he became very frustrated. One day for an apparently unfathomable reasons he became very angry at those using the  term ‘American Dream’ and warned his gnomes to beware in quite foul language. Shortly after he released his Magnum Opus called ‘re-contextualising the American Dream’. The end
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 22, 2019, 08:43:48 am
Ah yes Nietzsche. Funnily enough a psychologist said to me recently, if a client starts quoting Nietzsche then I assume they’re a narcissist 😬

Is that another double bind? 😜
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on November 22, 2019, 09:38:14 am
Ah yes Nietzsche. Funnily enough a psychologist said to me recently, if a client starts quoting Nietzsche then I assume they’re a narcissist 😬
Is that a Psychologist as in Psychology the science that always fails to get anything like the same results when they repeat a study. :bounce:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 22, 2019, 09:49:01 am
Just to confirm this was a tongue in cheek self mocking post, based on the narcissism thing. Ffs

Anyway don’t get me started on clinical psychology

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on November 22, 2019, 09:53:55 am
Just to confirm that this  :bounce: was to imply I was being deadly serious.






Not.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Mr E S Capegoat on November 22, 2019, 10:06:46 am
https://www.instagram.com/p/B5KeE_oBLz6/?igshid=fwkzx2si58xp
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 23, 2019, 08:08:30 am
Interesting article on support for Trump and the fear of death, pinches of salt at the ready:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/23/secret-trump-success-existential-dread-populist-death (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/23/secret-trump-success-existential-dread-populist-death)

Mr Capegoat, you may enjoy this one.
Mr pjh, you may not, it’s in the Guardian.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 23, 2019, 11:19:28 am
What these so clever analyses about popularism ignore is that these demagogues often get elected because the establishment don't put up a fight. In the US much of the establishment arguably aided Trump. In demographic terms, more than half of the white college educated voted for Trump... a good bit over half for the men in that group. In Trump's case most of his support was white middle class, as the Repulican party was pretty solidly tribal; popularism just helped get him over the line.

If we could put Free Solo anywhere in a comparative context (Im not sure it means much beyond whimsy)  it's probably an indication of the problem... the biggest fault of the US for me is too much emphasis on the rights to individual freedom and not enough on social responsibility. If you're poor in the US, such freedoms don't mean much, as the Clash correctly pointed out decades ago in Know Your Rights.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 23, 2019, 12:35:03 pm
Trump is of the establishment. Politically he may have begun as an outsider but the GOP establishment have fully embraced him, as have the corporate and legal establishments (all that said, I'm not letting the Democrat establishment off the hook either).

Trump's "genius" was to wed establishment support to populism and white fragility/ethno-nationalism/out-and-out racism. This essay is essential for understanding the race dimensions to Trump's victory:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/10/the-first-white-president-ta-nehisi-coates/537909/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on December 18, 2019, 01:46:40 pm
With the UK shitstorm going on, we've taken the eye off this one.

Today is going to be the day...

Reckon it will happen or not?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 18, 2019, 02:14:47 pm
Yes, he will be impeached today, the third in US history. I might be wrong, but it seems vanishingly unlikely.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 18, 2019, 03:24:55 pm
Yes, he will be impeached today, the third in US history. I might be wrong, but it seems vanishingly unlikely.

I wish I could believe it would have any real effect.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on December 18, 2019, 03:47:55 pm
Do I understand correctly that, assuming this passes in the House today, then it just goes to the Republican controlled Senate who will vote against, and therefore there’s no impact on Trump?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tommytwotone on December 18, 2019, 03:51:30 pm
That's my understanding - and it was always going to go that way.

Think the end goal was never to oust him, just try and get the stink of impeachment on him prior to the 2020 campaign.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 18, 2019, 04:05:58 pm
I reckon, if you could harness a permanent magnet rotor, to the long dead feet of the founding fathers; the spinning would power most of the northern hemisphere.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on December 18, 2019, 04:23:25 pm
Do I understand correctly that, assuming this passes in the House today, then it just goes to the Republican controlled Senate who will vote against, and therefore there’s no impact on Trump?

I think there is a prolonged hearing before Senate vote though, probably drag out forever?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 18, 2019, 04:34:00 pm
Do I understand correctly that, assuming this passes in the House today, then it just goes to the Republican controlled Senate who will vote against, and therefore there’s no impact on Trump?

The trial takes place in the Senate, where the Republicans do indeed hold a majority. We're watching the House debate now - quite simply Republicans are intellectually and morally bankrupt and they will prove that in the Senate. Senators McConnell and Graham have already, openly said they have no intention of acting as the impartial jurors that the constitution explicitly binds them to be. There can be no hope that they will as a party vote in anything but the most partisan way. He will be impeached and then acquitted.

Will it have any effect on Trump? The impeachment hearings have had only a marginal impact on public opinion, which has shifted little, and I think that will remain the case as proceedings move to an acquittal in the Senate. The proceedings might convince some supporters and neutrals who are wavering to abandon Trump. But they will also strengthen the resolve of the base. Unbelievably, I doubt it will have that much impact at all on the 2020 election. But I think things had reached such a point that the Democrats had little choice to impeach, even if the attempt is doomed and it might even provide a boost to Trump. If this had been let pass without impeachment then you might as well tear up the whole of the constitution. In many ways, it's actually a matter of principles, not politics, at this point.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 18, 2019, 04:37:44 pm
Do I understand correctly that, assuming this passes in the House today, then it just goes to the Republican controlled Senate who will vote against, and therefore there’s no impact on Trump?

I think there is a prolonged hearing before Senate vote though, probably drag out forever?

Trump says he wants a long, combative Senate trial but McConnell, who controls proceedings in the Senate, wants to keep it as short as possible. More exposure equals more risk, not of Trump losing but of the public hearing more details.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 18, 2019, 04:48:45 pm
Do I understand correctly that, assuming this passes in the House today, then it just goes to the Republican controlled Senate who will vote against, and therefore there’s no impact on Trump?

I think there is a prolonged hearing before Senate vote though, probably drag out forever?

Trump says he wants a long, combative Senate trial but McConnell, who controls proceedings in the Senate, wants to keep it as short as possible. More exposure equals more risk, not of Trump losing but of the public hearing more details.

The details will break anyway. Loudly.

Unless Bolton has as “Epstein accident”...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 18, 2019, 05:16:51 pm
Do I understand correctly that, assuming this passes in the House today, then it just goes to the Republican controlled Senate who will vote against, and therefore there’s no impact on Trump?

I think there is a prolonged hearing before Senate vote though, probably drag out forever?

Trump says he wants a long, combative Senate trial but McConnell, who controls proceedings in the Senate, wants to keep it as short as possible. More exposure equals more risk, not of Trump losing but of the public hearing more details.

The details will break anyway. Loudly.

Unless Bolton has as “Epstein accident”...

The details have already broken, loudly, to little effect.

Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer has asked that Bolton be called as a witness, something McConnell has already said will never happen. Bolton refused all requests to appear before House committees. We're not going to hear from him. On the other hand, he's already signed a very nice book deal ...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 18, 2019, 05:29:34 pm
Oh, he’ll do it his way, I think. He’s no Democrat, but he’s also not a man to cross, has a heavy, skeleton adorned, axe to grind and the balls to swing it, once it’s good and sharp.

I’d put money on there being more than already out there, in there (his book).

This is interesting:

 if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, it might still be dog (https://god.dailydot.com/man-who-looks-like-trump-supporter-twitter/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 18, 2019, 05:48:39 pm
Sorry, I meant we won't hear from his during the impeachment.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 18, 2019, 06:22:56 pm
I suppose I just hope for Trump to “Be Gone” (tail between legs a bonus) and don’t really care how he goes.
The impeachment is a step. If it unseats him, Yeha!
But mainly it’s another dent in the Teflon.
Emperor’s new clothes and all that. All of the people some of the time etc. etc.

Anyway. Moscow Mitch turns 78 on 20th of Feb. Unfortunately, that’s young for a tortoise, but we can dream.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on December 18, 2019, 07:42:13 pm
I sadly suspect that the impeachment will fail, as insufficent Reps will turn, and Trump will turn it into a victory - like the Muellar report he'll conflate not having been proven guilty with proof of innocence.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 18, 2019, 10:11:21 pm
I sadly suspect that the impeachment will fail, as insufficent Reps will turn, and Trump will turn it into a victory - like the Muellar report he'll conflate not having been proven guilty with proof of innocence.

I think that’s in large part bluster.
He will probably do those things, but the articles will have cut him deeply and regardless of the outcome now, he knows his legacy is shot.
Clinton had the gumption to recognise that resignation and graceful retreat allowed him to be rehabilitated over time. Trump and the GOP will see their intransigence dig their hole deeper and their long term damage will be greater for it.
They seem willing to risk it for short term gains.
Mitch seems eternally bent out ofshape that the people dared elect a black president and seems only to care about preventing that ever happening again. Still, he’s unlikely to make it through to 2024 and seriously long odds on 2028, so ...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 19, 2019, 04:31:12 am
I sadly suspect that the impeachment will fail.

This is a certainty. I'll be amazed if a single Republican Senator finds him guilty.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 19, 2019, 04:34:12 am
Clinton had the gumption to recognise that resignation and graceful retreat allowed him to be rehabilitated over time.

Clinton was acquitted and served out the remainder of his second term.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 19, 2019, 06:57:28 am
Clinton had the gumption to recognise that resignation and graceful retreat allowed him to be rehabilitated over time.

Clinton was acquitted and served out the remainder of his second term.

Yup, my brain fart.

Not that Nixon was as graceful in his retreat as my sentence implied (nor was his rehabilitation that great). I was thinking more about the GOP not being tarnished to same degree as they will/are this time.

So:

At least Nixon had the gumption to realise resignation and graceful retreat might allow him to be rehabilitated over time .
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 19, 2019, 07:27:58 am
That makes more sense. I think Nixon quit purely to avoid the humiliation of a Senate trial and spent the rest of his life in deep resentment. There was no rehabilitation. But I think you're right about the GOP. Nixon quit because he knew he'd lost the support of the GOP. Whether the GOP turned away through principle or an instinct for self-preservation, it did allow them to survive the tarnish of association with Nixon. That won't happen this time. But it still won't make any difference.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on December 19, 2019, 10:54:53 am
I guess the senate hearing will screw Biden's chances of getting picked.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 19, 2019, 10:56:48 am
I'm not saying you're wrong, but what's the reasoning?

On the other hand, Tulsi Gabbard, who voted Present on both articles yesterday (effectively an abstention) probably just completely screwed her Presidential bid (possibly on purpose).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on December 19, 2019, 11:58:15 am
I'm not saying you're wrong, but what's the reasoning?

I think he will have a lot of s**t thrown at him, I can't imagine Trump not briefing his defenders to bring it up at every opportunity, and unlike the Donald, it will stick to Biden*.

*Democrats are less inclined to look past these issues than Republicans, they need to be the good guys and (as) sqeaky clean (as possible in American Politics) in the same way the Rights wins on a few simple messages and the Left turn itself inside trying to cover every base and trying to be all things to all people (and get painted as championing the rights of disabled trans immigrants and arguing about who gets to use which toilet whilst not looking after the white "native" working class).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on December 23, 2019, 10:45:32 pm
Never mind the impeachment trial, how are these the words of a man fit to be president? ‘I never understood wind’: Trump goes on bizarre tirade against wind turbines
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/23/trump-bizarre-tirade-windmills?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Christ on a bike, I wouldn't trust this man to drive, let alone in charge of the entire US military.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: UnkArl on December 24, 2019, 12:02:57 am
What in the blue fuck is he on about!?!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fiend on December 24, 2019, 09:01:21 am
A truly nauseating level of extreme idiocy and incoherence, even by his exceptionally low standards.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 24, 2019, 09:10:10 am
What in the blue fuck is he on about!?!

Just another part of the appeal to the angry (white) people who elected him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 24, 2019, 10:44:22 am
This batshit crazy interview with Rudy Giuliani is well worth reading: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/a-conversation-with-rudy-giuliani-over-bloody-marys.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 24, 2019, 11:23:38 am
What in the blue fuck is he on about!?!

Just another part of the appeal to the angry (white) people who elected him.

Actually, since I’m tired of being lumped in with these “white” people (both here and in the US), could we just call them “Thickos”?
It’s more accurate and less racially charged.
#notallwhitepeople


(This is written in jest, Merry Xmas, ya animals!)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 03, 2020, 11:45:17 am
We already have apocalyptic fires, now we can have an apocalyptic war to go along with them. Oh, happy day!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 03, 2020, 11:54:52 am
We already have apocalyptic fires, now we can have an apocalyptic war to go along with them. Oh, happy day!

We can only hope he's thought carefully about the consequences, and has a clear plan for foreign policy, and the inevitable Iranian retaliation. Or possibly, he just did it on a whim because he thought it'd play well with his voting base. I wonder which is closer to the truth....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 03, 2020, 12:04:55 pm
We already have apocalyptic fires, now we can have an apocalyptic war to go along with them. Oh, happy day!

We can only hope he's thought carefully about the consequences, and has a clear plan for foreign policy, and the inevitable Iranian retaliation. Or possibly, he just did it on a whim because he thought it'd play well with his voting base. I wonder which is closer to the truth....

 :-\
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 03, 2020, 12:46:44 pm
Can i bet on b) please.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: BrutusTheBear on January 03, 2020, 07:05:18 pm
 :-\ wonder where he got the idea?!

https://youtu.be/9QdBPP7nMfI
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 04, 2020, 09:46:40 am
Multiple tweets also saying what your video clip does, that Obama can't negotiate,  and will choose war because hes weak; it wont mean anything to his base, that Obama negotiated the nuclear deal from which trump has withdrawn,  and manifestly did not go to war. Trump hasn't yet either, but I  the next year, we'll find out if hes seriously miscalculated or has actually weakened the Iranian regime. My fear is that they may retaliate through European targets as they're likely to be easier to hit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 04, 2020, 10:32:48 am
Is this a play straight out of house of cards? Declare war to win an election? (I know it’s really really not that simple...)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 25, 2020, 11:03:01 pm
A thorough, though perhaps slightly melodramatic evisceration of the impeachment process.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/25/trump-legacy-end-of-trust-in-democracy-simon-tisdall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 26, 2020, 07:23:11 am
I don't think it's melodramatic. I think the sign's for American democracy are grave. The Republicans are determined to turn this trial into a travesty, and through a gerrymandered majority they have the means to do so. Senior Republican senators such as McConnell and Graham declared weeks ago that they had no intention of acting as the impartial jurors they are meant to be (despite being required to swear and oath at the beginning to of the proceedings). They will acquit, no matter what evidence is presented. And then they will crow and gloat about it, revelling in the subversion of the rule of law, and their diehard supporters will lap it up.

Elsewhere, wherever and whenever they can, they will gerrymander (Dems are not innocent of this either), suppress black and brown votes, defend the no longer fit for purpose Electoral College, and pack courts at all levels with the incompetent and unqualified.

He will be acquitted. I doubt one Republican will break rank. He will, I think, win again in November. Impeachment is doomed and will probably play a part in sinking whoever becomes the Democratic candidate. But I still think they were right to do it. The amount and weight of the evidence in the public domain had become so overwhelming that ignore it would have been to say, in effect, that the rule of law no longer counts for anything. However futile it is, this impeachment represents an attempt to stand for something. The Republicans have shown they have no principles beyond  power, for which they will be rewarded. American democracy is deeply impoverished.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 26, 2020, 10:40:26 am
I don't think it's melodramatic ... American democracy is deeply impoverished.

I don't disagree with a word you've said Andy. I'd only add that I don't think it's only American democracy. 
Johnson seems to have avoided the issue of his siphoning public money to the model he was having an affair with,  Cummings has similarly dodged the electoral commission investigation into the conduct of the vote leave campaign.  The UK government has made a habit of repeating proven lies so often that the media gets tired of trying to refute them.

Democracy is on the wane,  at the behest of gangster capitalism dressed up as populist movement.  'Make America Great', 'Get Brexit Done '; the will of the people is only a slide towards a Putinesque state.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 26, 2020, 01:24:14 pm
Cummings has similarly dodged the electoral commission investigation into the conduct of the vote leave campaign.

Cummings is still (!) in contempt of parliament, some 18 months after being found so:
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/technology/data/news/102824/vote-leave-boss-dominic-cummings-found-contempt-parliament-over (https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/technology/data/news/102824/vote-leave-boss-dominic-cummings-found-contempt-parliament-over)

What was that you were saying about democracy in decline..?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: sdm on January 26, 2020, 01:26:50 pm
The UK government has made a habit of repeating proven lies so often that the media gets tired of trying to refute them.

It would be nice if they tried. The constant lies, bullshit and exaggerations are only effective because the majority of the media parrots them back all the time without scrutiny or fact checking.

They couldn't get away with it without a complicit media.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 27, 2020, 07:36:24 am
The UK government has made a habit of repeating proven lies so often that the media gets tired of trying to refute them.

It would be nice if they tried. The constant lies, bullshit and exaggerations are only effective because the majority of the media parrots them back all the time without scrutiny or fact checking.

They couldn't get away with it without a complicit media.

This is manifestly not true.  The BBC routinely checks figures and claims.  I hardly heard a single report in the whole election campaign that didn't point out that there would not be 40 new hospitals, for  example.
Rather more on topic,  the Washington Post has a running total of Trump's  lies in office. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 27, 2020, 07:49:49 am
It is true of parts of the media in the US though. Most people get their news from an extremely limited range of sources, and if the source the rely on is Fox News then they will almost never hear Trump's narrative challenged. I've spoken to numerous people about watching a relative or friend change dramatically after turning to Fox.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on January 27, 2020, 10:49:55 am
The UK government has made a habit of repeating proven lies so often that the media gets tired of trying to refute them.

It would be nice if they tried. The constant lies, bullshit and exaggerations are only effective because the majority of the media parrots them back all the time without scrutiny or fact checking.

They couldn't get away with it without a complicit media.

This is manifestly not true.  The BBC routinely checks figures and claims.  I hardly heard a single report in the whole election campaign that didn't point out that there would not be 40 new hospitals, for  example.
Rather more on topic,  the Washington Post has a running total of Trump's  lies in office.

I'd say the BBC dishonestly played it both ways as there were real threats over their shoulder ... most tory politicians got a really easy ride in the peal time interviews in the election and largely avoided in depth challenge that few ordinary viewers watch (Newsnight etc).... they then point to the fact checks that very few read and shows few watch to show their wonderful impartiality and journalistic quality. Its most important that liars are pulled up on peak-time TV news that people actually watch and PMs need public shaming for not attending election debates on the national broadcaster. The BBC will now reap what they helped sow and likely get gutted by this scumbag government.

Teresa Villiers was on Countryfile yesteday (we watched for the climbing, caving and Bamford Angler's Rest clips) and said all farming subsidies and protections would remain and they would get wonderful new deals with other countries. Well thats intersting said the BBC specialist commentator to pure fantasy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 27, 2020, 01:17:31 pm
Offwidth, that comes across as a rather bad tempered post, however you meant it. I don't understand the lefts obsession with trashing the media at every opportunity.
People on the right are equally convinced that the BBC is against them, does it not strike you that they're doing something right? I think people do read the fact checking things, not everyone is a foolish automaton.
Anyway this is rather off topic, I'd certainly agree with Andy in that the media in the US is far more partial and in parts willing to accept and propagate bare faced lies.
If you trash the BBC, you won't get some perfect arbiter, you'll get Fox News.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 27, 2020, 01:46:12 pm
Equally Toby, the BBC are not perfect examples of a media organisation - and they made several fuckups during the election coverage (the edits to JC cenetaph for example - and others).

Whether intentional or not they deserve to be called out / picked up for this and their other mistakes. We should not just let things slide otherwise we'll end up with XYZ... You could argue that is what has got us into the present state of politics!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on January 27, 2020, 02:58:44 pm
Equally Toby, the BBC are not perfect examples of a media organisation - and they made several fuckups during the election coverage (the edits to JC cenetaph for example - and others).

They surpassed themselves on the news at ten last night, showing footage of Le Bron James instead of Bryant.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 27, 2020, 03:26:32 pm
I don't understand the lefts obsession with trashing the media at every opportunity.

If you trash the BBC, you won't get some perfect arbiter, you'll get Fox News.

As I think you and I have discussed further up this very thread, this comes down to whether or not you think there is a systemic bias at play in the media against leftist thought. You clearly don't; thats fine, but don't pretend you don't understand why people on the left have a problem.

As TTT said, the BBC have had a seriously bad few months. You know this as well as I, but if you really need the evidence I'll make a list this evening. I'd be interested in seeing whether a comparable list could be compiled detailing supposed BBC bias *in favour* of the left. No one will be able to, because it doesn't exist.

I am a massive defender of the BBC, I don't want it gone. I think the license fee is great value for money. Equally, I want it to actually do what its supposed to and be politically neutral. Its possible to hold both those views at the same time I think.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 27, 2020, 03:35:57 pm

They surpassed themselves on the news at ten last night, showing footage of Le Bron James instead of Bryant.

Ah ha, this was obviously a cunning ploy to pretend to be incompetent,  and therefore mask their Machiavellian pro Tory anti Corbyn editing practices... or something. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ru on January 27, 2020, 03:48:18 pm
As TTT said, the BBC have had a seriously bad few months. You know this as well as I, but if you really need the evidence I'll make a list this evening. I'd be interested in seeing whether a comparable list could be compiled detailing supposed BBC bias *in favour* of the left. No one will be able to, because it doesn't exist.

Apart from listening to radio 4 on the way to work sometimes, it's been a long time since I've watched or listened to anything on the BBC, so I can't say anything about bias from experience. But I do read a broad political cross section of online media and always browse the comments sections, in which both the "left" and "right" (inverted commas because I think that dividing political thought into two oppositely defined camps is unhelpful) both think the BBC is biased in the opposite side's favour. There are regular calls for it to be disbanded in the Telegraph for being leftwards biased, for example. If the BBC really does have a rightwing bias how can it have done it so badly?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 27, 2020, 03:58:37 pm
Brave man reading the comments sections!

Its a good point; both sides do slag the BBC. I suppose I just don't think the slagging from the political right is based on fact. For example, the government boycotting the Today programme on the grounds of being too left wing is manifestly a crock of shit. Humphreys, when he was around, was an ardent Brexiteer and Sarah Sands, current Today editor, is a previous Telegraph/Mail journalist.

I don't want this to sound like crank bullshit because I really don't think its Machiavellian, I think its more pro-establishment deference. The government's line is reported as fact too often without being challenged. I appreciate its a fine line because if a minister gets given a hard time on the radio/TV they simply stop coming on, but I would prefer to empty chair politicians then let their lines go unchallenged. And the same goes for politicians of any stripe; no one should get a free ride.

Just my perspective anyway!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: i.munro on January 27, 2020, 06:56:41 pm
For me the BBC is repeating the error it made over climate change by  representing both sides as if they were of equivalent weight. An outmoded way of reporting politics when one side has simply abandoned any attempt at being truthful.
As i keep reading "if one side says it's day and the other says it's night the job of the journalist is not to report both positions , it 's to look out of the F$%%ing window and find out who is lying".
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 28, 2020, 08:12:24 am
Back on topic, interesting new Israel-Palestine 'peace' deal on the table today...conveniently timed to assist Netanyahu in the upcoming election and with a corruption charge hanging over him!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 28, 2020, 08:54:57 am
Let alone explosive reports on Bolton's forthcoming book ...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on January 28, 2020, 08:55:43 am
Back on topic, interesting new Israel-Palestine 'peace' deal on the table today...conveniently timed to assist Netanyahu in the upcoming election and with a corruption charge hanging over him!

And 'negotiated' without talking to the palestinians! Funny definition of a deal, seems more like a proclamation.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on January 28, 2020, 09:20:23 am
Offwidth, that comes across as a rather bad tempered post, however you meant it. I don't understand the lefts obsession with trashing the media at every opportunity.
People on the right are equally convinced that the BBC is against them, does it not strike you that they're doing something right? I think people do read the fact checking things, not everyone is a foolish automaton.
Anyway this is rather off topic, I'd certainly agree with Andy in that the media in the US is far more partial and in parts willing to accept and propagate bare faced lies.
If you trash the BBC, you won't get some perfect arbiter, you'll get Fox News.

My concerns are simply not about left or right bias (I think the BBC is broadly neutral but has shown bias both ways at diferent times on different topics). My concerns are about more fundamental aspects of journalism: truth and holding politicians to account (and as I munro says not putting equal time and emphasis on both sides of an argument that the facts show really only has one side....like climate change). I will say it again that the BBC is the best state broadcaster in the world that I am aware of but it had a reallly shit election on its most watched news and election output. I see the steps to Fox news (cartoon rightwing popularist propaganda) occuring because the BBC gave Boris a free pass to re-election by not always challenging his very big lies ... and nothing to do with his politics. I think anyone remaining even-tempered in the face of all this is a saint.

How can we not despair in the face of the unchallenged pure fantasy of what was said on Countyfile by the minister in charge of the future of environment and agriculture after brexit.

Government is becoming so detached from reality even the satirist sketch writers are struggling:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jan/27/door-matt-an-inspired-choice-to-take-the-huawei-hit

Trump and politics in the US is a warning, not a model to follow.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 28, 2020, 10:57:28 pm
Back on topic, interesting new Israel-Palestine 'peace' deal on the table today...conveniently timed to assist Netanyahu in the upcoming election and with a corruption charge hanging over him!

And 'negotiated' without talking to the palestinians! Funny definition of a deal, seems more like a proclamation.

Indeed. It is clearly more about domestic politics in the US and Israel than it is about any interest in peace. Netanyahu is in a worse situation than Trump, and is similarly casting around for a bit of international conflict to strengthen his base of support. Supporting Israel is a distraction from impeachment for Trump and electoral points from the Christian right wing voters. The world would be a better place if neither of these men was leading a country.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 29, 2020, 08:11:28 am
Netanyahu going to prison would definitely be cause for celebration, even if it is unlikely. A truly odious man.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on January 29, 2020, 10:05:26 am
Netanyahu going to prison would definitely be cause for celebration, even if it is unlikely. A truly odious man.

As long as you mean his corruption should be the biggest concern.

Back to 5G for a moment it will be interesting to see how Trump spin and Boris spin will be merged at some point for that wonderful trade deal. The fact is the UK are likely to be struggling soon on those  pesky economic forecasts and can't afford to backtrack on 5G installation which is already a good distance down the line; and we need China as much as the US once outside the EU. Even the ministerial  bulldog was supportive (have people forgotten he is a libertarian?)

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jan/28/dominic-raab-unsettles-huawei-opponents-by-being-nice-for-once
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on January 29, 2020, 09:05:39 pm
Trump's lawyers argued that a quid pro quo that is in the national interest would be a legitimate one. And that believing your own re-election is in the national interest is okay.

 :tumble:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 29, 2020, 09:54:23 pm
Trump wrote of Bolton: “… if I listened to him, we would be in World War Six by now, and goes out and IMMEDIATELY writes a nasty & untrue book. All Classified National Security. Who would do this?”

Even after a few years, I still can't get over the way that this is a powerful grown man more than seventy years old, and he talks and writes like a fucking four year old.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fiend on January 29, 2020, 10:31:33 pm
He never gets any less repugnant and contemptible.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 30, 2020, 05:49:38 am
Trump's lawyers argued that a quid pro quo that is in the national interest would be a legitimate one. And that believing your own re-election is in the national interest is okay.

 :tumble:

We truly reached some new lows yesterday.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 30, 2020, 10:04:23 am
A small,  meaningless piece of shameless schadenfreude to lighten the mood:

Trump border wall between US and Mexico blows over in high winds
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/30/trump-border-wall-between-us-and-mexico-blows-over-in-high-winds?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

I heard an interesting interview with Michael Lewis (financial journalist and author of the big short) in which he was very confident that Trump would not be reelected,  irrespective of who is running against him. I'd like to have that kind of optimism! 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 30, 2020, 10:24:34 am
I heard an interesting interview with Michael Lewis (financial journalist and author of the big short) in which he was very confident that Trump would not be reelected,  irrespective of who is running against him. I'd like to have that kind of optimism!

Me too! What was his reasoning? I suppose we may have all talked ourselves into an unnecessarily negative mindset ... but I'm not convinced.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on January 30, 2020, 10:30:18 am
A small,  meaningless piece of shameless schadenfreude to lighten the mood:

Trump border wall between US and Mexico blows over in high winds
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/30/trump-border-wall-between-us-and-mexico-blows-over-in-high-winds?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard


Shame that the viral wall story is partly fake news and so plays to the 'dishonesty of Liberals' agenda of the Trump base (the section was under construction and the concrete foundations hadn't set).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 30, 2020, 10:32:40 am
A small,  meaningless piece of shameless schadenfreude to lighten the mood:

Trump border wall between US and Mexico blows over in high winds
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/30/trump-border-wall-between-us-and-mexico-blows-over-in-high-winds?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard


I don't think anyone is treating it as any more than a little light relief. If we can't laugh at him then they're already more than half way to having won.

Shame that the viral wall story is partly fake news and so plays to the 'dishonesty of Liberals' agenda of the Trump base (the section was under construction and the concrete foundations hadn't set).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on January 30, 2020, 11:56:09 am
I heard an interesting interview with Michael Lewis (financial journalist and author of the big short) in which he was very confident that Trump would not be reelected,  irrespective of who is running against him. I'd like to have that kind of optimism!

Me too! What was his reasoning? I suppose we may have all talked ourselves into an unnecessarily negative mindset ... but I'm not convinced.

I didn't catch the last part of the interview, but the gist of his point seemed to be that the lies will catch up with Trump eventually and when they do it will be enough to oust him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 30, 2020, 12:06:26 pm
That seems like an awful lot of wishful thinking.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on January 30, 2020, 12:15:31 pm
A small,  meaningless piece of shameless schadenfreude to lighten the mood:

Trump border wall between US and Mexico blows over in high winds
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/30/trump-border-wall-between-us-and-mexico-blows-over-in-high-winds?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard


Shame that the viral wall story is partly fake news and so plays to the 'dishonesty of Liberals' agenda of the Trump base (the section was under construction and the concrete foundations hadn't set).

It may not have blown over, but it's not that difficult to climb it.......

https://youtu.be/QQo79GHq4T0


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 30, 2020, 01:06:24 pm
When it is continuous there won't there be no side to to pull on on the panel at the top?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on January 30, 2020, 01:15:13 pm
When it is continuous there won't there be no side to to pull on on the panel at the top?

Apparently the top plates aren't continuous, see 2:24 in the vid.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on January 30, 2020, 01:57:17 pm
When it is continuous there won't there be no side to to pull on on the panel at the top?

Edit: What remus said, they decided to leave a gap between panels in construction so you the guy who built the replica thought it was fair game to use the sides to climb.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 30, 2020, 02:40:18 pm
OK, I just speed watched it. Can't make this shit up.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on January 31, 2020, 10:12:44 am
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jan/31/trump-will-put-us-interests-first-in-trade-talks-says-kim-darroch-ambassador

Who could have seen this coming?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 31, 2020, 10:32:18 am
‘Leader of Nation will put that Nation’s interests first’ is not a huge news scoop.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on January 31, 2020, 11:09:02 am
I'd agree with that.... but it's a timely reminder, an exclusive and a good day for a 'remainer paper' to release it. It's probably a pretty accurate assessment in contrast to the fantasy coming from our government and from Trump.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 31, 2020, 11:50:41 am
Meanwhile, it looks increasingly like he will be acquitted today. Even the Soviet Union would have been embarrassed to call this a trial.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 31, 2020, 11:53:21 am
We'll never hear the end of it now. He'll bang on about it forever.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 31, 2020, 12:06:29 pm
We'll never hear the end of it now. He'll bang on about it forever.

God, I know, that's almost the worst part of it. Him and all the Trumpers among my FB friends' families.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 31, 2020, 01:00:35 pm
a second term for a president presiding over a comfortable economy, is pretty normal.
Most entrenched voters are not affected a Jot by what they will view as the Brouhaha of political life and will vote in their personal interests only.
The (ultimately tiny number of) swing voters, will be mainly influenced by how they feel in the two weeks/month or so, leading up to actually casting their vote.

Unfortunately (? Not that I wish ill on them) the policies of Trump have not (yet?) impacted enough individuals negatively to influence their vote; I suspect.

Much like the UK. The majority of negative impact here (after 10 years of Tory rule) has landed on groups who would never vote Tory anyway, so unless the rest of the population suddenly develop an as yet unseen social conscience; nothing will change.

Here, as there, I would posit that the lack of awareness of both Tory and GOP leaderships, will lead them into adopting polices that negatively impact enough “middle ground” individuals for the flip to occur. That or a recession.

The latter really isn’t in the control of Governments (it could be, but it isn’t), however, they invariably bear the blame.

Ultimately, a large number (most?) of people don’t like politicians of any stripe, tend to think “they’re all the same” and therefore only pick the “least worst” based on the circumstances of their daily life and individual prosperity.
Don’t expect change until those things tangibly degrade across enough of the middle ground.

Offwidth. All of the rest of the rhetoric and philosophy (left and right) is just window dressing and background noise to the busy, overworked and “just getting by” that occupy the vast middle ground of western democracies. No more relevant to everyday life than Kant or Spinoza.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 31, 2020, 01:27:18 pm
Actually, I should have added this:

Yesterday, I completed my Command and Control Firefighting refresher module (all senior officers have to re-qualify every five years) and I sat through, again, the same lecture, that I had to a week earlier on my Medical First Aid onboard Ships refresher and will almost certainly hear in my Proficiency in Survival craft and Rescue boats refresher and definitely in the Human Element in Leadership and Management (M) (a full 5 days in bloody Glasgow uni for that bugger) over the next two weeks.

Anyway, the lecture revolves around a study, carried out in the UK, about ten years ago.
Various groups, of about 20 individuals, of varying backgrounds and ages, are placed in a room to “fill out a form”. Thinking theyare there for entirely different reasons from reality.
Then they set off a fire alarm and record the reaction.
The shortest recorded period, before even a single individual got up to  see if they could see anything happening outside the room they were in, was seven minutes.
Not one of the test groups evacuated, unless a suitably dressed “Fire Marshal” instructed them to.

People suck.

Incidentally, as an aside, if the alarm is replaced by a recorded voice, stating there is a fire, nobody ignored it and nobody questioned ifitwas “real”.

Edit:

To me this sounds analogous to the Media and it’s relationship to theworld at large. The study is more complex than described here, also looking at environments (such as a ship’s Bridge of Engine control room) where a variety of alarms are located and how even well trained individuals actually miss import alarms amongst lesser indicators. Pilots are often put inthat position too. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 31, 2020, 01:39:58 pm
I'd tend to agree with you Matt, that he'll get re-elected; but there have been a number of commentators writing recently that if the democrats can keep focus on his character and not performance, he'll lose. They have not always been European left wingers either. I'm sceptical but the general opinion seems to be that people in the us approve broadly (overall) of his performance, but profoundly dislike him as a character.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on February 03, 2020, 09:04:27 am
The shocking thing is how normal this has become.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/feb/02/trump-kansas-city-missouri-super-bowl-tweet
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: sheavi on February 05, 2020, 07:47:16 pm
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/02/romney-impeach-trump/606127/

Quite newsworthy
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on February 05, 2020, 10:35:05 pm
Fully acquitted, to the surprise of noone. The Americast BBC podcast has a really good look at the Iowa caucus, worth a listen.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on February 06, 2020, 09:30:30 am
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/02/romney-impeach-trump/606127/

Quite newsworthy

One shining example.

Rest are like turkeys given the option of voting against Thanksgiving.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on February 18, 2020, 05:10:39 pm
Interesting development

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/feb/18/trump-barr-judges-emergency-meeting-concerns
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eastside on February 18, 2020, 05:30:39 pm
It's like a slow motion trainwreck.

It would be almost funny if it weren't for the sinister, nazi-esque undertone of all of this.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on February 20, 2020, 09:26:14 am
Who's more likely to beat Trump, a 78 year old billionaire or a 78 year old socialist?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 20, 2020, 09:51:17 am
I couldn't watch last night but by all accounts Bloomberg was a train wreck. He doesn't belong on the ballot and doesn't deserve to be.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 20, 2020, 10:11:01 am
Is there some way we could, sort of, mush them together?

Bernbloom?

Bernberg?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on February 20, 2020, 10:16:56 am
I couldn't watch last night but by all accounts Bloomberg was a train wreck. He doesn't belong on the ballot and doesn't deserve to be.

Interesting.  Would you favour Sanders? If so do you not feel that hes in danger of doing a Corbyn  (ie inspiring to the already believers, whilst repulsive to the undecided and the apathetic).
I'm genuinely asking from a pretty neutral standpoint as I don't really have a horse in the race, other, obviously,  than I'd really like Trump not to be president. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 20, 2020, 10:29:41 am
I would vote for Sanders but I'm not totally convinced any of them will beat Trump. It disturbs me how far to the right the political pendulum has swung there. Buttigieg is thoroughly depressing as the 'moderate' candidate, totally plastic, like an American Trudeau. At least he is a bit younger though!

My work conversations over the past few weeks with American financial people suggest an extreme wariness about a Sanders nomination. This is a) not surprising given they are private equity people who would clearly see their industry face challenges under a Sanders presidency but b) pretty depressing given the Trumpian alternative. It reinforces my depressing suspicion that what people fundamentally care about is feathering their own nests and sod everything else. Selfish, yes; but god knows how to address it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 20, 2020, 02:21:34 pm
I couldn't watch last night but by all accounts Bloomberg was a train wreck. He doesn't belong on the ballot and doesn't deserve to be.

Yes, how ghastly to have a ... non-partisan

Except that he really isn't.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 20, 2020, 03:00:17 pm
I couldn't watch last night but by all accounts Bloomberg was a train wreck. He doesn't belong on the ballot and doesn't deserve to be.

Interesting.  Would you favour Sanders?

It's a genuine conundrum, and everyone is trying to second guess this thing called "electability" (which can only be assessed ex poste anyway). I'll preface this with two things. My views are hypothetical, I don't have a vote - though I should have one by 2024. Second, come the general election I would vote for any of these candidates, except Bloomberg. I know a lot of people who feel this way, but also plenty who don't. I acknowledge my friends skew very heavily left and most are very loyal to Bernie (though, to my knowledge, only one of these people didn't vote for Hillary in 2016). Actually, one more thing, I think Trump has a very strong chance of winning again, no matter who he is running against.

In the primaries, healthcare is the overriding issue for me. That rules out just about anyone but Bernie and Warren. I think both, and Bernie especially, can win in the popular vote but both may well lose in the electoral college. The VP pick will be important. If I was forced to pick I would like to see Warren/Julian Castro. I think Biden is over but I suppose he might revive. I think Trump would eviscerate him in a debate. I think Buttigieg will fade. Klobuchar will not get the nomination.

Bernie is the undoubted frontrunner right now but we shouldn't forget the DNC - are they prepared to accept that he's the party's choice?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on February 20, 2020, 03:33:23 pm
I couldn't watch last night but by all accounts Bloomberg was a train wreck. He doesn't belong on the ballot and doesn't deserve to be.

Yes, how ghastly to have a ... non-partisan

Except that he really isn't.

He's also quite probably both sexist and racist based on what I can tell. So in my opinion most definitely pretty ghastly.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 20, 2020, 03:45:50 pm
There's that too. He bought his way onto last night's stage and in the process managed to conjure up some myth about his electability. That completely evaporated last night.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on February 20, 2020, 03:55:19 pm
I think Trump has a very strong chance of winning again, no matter who he is running against.

I agree with this. Although I would be surprised if it was an actual legitimate win. I think they will quite literally just try to cheat or lie about the result and declare Trump winner. Or he will simply refuse to hand over the keys. They've seen that there is basically no being held accountable so why not. And the consequences for him once he's out of office look pretty dire.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nigel on February 21, 2020, 06:47:42 pm
fringe politicians like Sanders.

What makes Sanders a "fringe" politician? Genuine question!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on February 21, 2020, 07:02:41 pm

Micheal Bloomberg built a huge technology/ media business from zero through the 1980s and 1990s, serving clients in the financial sector. Not a time and place where political correctness was especially emphasised (books like Liars Poker and Bombardiers give accurate portrayals). Given that, it is actually astonishing that there isn't more mud sticking to him and suggests his standards were likely quite high in context. Judging him by the scorched-earth woke standards of, say, a contemporary university humanities faculty is ridiculous and is a road to damning a whole generation of successful business people in favour of Corbynesque fringe politicians like Sanders.

Which other presidents have been business people beside the current incumbent? Hopefully there are some slightly more successful counter examples!

Edit ah ha found a list https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_United_States_by_previous_experience makes for some interesting reading re: previous businessmen!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 22, 2020, 07:43:30 am
Judging him by the scorched-earth woke standards of, say, a contemporary university humanities faculty is ridiculous

Do you really have to be so fucking tedious Toby? Anyway, I'll let all my non-Bloomberg supporting friends - the shop floor manufacturing worker turned union organiser, the other union organiser, the several teachers, the school psychologist (ok, this one has a PhD), the several retirees, the several small business owners, the social worker, the pastor, a couple of people working middle management corporate jobs, the charity worker, a couple of people genuinely struggling to keep their heads above water, the attorney, the award winning brewer (sounds hipster but no college degree), the stay at home mum,, and, yes, a couple of college professors working hard at hard pressed state schools serving local communities - that they're all just too "woke."

Anyway, it's all ok, because boys will be boys etc.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on February 22, 2020, 01:09:13 pm
Judging him by the scorched-earth woke standards of, say, a contemporary university humanities faculty is ridiculous

Do you really have to be so fucking tedious Toby? Anyway, I'll let all my non-Bloomberg supporting friends - the shop floor manufacturing worker turned union organiser, the other union organiser, the several teachers, the school psychologist (ok, this one has a PhD), the several retirees, the several small business owners, the social worker, the pastor, a couple of people working middle management corporate jobs, the charity worker, a couple of people genuinely struggling to keep their heads above water, the attorney, the award winning brewer (sounds hipster but no college degree), the stay at home mum,, and, yes, a couple of college professors working hard at hard pressed state schools serving local communities - that they're all just too "woke."

Anyway, it's all ok, because boys will be boys etc.

Agreed! What a ridiculous thing to say! Its not like speaking out against racism and sexism only just happened in the last few years amongst 'woke' liberals. These are quite literally centuries old issues!

And even if they were only recent issues, his "stop and frisk" policies as New York major in the 2000s were controversial and disproportionately targeted minorities.

Read his quotes yourself they are not exactly all old. Many are fairly recent and pretty distasteful by the standards of almost any era.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/feb/19/mike-bloomberg-2020-mayor-democratic-primary

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on February 22, 2020, 07:12:43 pm
What about his implementation of racist policing tactics as New York major? Was that just banter too?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on February 22, 2020, 07:57:24 pm
Malcolm Tucker is very funny. I love the thick of it. However, he's not a real person and if he was he'd be horrendous person to work with. A work place bully might be funny in a good comedy, but definitely not in real life. Nobody in their right mind suggests that Malcolm Tucker is a role model or would be a good leader.

I have to disagree with what you that what you and I think is irrelevant. Sure maybe we can't vote in the presidential election, but there are plenty of elections we can vote in and the normalising of racist candidates is not something I am happy to just shrug my shoulders at.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on February 22, 2020, 10:53:01 pm
What about his implementation of racist policing tactics as New York major? Was that just banter too?

No. In my opinion that is a more legitimate criticism of Bloomberg but he apologised for it and in a month or two the polls and primary voting will have made it clear whether black voters in the US buy his apology and/or care about this issue. It is pretty irrelevant what you or I think.

I don't really have a particularly strong positive or negative opinion on Bloomberg, but if the very extensive chapter in the book I've just read was in any way accurate stop and search was introduced wholesale by police forces across the country, after an original, and very successful, trial in Kansas City.
To briefly summarise, it worked when done only on the worst, say 5 blocks, in the entire city, and even then only at night. The amount of aggravation to people in these cases was vastly outweighed by a disproportionate fall in violence and illegal drugs. Other forces started to do this all the time, in wider areas and it didn't work.

It seems rather harsh to pin all this on Bloomberg, as I understand it, it was an extremely prevalent trend which was misunderstood and poorly implemented.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 23, 2020, 07:48:58 am
I know all too well that I can be a pompous ass. I remember with embarrassment trying to pull academic rank one time, something I apologised for immediately. But if I've ever been snide to someone simply for the fact that they work in the private sector then please point out those posts and I will apologise for them too.

I could have been less rude in my post, I should have left out the swearing. But it was your second recourse to accusations of "wokeism" in a week and it is a boring, trite, and fatuous argument that bears no relationship to any reality - either the reality of what most humanities departments are like (something I do actually know something about) or, more importantly, the reality of why many Democrats do not support Bloomberg. It's very dismissive of huge swathe of people who hold sincere views on a whole bunch of issues.

The accusations of racism and sexism are actually nowhere near the top of the list why I don't support Bloomberg (though if women and black and brown people I know say those things are real problems for them then I will I listen). The fact that he's very rich is also nowhere near the top of the list. I've read his policy platform and parts of it are actually ok, but its very weak on healthcare. I don't think he gets the real pain many American's are facing. I think America, in which I do have a real stake, needs a degree of change far beyond what Bloomberg is willing to conceive. Thus far any momentum he has seems to be built on some idea that he's the only one who can beat Trump - but there's zero actual evidence for that, it hasn't been tested yet. He hasn't deigned to put himself on the ballot and face the voters. His performance in the Nevada debate suggests he is ill-prepared, perhaps even arrogant. I don't like the fact that he seems to think he can bypass much of the process and the hard work. I think his electability claim is a house of cards. But we'll see on Super Tuesday. If I'm wrong, I'll acknowledge it.

So, sure, come up with good arguments why Bloomberg is the right candidate, but don't just ridicule and write-off any opposition to him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on February 23, 2020, 09:32:01 am
I know all too well that I can be a pompous ass. I remember with embarrassment trying to pull academic rank one time, something I apologised for immediately. But if I've ever been snide to someone simply for the fact that they work in the private sector then please point out those posts and I will apologise for them too.

I could have been less rude in my post, I should have left out the swearing. But it was your second recourse to accusations of "wokeism" in a week and it is a boring, trite, and fatuous argument that bears no relationship to any reality - either the reality of what most humanities departments are like (something I do actually know something about) or, more importantly, the reality of why many Democrats do not support Bloomberg. It's very dismissive of huge swathe of people who hold sincere views on a whole bunch of issues.

The accusations of racism and sexism are actually nowhere near the top of the list why I don't support Bloomberg (though if women and black and brown people I know say those things are real problems for them then I will I listen). The fact that he's very rich is also nowhere near the top of the list. I've read his policy platform and parts of it are actually ok, but its very weak on healthcare. I don't think he gets the real pain many American's are facing. I think America, in which I do have a real stake, needs a degree of change far beyond what Bloomberg is willing to conceive. Thus far any momentum he has seems to be built on some idea that he's the only one who can beat Trump - but there's zero actual evidence for that, it hasn't been tested yet. He hasn't deigned to put himself on the ballot and face the voters. His performance in the Nevada debate suggests he is ill-prepared, perhaps even arrogant. I don't like the fact that he seems to think he can bypass much of the process and the hard work. I think his electability claim is a house of cards. But we'll see on Super Tuesday. If I'm wrong, I'll acknowledge it.

So, sure, come up with good arguments why Bloomberg is the right candidate, but don't just ridicule and write-off any opposition to him.

Nicely put Andy, I understand your point about change,  but do you think that conservative America will vote for the amount of change that Sanders would represent? Theres no doubt that he has charisma as a speaker,  but I wonder if he might put off a lot of crucial swing voters with the mentions of socialism? Bloomberg has a record of government of New York, and is prominently pro gun control,  does that not count for anything?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 23, 2020, 09:45:48 am
No, I'm very far from convinced. There are a significant group of people who will never vote for Bernie. But as people have said about Brexit and the most recent UK elections, some of the old left/right labels are starting to break down. I've lost track of the number of interviews I've read with voters who went for Bernie in the 2016 primaries and then voted for Trump in the general - not out of some petulant revolt but because those were the two they thought might bring about change of some kind in their lives.

But Bernie's route to victory is not thought converting conservatives, it's through turn out - in particular turning out particular groups who tend to vote in lower numbers. The Latinx vote in Nevada last night showed how that can be done. Turn out in the 2016 general was 55%. Hillary didn't lose states like Pennsylvania because a few thousand "Bernie Bros" threw a strop and voted Green or Libertarian. She lost because she totally failed to get the vote out in sufficient numbers, despite the obvious importance of the election.

Interestingly, I've just seen on a friend's FB someone who described themselves as a disaffected moderate Republican saying they would not vote for Trump this year and would vote for any democrat except Bloomberg and Bernie. He doesn't like Bloomberg because he sees him as too similar to Trump. Only one person, but we may be over-estimating Bloomberg's appeal to moderate swing voters.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 23, 2020, 10:07:42 am
An addendum; in 2016 Bloomberg spent many millions of dollars supporting the re-election campaign of Republican Senator Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania. The ads Bloomberg paid for set out to paint Toomey as moderate centrist, something that isn't really true (he has occasionally uttered very mild criticism of Trump but always votes the party line). Toomey went on to win by just 1.5%, an important win in the Republican fight to hold on to the senate and thus critical to their ability to appoint Supreme Court judges and acquit Trump. That's what I mean when I say Bloomberg isn't really a Democrat.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on February 23, 2020, 10:46:34 am
But it was your second recourse to accusations of "wokeism" in a week

Wokeism? Is that a word coined by people who can’t spell ‘enlightened’?  :-\
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on February 29, 2020, 10:22:51 am
Even as a critic of the orange one, I'm gobsmacked about this (I shoild have known better... always follow the money):

https://www.theroot.com/we-calculated-how-much-we-pay-trump-to-play-golf-it-tu-1841793634
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on February 29, 2020, 10:51:47 am
No, I'm very far from convinced. There are a significant group of people who will never vote for Bernie. But as people have said about Brexit and the most recent UK elections, some of the old left/right labels are starting to break down. I've lost track of the number of interviews I've read with voters who went for Bernie in the 2016 primaries and then voted for Trump in the general - not out of some petulant revolt but because those were the two they thought might bring about change of some kind in their lives.

Interesting,  that's almost exactly what John Sopel says on the most recent Americast podcast. I'm not really a fan of Sanders bombastic rhetoric,  thin on the detail style but if hes the best chance of getting rid of Trump I hope he wins.

.... That's what I mean when I say Bloomberg isn't really a Democrat.

One might reasonably argue,  neither is Sanders. Frankly,  I wouldn't care that much what they were within reason if they have a chance of winning. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 29, 2020, 11:56:45 am
.... That's what I mean when I say Bloomberg isn't really a Democrat.

One might reasonably argue,  neither is Sanders. Frankly,  I wouldn't care that much what they were within reason if they have a chance of winning.

True, but Bernie is consistent. Bloomberg has flip-flopped in a way that makes him look opportunistic.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on February 29, 2020, 12:30:41 pm
Is their really a majority to be had for a pure-hearted socialist among the ≈ 50% americans who have franchise?

I feel that this record has gotten plenty of airtime in both France and Britain without becoming a hit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 29, 2020, 01:15:08 pm
.... That's what I mean when I say Bloomberg isn't really a Democrat.

One might reasonably argue,  neither is Sanders. Frankly,  I wouldn't care that much what they were within reason if they have a chance of winning.

True, but Bernie is consistent. Bloomberg has flip-flopped in a way that makes him look opportunistic.

I actually like the idea of a leader, who is not hamstrung by ideology and will change their mind based in the realities of a given situation.

Too many are simply the “Head Sheep”, the world could do with a few more goats leading the flock.

(Not implying Sanders is a sheep).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 29, 2020, 07:25:58 pm
I didn't mean in terms of ideas or policy but just in in broad alignment. Bernie has always been on the left, even if he hasn't always been a member of the Democratic Party, Bloomberg has switched back and forth between Democrats and Republicans.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on February 29, 2020, 07:28:26 pm
Is their really a majority to be had for a pure-hearted socialist among the ≈ 50% americans who have franchise?

As I've said before, I'm far from convinced there is. But I'm no more convinced any of the others have a better chance.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on March 02, 2020, 01:18:38 am
I didn't mean in terms of ideas or policy but just in in broad alignment. Bernie has always been on the left, even if he hasn't always been a member of the Democratic Party, Bloomberg has switched back and forth between Democrats and Republicans.

Does that mean he's flip/flopped or that he's actually moderate and the parties have swung back and forth? 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 02, 2020, 05:40:59 am
I suppose there could be some truth but seems to me that for the last four decades the GOP have only every really moved in one direction.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on March 02, 2020, 09:01:20 am
What, the boyband? :)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on March 15, 2020, 10:11:34 am
Could the only positive thing about the virus be it being the end of Trump's political career? Hes certainly been regularly and massively incompetent.  From an Observer article:
Trump’s original sin was committed two years ago when he disbanded a White House office dealing specifically with preparation for pandemics. His discomfort on this topic was clear on Friday when a reporter asked him about it.

“Well, I just think it’s a nasty question,” he said. “I don’t know anything about it.”


Surely he can't survive politically if / when the fatalities start increasing? That said, I wouldn't put it past him to try to cancel the election and award himself a second term. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on March 15, 2020, 10:27:17 am
It is for sure a bit test of his presidency. As it is for Boris. When the CV19 dust starts to settle - there will (unfortunatley) be a series of case studies (e.g. countries) against which the USA and the UK will be judged. China, S.Korea and Japan at the 'good' end (so far - its a long game I admit) and Italy and Iran at the bad end.

At the moment it looks like the USA is going more Italy than Korea shall we say...

Against those exemplars of outcomes - there will be few places to politically hide I would guess...

Then again, Trump seems to be able to dodge most things - including so far CV19...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 15, 2020, 10:38:32 am
A good part of his base just think it's a Democrat hoax. Rapidly mounting deaths might start to sway some people but that would require a persuasive argument that the blame lies, at least in part, with the administration's response. Many people will simply hear his argument that he acted early by banning travel from China in January and accept that.

Being cynical, the real risk for Trump comes from knock on effects on the economy. I have seen so many people say they can't stand him but they're doing well personally and that is what they vote on. Again, that relies on persuading people that at least some of the responsibility lies with him. This is going to be financially devastating for many people - there's massive economic insecurity in the US with large swathes of the population living pay check to pay check in insecure jobs with no legal protections. But many of those who think of themselves as secure and comfortable will see investments devastated. But who knows? Looks like we're going to be relying on Uncle Joe to make the argument. This is almost certainly also going to reveal the inadequacy and gross inequality of the US healthcare system.

Could he use it to cancel/suspend the elections in November? It seems far fetched but I suppose if the progress of the disease proves utterly catastrophic (and prolonged) then I guess its not inconceivable. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: cheque on March 15, 2020, 10:54:02 am
the CV19 dust

That’s what a ~10 year old kid at Awesome Walls on Friday evening was describing the chalk on the holds as to his instructor. :lol:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on March 17, 2020, 06:28:33 pm
Quote from: BronzedTurd
Cuomo wants “all states to be treated the same.” But all states aren’t the same. Some are being hit hard by the Chinese Virus, some are being hit practically not at all. New York is a very big “hotspot”, West Virginia has, thus far, zero cases. Andrew, keep politics out of it....

Id assumed Id be a little more used it to by now, but somehow he still finds new ways to lower my opinion of him. To call it a 'Chinese virus' and then not 25 words later make an appeal to 'keep politics out of it'! The sheer madness of it!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on March 17, 2020, 10:34:52 pm
Never assume that there isn't a new low that Trump will sink to. I don't think it's that far fetched that he'll try to delay or cancel the November election.

He'd probably start a war with Iran if he thought it'd get him a few more years fleecing the American people and pretending he has any talent.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on March 18, 2020, 05:43:17 pm
All of the stock market gains since the 2017 inauguration have gone. How will this be spun come election time...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 18, 2020, 05:49:25 pm
How will this be spun come election time...

"I don't take any responsibility." He's already said it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on March 20, 2020, 08:25:39 am
How will this be spun come election time...

"I don't take any responsibility." He's already said it.

And, he will blame the Chinese or Iranians and any other country he can remember the name of.

On the plus side, Biden is actually sounding reasonably credible. Although that probably means he won't get elected. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on March 20, 2020, 08:36:56 am

On the plus side, Biden is actually sounding reasonably credible. Although that probably means he won't get elected.

If the election even happens. Situation is perfect for an autocratic leader to delay the election.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on March 20, 2020, 09:37:58 am

On the plus side, Biden is actually sounding reasonably credible. Although that probably means he won't get elected.

If the election even happens. Situation is perfect for an autocratic leader to delay the election.

Yep, like I said a few posts ago. I think it's a real possibility.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on March 21, 2020, 09:36:03 am
 In possibly a new low even for Trump he's backing the 2 republican senators who have been blatantly insider trading, selling off a shitload of shares after a CV 19 briefing just before they all crashed. Disgusting.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on March 24, 2020, 10:44:00 pm
https://www.newstatesman.com/world/north-america/2020/03/america-pandemic-response-swine-flu-avian
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on March 25, 2020, 02:55:23 pm
Thanks for sharing, piss now boiling.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on March 25, 2020, 10:55:54 pm
Thanks for sharing, piss now boiling.
I'm not sure I really understand piss now boiling but I imagine you're probably not in favour of Trump's elimination of any structure that might have been useful in just this situation...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on March 26, 2020, 09:14:01 am
Precisely. I never thought i could think worse of the guy, but he keeps on outdoing himself.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 10:36:26 am
Amazing isn’t it.

In many ways CV19 was a golden opportunity to guarantee re-election. Do what Boris did - committee chair the experts - go and do some PR unpacking PPe boxes at an airforce base etc.. post some fake pics of self isolation in the White House etx. Etc.. etc...

But no. The Ego gets the better of him. Still Teflon don etc...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on March 26, 2020, 10:37:25 am
Didn’t Clinton bemoan that there was never a war or major crisis on during his watch - so he didn’t have any real presidential challenges?

Aside from servicing his libido of course. 😂
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on March 31, 2020, 09:39:55 am
Ah the almost daily opportunity for good old Donald to prove that he really is a vile, craven excuse for a human being. 


Trump accused of using coronavirus briefing as corporate advertising spot
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/donald-trump-coronavirus-briefing-ceos-my-pillow?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on March 31, 2020, 09:53:37 am
... and as if things couldn't be more depressing, Trump's approval rating is at its highest value since the start of his Presidency.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 31, 2020, 10:00:45 am
... and as if things couldn't be more depressing, Trump's approval rating is at its highest value since the start of his Presidency.

Beggars belief that even the dumbest Redneck can’t see what he is.

But, it nothing new. Desperate people, will cling to the illusion of personal exceptionalism and whoever supports their view.

Conmen and Hucksters have thrived on human misery, since forever.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 31, 2020, 10:57:14 am
Yes but.. there’s a tendency to support leaders in times of crisis, a tendency to rally round YOUR man when things go pear-shaped, and in any case for the evangelicals and white supremacists, there’s really only one game in town. Throw in those poorly informed and suspicious of ‘fake news media’ ( or ‘main stream media’ if you’re a Brit) and there’s a sizeable chunk of the electorate right there.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on March 31, 2020, 11:14:40 am
Yes but.. there’s a tendency to support leaders in times of crisis, a tendency to rally round YOUR man when things go pear-shaped, and in any case for the evangelicals and white supremacists, there’s really only one game in town. Throw in those poorly informed and suspicious of ‘fake news media’ ( or ‘main stream media’ if you’re a Brit) and there’s a sizeable chunk of the electorate right there.

True.  The 538 podcast on Trump's approval rating notes that his bump is less than that of the other national leaders, and less than that of US regional leaders (Governors and Mayors) - so its magnitude could be viewed as a negative sign (all depends on how long it persists relative to the electoral cycle).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 31, 2020, 11:25:41 am
Yes but.. there’s a tendency to support leaders in times of crisis, a tendency to rally round YOUR man when things go pear-shaped, and in any case for the evangelicals and white supremacists, there’s really only one game in town. Throw in those poorly informed and suspicious of ‘fake news media’ ( or ‘main stream media’ if you’re a Brit) and there’s a sizeable chunk of the electorate right there.

True.  The 538 podcast on Trump's approval rating notes that his bump is less than that of the other national leaders, and less than that of US regional leaders (Governors and Mayors) - so its magnitude could be viewed as a negative sign (all depends on how long it persists relative to the electoral cycle).

They’ll still be burying their grandparents, almost up to their election.

I can’t see it having no effect.

The “citizen  journalists” (aka Tossers) that run out to find the quietest view of their local hospitals, to try and promote the view that the whole thing is a faked up conspiracy; are a little sickening.

There’s a vocal anti-vaxer on one of Polly’s breastfeeding groups (Polly was a peer supporter for years), who is loudly protesting the entirety of germ theory.
Essentially accusing the entire world’s medical community of engaging in mass slaughter for “population control” reasons.

They’re out there and they vote.
(Fortunately, that one is Canadian (and is getting ripped apart by other members of the group)).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: duncan on March 31, 2020, 11:42:00 am
Yes but.. there’s a tendency to support leaders in times of crisis, a tendency to rally round YOUR man when things go pear-shaped, and in any case for the evangelicals and white supremacists, there’s really only one game in town. Throw in those poorly informed and suspicious of ‘fake news media’ ( or ‘main stream media’ if you’re a Brit) and there’s a sizeable chunk of the electorate right there.

It's also easy for cynical Brits. to underestimate non-evangelical/white supremacist Americans' heartfelt patriotism and how much the president - any president - embodies the country and benefits from this patriotism. It makes unseating any incumbent an uphill struggle.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on March 31, 2020, 12:49:14 pm
Yes but.. there’s a tendency to support leaders in times of crisis, a tendency to rally round YOUR man when things go pear-shaped, and in any case for the evangelicals and white supremacists, there’s really only one game in town. Throw in those poorly informed and suspicious of ‘fake news media’ ( or ‘main stream media’ if you’re a Brit) and there’s a sizeable chunk of the electorate right there.

It's also easy for cynical Brits. to underestimate non-evangelical/white supremacist Americans' heartfelt patriotism and how much the president - any president - embodies the country and benefits from this patriotism. It makes unseating any incumbent an uphill struggle.

True, but it's to be found across the political spectrum and can be complex. I have friends who are very progressive and fervently anti-Trump but also openly describe themselves as proudly patriotic in a way that it is very hard to imagine someone equivalently left-wing in Britain doing. They view resisting Trump as their patriotic duty (and one of them is a direct descendant of John Jay, one of the signees of the Declaration of Independence).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Andy F on April 03, 2020, 07:50:57 pm
This open letter from Tommy Lee (Motley Crew drummer) is gold:
https://twitter.com/ReesusP/status/1246096957451321344?s=09
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 08, 2020, 10:46:00 pm
A somewhat depressing look into Trump's latest appointment to the White House:
'We won't see coronavirus here' ... and other gems from Trump's new press secretary
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/08/kayleigh-mcenany-donald-trump-press-secretary-quotes?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Trump's behaviour at press briefings seems even more erratic than usual, if that's possible. He's a bit of a throwback and famously eats lots of burgers, perhaps he's finally got mad cow disease?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 09, 2020, 09:12:34 am

Popcorn-munchers now just have Biden's choice of running-mate to think about. Amy Klobuchar or Kamala Harris are both talked about - both seem like good choices to me.

Yes, it's surely a good idea for US politics to have a few major figures who are less than 70?
Hopefully the Democrats can pull something together.  They don't really seem to be getting any exposure over here at least,  but aware that doesn't mean much as to how people are likely to vote.

With a president who has taken to advertising old malarial prophylaxis youd have thought people would vote for anything else. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 14, 2020, 07:56:47 am
Absolutely crazy,  even by his standards. Heard some of the briefing on the news, he genuinely behaves like a seven year old  bully. Looks likely he'll fire Fauci in the next few weeks. 

Trump claims 'total authority' and attacks media in chaotic coronavirus briefing

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/13/trump-us-coronavirus-briefing-latest-media?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 14, 2020, 08:32:37 am
The GOP dominated Wisconsin Supreme Court forced last week's state elections to go ahead despite the pandemic and shutdown. Today, it's announced a conservative incumbent on that Supreme Court was beaten by a progressive Democrat challenger. A small glimmer. The result could make it harder for Republicans to purge voter rolls ahead of November (the extent of blatant voter disenfranchisement in the US is astonishing). Moreover, Wisconsin, along with Michigan and PA, was central to Trump's win by 2016. Only one result but maybe a sign that voters are willing to turn out, even at considerable risk.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 14, 2020, 08:38:11 am
It was striking how many networks cut away from his address before he finished speaking and took apart his statements.
Even Fox is looking at him sideways.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 14, 2020, 09:51:01 am
It was striking how many networks cut away from his address before he finished speaking and took apart his statements.
Even Fox is looking at him sideways.

And the Wall Street Journal according to the BBC report. The way he speaks to journalists is horrible
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on April 14, 2020, 09:58:30 am
The Guardian live fact check was having fun during his bizzare outburst. The authority point was just bizarre... effectively denying the US is federal.

In the meantime there is more gerrymandering of oversight.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/12/trump-inspector-general-purge-watchdogs
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on April 14, 2020, 02:06:32 pm
It was striking how many networks cut away from his address before he finished speaking and took apart his statements.
Even Fox is looking at him sideways.

And the Wall Street Journal according to the BBC report. The way he speaks to journalists is horrible

Not only horrible, but, assuming we think a free and open media is a good thing, just plain wrong. To be saying to a journalist "enough", because you don't like their line of questioning. Shocking.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on April 14, 2020, 07:24:39 pm
Absolutely crazy, even by his standards. Trump claims 'total authority' and attacks media in chaotic coronavirus briefing
Isn’t this just Trump now in full campaign mode?

It worked in the last election to whip up his base, trash the media and promise to ‘drain the swamp’.

He also must have paid attention to what happened in the UK at the last GE when the Tories used the same shock tactics from the Trump playbook to cut through to the voters (unlawful prororogation*, attacking the media and judiciary, made up numbers on nurses and hospitals, fake fact check twitter account, “Foreign collusion”, “Surrender Act”, etc etc). And then won a huge majority.
*I’m absolutely convinced Cummings/Johnson wanted the prorogation to end up in the courts.

Trump has been shocking us for the last 4 years but now the gloves are off and he’s just dialled it up to eleven for the election I suspect. Don’t get me wrong, I think (hope) it will backfire this time as he’s likely to go too far even for him, but then again maybe not...

The way he speaks to journalists is horrible
I heard Gove do some pretty awful interviews during the election failing to answer any questions and belittling the journalists at the same time (same principle, just in a more Gove-esque way).

I guess my point is that ‘normal’ politics has been slipping away bit by bit over the last 5 years and I struggle to be surprised any more.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on April 14, 2020, 08:35:13 pm
I thought that was more than just belittling journalists though. He seemed to think he was above questioning, and he shouldn't have to put up with being held to account by others.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on April 14, 2020, 10:06:06 pm
I thought that was more than just belittling journalists though. He seemed to think he was above questioning, and he shouldn't have to put up with being held to account by others.

Yeh that press conference was pretty special. But he has been doing this for a while with his ‘chopper talk’ taking select questions or just answering them however he wanted with a diatribe, often praising himself and trashing the media.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 14, 2020, 10:28:40 pm
I thought that was more than just belittling journalists though. He seemed to think he was above questioning, and he shouldn't have to put up with being held to account by others.

I totally agree Ged, I have no great love for Gove but no British politician comes close to Trump's behaviour. His maniacal obsession with his own viewing figures while tens of thousands of people are dying is obscene, bordering on psychosis.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 15, 2020, 06:41:44 am
The pandemic has certainly given him a stage on which to reveal (if it wasn't obvious already) the full range and depth of his character faults - the narcissism, the egotism, the fragility, the belligerence - married to a far reaching incompetence. He's completely ill-equipped to deal with this situation. It's a recipe for disaster. The battle he's setting up between the federal government and the states - the claims of "total authority" - is particularly interesting/worrying.

I hope that more and more journalists will begin to press him like the two female reporters did on Monday. He had nothing in reply and so quickly descended into total ugliness.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on April 15, 2020, 06:45:20 am
I don’t disagree Toby, and the fact it’s a public health crisis makes his behaviour even more repulsive, as you say.

My only point being that in campaign mode (US or UK) there seems to be a reframing of what would be acceptable outside of the election period. And this has been ramping up over time - first the 2016 Trump campaign, then Vote Leave, then 2019 Tory campaign, and now 2020 Trump again. He’s fighting for survival and he’ll throw everything at it. Maybe the classic phrase should be updated - “All’s fair in love, war, and campaigning”.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on April 15, 2020, 07:45:00 am
We probably need to not bother anymore with the phrase "just when you thought he couldn't get any worse"...

Trump insists on putting his name on emergency relief chequers to families, thus delaying their delivery by a few days.  People spend longer relying on food banks,but at least the presidents ego is massaged.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/coming-to-your-1200-relief-check-donald-j-trumps-name/2020/04/14/071016c2-7e82-11ea-8013-1b6da0e4a2b7_story.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 15, 2020, 08:00:06 am
Trumps suspends US WHO funding  pending an investigation into their ‘cover up’ and ‘mismanagement’
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/15/against-humanity-trump-condemned-for-who-funding-freeze
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 15, 2020, 08:55:36 am
We probably need to not bother anymore with the phrase "just when you thought he couldn't get any worse"...

Given that at the moment he'll probably be re-elected, I'm sure he can get much, much worse. In 4 years time he'd then either be trying to change the rules so he can get a third term, or install Ivana as an heir. He clearly wants to be king of the US.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 15, 2020, 09:21:48 am
Given that at the moment he'll probably be re-elected

I'm not saying he won't be, but this is looking much less certain than it did on January 1st, when I would virtually have bet on it. Things are now much more fluid and unpredictable. As Harold Macmillan may have said, "Events, dear boy, events."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 15, 2020, 10:38:17 pm
https://www.newstatesman.com/world/north-america/2020/04/donald-trump-world-health-organisation-funding-US

Andy, I think Trump knows that if he lashes out constantly and blames China, the WHO, the media and anyone else he can think of for his own total mishandling of the crisis just enough people will buy it for him to continue trying to screw the US for every cent he can get out of it, and massage his fragile ego for another four years.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on April 15, 2020, 11:00:59 pm
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/15/politics/gretchen-whitmer-operation-gridlock/index.html

Your move Donald..

can I hear Axl Rose whistling a sad refrain somewhere?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 16, 2020, 05:47:58 am
Don't get me wrong Toby, I still think it's entirely possible. I just think it's less certain than before the pandemic (when I felt it was all but certain).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 16, 2020, 10:21:55 pm
Jaysus, you'd like to think this might piss off a few potential Trump supporters:
Ivanka Trump defies social distancing to celebrate Passover at golf club

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/16/ivanka-trump-defies-social-distancing-to-celebrate-passover-at-golf-club?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

What absolute cnuts.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 17, 2020, 05:43:23 pm
So, is this not incitement to civil disobedience at the least  or even outright insurrection/violence at worst?

 https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/trump-tweets-to-liberate-michigan-minnesota-as-protesters-violate-orders-2020-4%3famp (https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/trump-tweets-to-liberate-michigan-minnesota-as-protesters-violate-orders-2020-4%3famp)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on April 17, 2020, 06:59:26 pm
If it's mostly Trump-supporters who want to go about their daily business interacting with each other in the middle of a pandemic then maybe they should be encouraged...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 17, 2020, 07:28:13 pm
If it's mostly Trump-supporters who want to go about their daily business interacting with each other in the middle of a pandemic then maybe they should be encouraged...

I second the motion.

Can we vote Mr Chairman?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on April 18, 2020, 05:53:12 pm
https://www.nonprophet.media/stand-up

Read this from Mark Twight with interest and no little incredulity. It’s interesting in the states how similar arguments can be trotted out by disparate groups, and that it would seem even intelligent people are not immune to conspiracy theories.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on April 18, 2020, 06:07:26 pm
Sounds about right for Mark Twight. Have you listened to any interviews with him? In the ones I’ve listened to he comes across as a self-absorbed bellend who takes himself far too seriously.
His climbing career seemed to be a vehicle for self-publicising his worldview of climbing and life being a noble struggle by elites against mediocrity. Tit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on April 18, 2020, 06:08:20 pm
https://www.nonprophet.media/stand-up

Read this from Mark Twight with interest and no little incredulity. It’s interesting in the states how similar arguments can be trotted out by disparate groups, and that it would seem even intelligent people are not immune to conspiracy theories.

Mark Twight may be intelligent but he always had a massive streak of twat running right down the middle, didn’t he?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 18, 2020, 06:18:23 pm
Yes, he's always struck me as an insufferable "I'm an untouchable übermensch" dick.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 18, 2020, 06:33:25 pm
"That said consistent behavior throughout my life may confer a robust physical immunity, and I am willing to make the mortal bet on that immunity."

Right ...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on April 18, 2020, 06:38:00 pm
"That said consistent behavior throughout my life may confer a robust physical immunity, and I am willing to make the mortal bet on that immunity."

Right ...

If there is one thing to take away from this crisis, it’s that climbers’ much vaunted risk assessment ability is incredibly domain specific.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 18, 2020, 07:18:46 pm
Lol, I was about to add a comment about Twight but no need. Strange what appeals to some people, I tried to listen to a recent podcast with him while painting the kitchen but it was incredibly dull.

Worse than climbers would seem to be successful businessmen. Concentrating on odds that might look like a decent punt for investment while ignoring the fact that being wrong here has a rather more serious downside.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 18, 2020, 07:31:50 pm

Mark Twight may be intelligent

Not much evidence of that there.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on April 18, 2020, 07:41:52 pm
One has to be concerned about the short to long term future of the US and the effects of covid. With what looks like a gathering movement of people up for sacking off social distancing and any kind of precautions, and a completely incompetent government, are we going to see a stratospheric epidemic there more than anywhere else? The death curve is saw in BBC for the US  is taking on a distinctly exponential shape.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on April 18, 2020, 08:37:33 pm
It’s interesting in the US. Some states will be well in top of it (California springs to mind) others hit bad but co-ordinated (New York). Some are sparsely populated and may not be badly hit at all.

But it’s not going to go away for a while. There’s a good item on the BBC about a cluster of 800 cases stemming from a slaughterhouse that wouldn’t shut down after several people there got it. I could envisage that happening repeatedly in different contexts across the states. Little or large clusters popping up repeatedly.

I don’t know enough about the federal and state structure but is this fuck up happening because the state governers call the shots - but ideally would follow a federal line. Which in this case is batshit?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: lagerstarfish on April 19, 2020, 07:06:49 am
https://www.nonprophet.media/stand-up

Read this from Mark Twight with interest and no little incredulity. It’s interesting in the states how similar arguments can be trotted out by disparate groups, and that it would seem even intelligent people are not immune to conspiracy theories.

Gosh.

Sounds just like me as an angry 16 year old (before I started climbing)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 19, 2020, 09:32:28 am

Mark Twight may be intelligent

Not much evidence of that there.

Doesn't he like quoting nietzsche? Which is as good a marker of intelligence as large furry dice hanging on someone's car mirror.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on April 19, 2020, 09:52:02 am
In the meantime, the orange one gets more crazy by the day.

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-coronavirus-press-conference-transcript-april-18

I got frustrated for a while watching the BBC live coverage last night, as the graphs were all off screen,  then I rememberd the context.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: lagerstarfish on April 19, 2020, 10:14:25 am
When he started rambling about having "many platforms" I found myself waiting for Nine and Three Quarters to get a mention
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on April 19, 2020, 05:29:13 pm
I understand all that, having lived in rural Alberta for 4 years and spent plenty of time in Montana, Wyoming and Utah. But his blog is basically attached to his business, which is some kind of 'movement' selling anti-authoritarian merchandise and artwork, and fitness programmes. He's like a hench neo-liberal John Redhead. And many of his clientele will be wealthy people from urban areas of the US who idolise Twight for his bullshit pseudo-punk-Nietzschean literature about climbing and training. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on April 19, 2020, 05:37:24 pm
It’s slightly disingenuous to talk about the BC population as a whole when more than half of that population lives within the Vancouver metropolitan area (not sure how far this extends but I remember the corridor all the way to Squamish being pretty continuously settled).

In an area like this it seems a very easy decision to close the public lands so you don’t get thousands of people heading up every chance they get, stopping at petrol stations, Mags, etc.

And if you closed the public lands nearer to Vancouver and left more remote ones open then people would just drive further!

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on April 19, 2020, 08:24:57 pm
"I’d say there’s a big difference between 6% and 60"

Can't argue with that donald.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on April 20, 2020, 10:54:42 am
It’s slightly disingenuous to talk about the BC population as a whole when more than half of that population lives within the Vancouver metropolitan area
That is true (though only a few blocks of downtown Vancouver are as crowded as say, central London) but regardless the covid stats here are as good or better than South Korea, which is held up as an exemplary model. Sustaining aggressive lockdowns is a hard sell in that context.

Canada is basically 95% a gigantic empty wasteland, with 30 million people living in 5% of the country south of a certain latitude. And even in that 'populated' little strip along the southern border with the US, there's huge amounts of open space for people to spread out into. Apart from literally a few blocks of Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Toronto or Montreal population is spread out - even in Canadian cities the housing is often large detached houses.
For an infection which spreads through human contact, I'd be astounded if the infection stats in Canada weren't miles better than just about any country in the world. 
I love this map showing population density. Basically, outside of Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary and Montreal, there isn't any!
  (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/Canada_Population_density_map.jpg)

Compare with Europe:
(https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/gfx/news/2018/1-mapsrevealth.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on April 20, 2020, 11:33:47 am
Same could be said for Scotland.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 20, 2020, 12:03:09 pm
Same could be said for Scotland.

Yeah...

But you lot batter and deep fry Mars bars, so you’re all basically walking “underlying health conditions” with Tartan skirts...

😜
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on April 20, 2020, 12:34:00 pm
Even in extreme states of inebriation I've yet to be tempted by one.

Opt for a slice of deep fried pizza instead.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on April 20, 2020, 09:51:05 pm
Even in extreme states of inebriation I've yet to be tempted by one.

Opt for a slice of deep fried pizza instead.

Deep fried pizza   :o

I had to look that up. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on April 20, 2020, 10:10:21 pm
Even in extreme states of inebriation I've yet to be tempted by one.

Opt for a slice of deep fried pizza instead.

Deep fried pizza   :o

I had to look that up.

It’s good. Deep fried haggis is/was a favourite of mine.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: nai on April 21, 2020, 09:03:42 am
No it's not. I remember my first climbing trip to Scotland, stopping at a chippy on the outskirts of Glasgow, ordering pizza and realising what I'd done when the "chef" took one, folded it and move it towards the oil.  I made it to "N" before it went in and I was resigned to having it  :sick:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on April 21, 2020, 09:15:32 am
You don't eat it sober, it's rank.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on April 22, 2020, 12:43:27 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBVAnaHxHbM

What he put in place is what Trump removed.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 24, 2020, 08:15:55 am
Trump's outdone himself this time. Ever noticed those childproof caps and labels on the bottle saying ingesting bleach isn't a good idea? POTUS takes a different view; internal UV (??) seems to be on the agenda too:
http://youtu.be/QtgVxGkrX1Y?t=102 (http://youtu.be/QtgVxGkrX1Y?t=102)

Walter Shaub, former Director of US Gov ethics, has an interesting thread on this:
 It is incomprehensible to me that a moron like this holds the highest office in the land and that there exist people stupid enough to think this is OK (https://twitter.com/sheraz_dar/status/1253576798119567365)
https://twitter.com/waltshaub/status/1253506214257975298 (https://twitter.com/waltshaub/status/1253506214257975298)

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on April 24, 2020, 09:14:38 am
Not sure what is more dangerous, the novel virus or his novel stupidity.

Can you imagine being the guy off screen he is talking to, who has to agree with him? You'd have to have your cringe surgically removed.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 24, 2020, 09:20:25 am
https://twitter.com/Daniel_Lewis3/status/1253482576699969537
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on April 24, 2020, 09:35:46 am
https://twitter.com/Daniel_Lewis3/status/1253482576699969537

Being an advisor to a powerful idiot who ignores all your advice must be a stressful job!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on April 24, 2020, 09:38:51 am
https://twitter.com/Daniel_Lewis3/status/1253482576699969537

Just needs the Curb Your Enthusiasm music adding over the top!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 24, 2020, 09:48:15 am
https://twitter.com/Daniel_Lewis3/status/1253482576699969537

Being an advisor to a powerful idiot who ignores all your advice must be a stressful job!

Maybe Simon MacDonald  (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sir-simon-mcdonalds-row-with-raab-over-failure-to-join-brussels-coronavirus-effort-zfjdzq2n3) has a view on that..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 24, 2020, 10:05:32 am
(https://i.ibb.co/hLyYC1k/5-BB7-DF5-A-EDA2-422-A-ACA9-34-E388-AB080-F.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 24, 2020, 10:08:35 am
Enjoyed this:

https://twitter.com/sarahcpr/status/1253474772702429189
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 24, 2020, 10:47:14 am
 https://newsthump.com/2020/04/24/domestos-launches-new-patriot-smoothie-for-trump-supporters// (https://newsthump.com/2020/04/24/domestos-launches-new-patriot-smoothie-for-trump-supporters//)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 24, 2020, 10:58:03 am
As an historical footnote, in the interwar period, Lysol Disinfectant was marketed throughout North America as a "feminine hygiene" product. Women were actually using it as vaginal douche for contraceptive purposes. Lysol knew full well that was what was happening but as contraception was illegal they had to use the euphemistic language about hygiene.

Mind you, I don't think this little nugget was on Trump's mind.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 24, 2020, 11:05:32 am
Using the word 'mind' advisedly there, I hope.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 24, 2020, 11:29:51 am
Goes without saying ...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 25, 2020, 09:22:34 am
It appears that what was on Trump's mind was merely that he was being lobbied by a shameless evangelical bigot looking to cash in on the US soaring death rate

Revealed: leader of group peddling bleach as coronavirus 'cure' wrote to Trump this week

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-leader-group-peddling-bleach-cure-lobbied-trump-coronavirus?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 25, 2020, 09:23:38 am
It's just occurred to me that the above description pretty much applies to Trump himself as well. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on April 25, 2020, 09:46:58 am
I think he should just come clean on his motives.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 25, 2020, 10:11:51 am
He's now claiming he was merely being sarcastic, in which case he needs to raise his game as it was about the lamest piece of sarcasm I've ever seen.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Footwork on April 25, 2020, 10:27:31 am
Surprised he didn't try the whole sarcasm thing on previous misogynistic comments tbh.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tc on April 25, 2020, 11:26:57 am
If I have to listen to that halfwit for much longer, drinking bleach will start to feel like an attractive option.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on April 25, 2020, 11:28:45 am
He's now claiming he was merely being sarcastic, in which case he needs to raise his game as it was about the lamest piece of sarcasm I've ever seen.

Lets hope the journalists take him up on that next then: Sarcasm in a President's public address during a pandemic in the context that he makes high claims about truth and fake news and where people have acted badly on his previous 'sarcasm ' (like encouraging protests in that address against lockdowns).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on April 25, 2020, 11:47:12 am
Andy - anyone - do Trump ‘tolerating’ Americans who have voted for him (as opposed to supporters) realise what a total fucking knob head he appears to be to the rest of the world? (Sorry - couldn’t think of a better way of expressing that).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 25, 2020, 12:43:23 pm
Andy - anyone - do Trump ‘tolerating’ Americans who have voted for him (as opposed to supporters) realise what a total fucking knob head he appears to be to the rest of the world? (Sorry - couldn’t think of a better way of expressing that).

I honestly don't know Tom and I guess we won't know until November. The "base" are beyond hope. His 2016 victory was really built on an alliance of traditional and non-traditional Republican voters. Before the pandemic there were plenty of "mainstream" Republicans - I know some through friends and family - perfectly willing to tolerate almost anything he did if he continued to deliver tax cuts and a "strong" economy (strong for them anyway - one thing the pandemic has revealed is just fragile large parts of the US economy are for most Americans). I guess the real question is going to be able to shift the blame for the government's response and for crashing the economy?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on April 25, 2020, 01:10:06 pm
...... and the scary demographic issues in that (that are unlike other popularist movement demographics like brexit). Most white, college-educated americans voted for Trump.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: AndyR on April 25, 2020, 09:25:14 pm
Andy - anyone - do Trump ‘tolerating’ Americans who have voted for him (as opposed to supporters) realise what a total fucking knob head he appears to be to the rest of the world? (Sorry - couldn’t think of a better way of expressing that).

A different Andy than you expected here. I spend a lot of my time in the south of the US (AR, TX, LA), and I tend to find that outside of urban areas, on the whole ‘average’ Americans have little to no idea of what goes on outside their state, and often, their county. So no, for a reasonable portion of non-urban Americans, I don’t think they know, nor do they care.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on April 25, 2020, 09:32:01 pm
Thanks both Andy’s :)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 25, 2020, 09:43:34 pm
Yes, re: the specific question of whether Americans care about how Trump is viewed outside the US, most don't consider it and don't care.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on April 26, 2020, 11:17:10 pm
He's now claiming he was merely being sarcastic, in which case he needs to raise his game as it was about the lamest piece of sarcasm I've ever seen.

Lets hope the journalists take him up on that next then: Sarcasm in a President's public address during a pandemic in the context that he makes high claims about truth and fake news and where people have acted badly on his previous 'sarcasm ' (like encouraging protests in that address against lockdowns).

I think it just highlights he doesn't know what sarcasm is, or how to use it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on April 27, 2020, 09:15:55 am
No, shit.

As he now says he won't do any more daily briefings, as it's a waste of time because of the journalists, he certainly knows something else: how to sulk like a toddler. It's a shame as they will go down in history as some of the greatest moments in inadvertant political black comedy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on April 27, 2020, 09:42:41 am
If only these journalists wouldn't spoil his junket by doing annoying things like wanting facts and the truth.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on April 27, 2020, 07:42:29 pm
I thought it worth sharing this crossword clue from last Sunday's Observer Everyman:

Team Trump rent asunder, leading to explosion of rage (6,7)

Also this beauty to celebrate wisdom:

Lunatic overcome by boundless ocean, misrepresented? (6)



Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 27, 2020, 10:47:16 pm
It appears he's changed his mind about the briefings, a ego that massive couldn't turn down the opportunity of being on national television every day for more than a few hours. It appears also that most of the individual states have decided to largely ignore what Trump says and just do whatever they want anyway. 

I wonder what batshit crazy babble Trump will come up with this evening?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on April 28, 2020, 07:16:34 am
Not really a surprise but the campaign strategy is to pivot any blame or consequences of Covid back to China. I assume that’s what he’ll use the press conferences for relentlessly now.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/24/gop-memo-anti-china-coronavirus-207244
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on April 28, 2020, 08:39:45 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I32y_0Qgb8o

Dr Birx needs to become a poker player. Her ability to not flinch is impressive.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nigel on April 28, 2020, 11:07:40 am
Not really a surprise but the campaign strategy is to pivot any blame or consequences of Covid back to China. I assume that’s what he’ll use the press conferences for relentlessly now.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/24/gop-memo-anti-china-coronavirus-207244

Unsurprising really. Perhaps the Dems' retort could be "why does the "exceptional nation" (sic) need to rely on China to solve pandemics for them?".

Not as trite as it first seems. Firstly China has provably dealt with the virus much better than the US, despite having no warning, so it moves the focus to where it should be - onto the inadequate US response. Secondly, if you replace "the virus" with "Al Qaeda" then I suspect that the world's policeman would have been straight into China without invitation to "solve" the problem. Highlights that perhaps not all problems can be solved via the traditional Republican bellicosity.  Why not give co-operation a try?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 29, 2020, 09:06:50 am
Not really a surprise but the campaign strategy is to pivot any blame or consequences of Covid back to China. I assume that’s what he’ll use the press conferences for relentlessly now.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/24/gop-memo-anti-china-coronavirus-207244

Unsurprising really. Perhaps the Dems' retort could be "why does the "exceptional nation" (sic) need to rely on China to solve pandemics for them?".
Not as trite as it first seems. Firstly China has provably dealt with the virus much better than the US, despite having no warning, so it moves the focus to where it should be - onto the inadequate US response. ... Why not give co-operation a try?

I'd suggest that none of us know how well China is really dealing with the virus,  I'd expect any information coming out of the country to be heavily massaged.  However I agree that the US government has been utterly negligent in preparation and response. They've had a much easier job to do than the UK outside the major coastal cities as many states have far lower population densities and transport hubs, and in some places its still gone badly wrong.  Its clearly in significant part Trump's fault for running a totally dysfunctional administration and closing down all their pandemic preparations that Obama put in place.  However I think id be wary about cooperating with China who tried their best to cover the whole thing up at the outset,  and continue to prosecute some sort of ethnic cleansing strategy against the Uigur Muslim population. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 29, 2020, 09:53:22 am
Except that if one of Trump's tactics is going to be to repeat "But China" ad nauseam then the Dems need a retort to that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on April 30, 2020, 08:47:45 am
Except that if one of Trump's tactics is going to be to repeat "But China" ad nauseam then the Dems need a retort to that.

But even if they have one, such as that Trump spent January and  February praising them, Trump's base wont be listening.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/29/donald-trump-coronavirus-response-elections-2020?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Biden is going to have to pull something very special out of the bag for Trump not to win a second term. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on April 30, 2020, 09:02:23 am
Trump's base wont be listening. 

The base is in some ways irrelevant. It's not in play and is in any case not on its own large enough to win him the election. Other constituencies are far more important.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on April 30, 2020, 09:36:06 am
At this rate GOP must be getting very worried. He is attacking Fox news now.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/29/fox-news-trump-democratic-talking-points
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 15, 2020, 12:02:09 pm
A quote worth sharing, especially if you like Mel Brooks (reported in grauniad)
]
Quote
After Trump’s disinfectant comments, Beppe Severgnini, a columnist for Italy’s Corriere della Sera, said in a TV interview: “Trying to get into Donald Trump’s head is more difficult than finding a vaccine for coronavirus. First he decided on a lockdown and then he encouraged protests against the lockdown that he promoted. It’s like a Mel Brooks film.”
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Andy F on May 18, 2020, 06:21:40 pm
https://twitter.com/McJesse/status/824722071657836544?s=19

Genius  ;D
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on May 19, 2020, 08:00:05 am
Trump appears to have failed to understand that malarial prophylaxis doesn't work with all known viruses. 

For fucks sake it never fails to depress me how anyone can  support anyone this stupid. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on May 19, 2020, 08:20:02 am
He’s beyond comment.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on May 19, 2020, 09:03:44 am
Bet he isn't actually taking it, just been asked to say so by one if cronies in the Pharma industry.

Hope he is taking it actually, has some great known side effects, actually nasty stuff.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on May 19, 2020, 09:05:03 am
The fact that his doctor is supporting it also brings the medical profession into disrepute. Whatever representative body they have in the US (BMA or RCGP equivalent) should be condemning this in the strongest terms. I don’t know if they even have something similar over there though, probably not.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on May 19, 2020, 09:07:14 am
Trump appears to have failed to understand that malarial prophylaxis doesn't work with all known viruses. 

For fucks sake it never fails to depress me how anyone can  support anyone this stupid.

I feel uneasy wishing ill on anyone, but as a lover of irony I could see the funny side of Trump being hospitalised with hydroxychloroquine's side effects (heart palpitations / arrhythmia).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 19, 2020, 09:07:36 am
Yes, the American Medical Association.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: nai on May 19, 2020, 09:15:00 am
I feel uneasy wishing ill on anyone, but as a lover of irony I could see the funny side of Trump being hospitalised with hydroxychloroquine's side effects (heart palpitations / arrhythmia).

And then picking up covid from the hospital
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 19, 2020, 09:21:50 am
'Taking'? What does that mean? 1 microgram  every 7 days?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on May 19, 2020, 09:41:56 am
homeopathic malarial.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on May 19, 2020, 10:11:58 am
I feel uneasy wishing ill on anyone, but as a lover of irony I could see the funny side of Trump being hospitalised with hydroxychloroquine's side effects (heart palpitations / arrhythmia).

And then picking up covid from the hospital

But having his life saved by the attention of a female Mexican doctor.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on May 19, 2020, 10:20:18 am
I feel uneasy wishing ill on anyone, but as a lover of irony I could see the funny side of Trump being hospitalised with hydroxychloroquine's side effects (heart palpitations / arrhythmia).

And then picking up covid from the hospital

But having his life saved by the attention of a female Mexican doctor. plasma from a recovered Mexican illegal immigrant
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: nai on May 19, 2020, 10:33:56 am
I feel uneasy wishing ill on anyone, but as a lover of irony I could see the funny side of Trump being hospitalised with hydroxychloroquine's side effects (heart palpitations / arrhythmia).

And then picking up covid from the hospital

But having his life saved by the attention of a female Mexican doctor.

haha, I almost typed "picked up covid from a Mexican nurse".
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 19, 2020, 12:08:53 pm
I feel uneasy wishing ill on anyone, but as a lover of irony I could see the funny side of Trump being hospitalised with hydroxychloroquine's side effects (heart palpitations / arrhythmia).

And then picking up covid from the hospital

But having his life saved by the attention of a female Mexican doctor.

Of African and Chinese descent...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on May 27, 2020, 08:14:12 am
Long overdue.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/26/trump-twitter-fact-check-warning-label
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 27, 2020, 08:49:47 am
Long overdue.

Agreed. Some journalists (mostly women) have recently stepped up to the plate but they should have been doing this much sooner in press conferences: "But, Sir, that isn't true" (or even better, "But, Sir, that's a lie")
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on May 29, 2020, 08:19:49 am
Long overdue.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/26/trump-twitter-fact-check-warning-label

An in response, he signs an executive order targeting social media companies https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52843986

Remarkable that he can get away with such a flagrant abuse of his position.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on May 29, 2020, 08:23:21 am
As I understand it he won't be able to actually do anything about this,  as a) it would have to pass Congress b) he'd be challenged on breaching the first amendment by restricting freedom of speech
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Wil on May 29, 2020, 10:49:59 am
A step further for Twitter in enforcing their own rules:

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/RiElrdS3Is7kIDW9e2Bc-c3x5odlEOO8LN_LemVkvvuVnjJ_pCkGLKXmwvYva8rcesJcY55nm6AGHUgDco7iEK5F_UnhKu76VCxNce9yrTbHWYVTT9ukBK3Le27XKeoGVLJsL6mPpHGdODjgCrV1n5aDEZA-6GJpKTeaSheOazJHsNechsoM2FbSn5DXCxHIespwTtUK8bKmEi2TurFQelEQ5RlsoslwhrWRy08nvOX4-BgaCkH1gfsvYDTo3ely-SZhZNcsiQZrEFFmb0qW2KSlyhPMSlaxsP4GUR_htwc9HiNF77Y3aMWHZ1XgbhjFjP2WtXdcSYzGv85G4g0PkZ8OhwLH2T71sckn-Ha447-xgwtMA8kQ9Q0WnxBUcnZwuMrwwY_ifdh1DkzG_bwIXIXQbtFe3gDtaSNWmqH2ZCoBsjYw38GN4ZwViIbsn5EBBBIXtzjaHR0e_cAHHjmFyg-1gZ7AHa6t9jPx9vkRI5To0EZdYzmOduUbbBiTIteHY3TdS_pWHhl5WVVxPwAWpwk6C_Ik2EsYgroTVCnF0qcCjI2f0t6796TyCX3CCIp3PJr64p2ysyeqkoPFHNCHdPQOQJl8XUHyD1m8TSHIUCUcjJ37aAtaae8VCbsGCrJT4IJ6juAPEhGMpPumx1hvPVQJv6OStlJsBySbOQPL6Iajpg9Meh5Fk2HmrVp6NA=w591-h431-no?authuser=0)

Note also no replies allowed.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on May 29, 2020, 02:21:52 pm
Protesters under fire  :lol:
https://www.theonion.com/protestors-criticized-for-looting-businesses-without-fo-1843735351?utm_medium=sharefromsite&utm_source=theonion_twitter


Quote
MINNEAPOLIS—Calling for a more measured way to express opposition to police brutality, critics slammed demonstrators Thursday for recklessly looting businesses without forming a private equity firm first. “Look, we all have the right to protest, but that doesn’t mean you can just rush in and destroy any business without gathering a group of clandestine investors to purchase it at a severely reduced price and slowly bleed it to death,” said Facebook commenter Amy Mulrain, echoing the sentiments of detractors nationwide who blasted the demonstrators for not hiring a consultant group to take stock of a struggling company’s assets before plundering. “I understand that people are angry, but they shouldn’t just endanger businesses without even a thought to enriching themselves through leveraged buyouts and across-the-board terminations. It’s disgusting to put workers at risk by looting. You do it by chipping away at their health benefits and eventually laying them off. There’s a right way and wrong way to do this.” At press time, critics recommended that protestors hold law enforcement accountable by simply purchasing the Minneapolis police department from taxpayers.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 29, 2020, 06:20:28 pm
I have just seen his tweet on Twitter saying
Quote
.. when the looting starts, the shooting starts
Wow. POTUS glorifying /inciting violence  :no:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fiend on May 29, 2020, 07:30:31 pm
Disgusted but not in the slightly bit surprised one presumes. That's the one that twitter hid with a warning, right?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on May 29, 2020, 08:57:32 pm
Disgusted but not in the slightly bit surprised one presumes. That's the one that twitter hid with a warning, right?

Yes
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on May 29, 2020, 11:04:44 pm
So today, just to add to threatening protesters with being shot at (perhaps he should look at some history here and see how well that went for China in 1989); Donald pulls out of the WHO. Quite a day for the shit thick giant infant who somehow became president. Long may he not last.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on May 30, 2020, 05:28:17 am
Watching the protests - and riots across the US - I’d wager that while racism is clearly the trigger there’s a whole load of other obvious stuff bundled up in there coming out...  Trump stuff, Lockdown fatigue/anger, economic hardship (pre and especially post lockdown) and more....

I really really fear that Trump will see this as another opportunity to openly ‘divide and rule’....

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 30, 2020, 08:41:51 am
It's race. Black Americans are tired and angry. They feel hunted, literally. In the last couple of weeks we've been treated to videos of a young black jogger being hunted down by vigilantes and of another black man being slowly publicly murdered (yes, sure, it still has to go to trial) by a cop while he called for his dead mum and bystanders pleaded for mercy. In 2016 Minnesota police shot and killed Philando Castile as he sat compliant in his car. Yesterday a friend, an older black woman active in the church, had the cops called on her as she tried to shelter from a rainstorm. Someone thought she didn't belong where she was and rang the cops. Black parents are scared when their children go out. Routine encounters with cop can easily turn deadly, as it did for George Floyd. White anti-shutdown protestors armed with assault rifles are treated with kid gloves; unarmed black (and white) protestors against police killings are met with rubber with rubber bullets and tear gas (there is also a huge amount police provocation going on, as well as deliberate agent provocateur actions). White pupils at private Christian schools are staging mocking recreations of Floyds death and posting them to social media.

Definitely there are other factors, but they are almost all also heavily inflected by race. Of course there are poor white Americans, but poor blacks are much poorer, on average, than poor whites. There are massive disparities in access to education, healthcare, decent housing, and other things most of would consider basic essentials. Lockdown has made little or any difference to any of that, beyond exposing the reality even more starkly. Many black Americans understandably see Trump as nothing different, just another racist.

He will undoubtedly do nothing but sow division. His entire world view is Hobbesian us vs. them. He is the President of white America. Who knows how it will play out. We'll have to see what the rest of the summer brings and exactly how white America splits.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on May 30, 2020, 10:08:42 am
Thanks Andy. From the nearly a year I've spent in the states on three long trips,  one of the things which shocked me was that I hadn't realised just how different from European countries it is on the race issue.  Segregation and repression exists in both, sure, but it seemed so much more normalised and institutionalised in the US.

Just read this morning that Trumps looting/shooting phrase is a direct quote from a 60s Miami police chief  threatening black civil rights activists.  He really isn't just any old racist is he?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 30, 2020, 10:22:43 am
Just read this morning that Trumps looting/shooting phrase is a direct quote from a 60s Miami police chief  threatening black civil rights activists.  He really isn't just any old racist is he?
Here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/05/29/when-the-looting-starts-the-shooting-starts-trump-walter-headley/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on May 30, 2020, 10:44:59 am
I spent 6 months living in Minneapolis in 2003. I luu I bed just up the road from where many of the riots were. Back then - the Twin cities and Minnesota in general were considered pretty laid back - with the city pretty cosmopolitan.

Bizarrely - while I was there, there were riots too - but due to the university Hockey team winning the nationals... I was out having a look as cars and dumpsters were being torched - and then the plastic bullets started whizzing by. Quite surreal. I recognised the big store in the corner that was torched and in many pics. Back then it was pissed up students but the police didn’t piss about.

It’s sad to see - still have friends and contacts over in the Twin Cities.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on May 30, 2020, 11:46:51 am
A young man has been killed in Detroit after someone in an SUV fired multiple shots into a crowd of protesters. This has the potential to become incredibly ugly.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 30, 2020, 01:07:29 pm
A young man has been killed in Detroit after someone in an SUV fired multiple shots into a crowd of protesters. This has the potential to become incredibly ugly.

It has been a long time brewing.

I lived in San Jose (Bay area)for nearly two years as a 14/15 year old (‘83/84) then I was stationed for a year in Roosevelt Roads and Port Canaveral (so Puerto Rico and Florida) for most of ‘94 and some of ‘95. Then went to work in Universal Shipyard, Thunderbolt, Savannah (Georgia) for eight months in ‘99/2000, before relocating with the vessel into New England/ Maine the following autumn.

I listed all that, because, every single one of those places was entirely different to each of the others. As different as here and Romania, more different than here and France.
The people, the culture, everything.

By far the most uncomfortable (and dangerous) was Savannah. I don’t know anything about the regions currently on fire, but if Georgia is anything to go by, this is hardly a surprise. Keeping my mouth shut there, was hard. The blatant segregation and racism, really tough to witness.
I was the project manager for a Mega yacht refit and weekends were all about barbecue with the, say, Fabrication manager etc. White, middle class, college educated.
Southern Gentlemen, to be sarcastic.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 31, 2020, 05:48:34 am
For anyone interested in the empirical data on the actual extent of racially-motivated police brutality in the US and various similar topics, I strongly recommend (black) academic Wilfred Reilly's book "Taboo: 10 Facts You Can't Talk About".


Jeezus! Of course it’s a small minority. I think we’re all aware that there are ~300M people in the US and, as I said, immense variations in culture between states and regions.
Statistically, you’d need hundreds of thousands of similar events, in a relatively short time frame (less than a decade, to suit human memories) for them to even begin to be significant in a per capita / time scale.

Do you imagine, then, that because the several recent incidents (high profile) are statistically insignificant, that no problems exist?

Or, even, that the “problem” is simply confined to a few bad Cops?

If so, try “being black and having the wrong type of barbecue in the park” or “being black and picking up litter in your own front yard” or “ being black and using the gym in your office block” or “ being black and asking a dog walker to put their dog on a lead” or....

 I could probably go on all day, just on the few incidents that make an international impact and then manage to lodge a headline in my memory.

I used to think it was a bit overblown, that this was just what happens when every Cop carries a fire arm. Enough Cops, big fuck ups, infinite monkeys and all that.

For sure, that’s true, to an extent and exacerbated by the prevalence of fire arms amongst the general public.

But, as my dad once pointed out ( somehow, even 15 years retired, he cannot stop being a Cop) Police forces across Europe are routinely armed; Britain is an exception.
Yet, even if we take the EU, rather than individual countries, where the population is comparable to the US, we don’t find anything like the number of incidents. Police involved or even general public (high profile) racism is much less common (definitely not zero, though).

Yet, Mr Farage and his ilk, inform me that we are overwhelmed with “other than white people” and “the wrong kind of white people” right across Europe and even worse, they’re all recent arrivals who can’t cope with our “culture” (drinking six pints in a hour, with four packets of pork scratchings and getting into a fight with the bouncers because they won’t let you into the club with pork skin vomit down your trousers).

Possibly, of course, it’s just social media unduly affecting public opinion. Inflating the profile of what would have been locally contained news, once.

Good job Twitter doesn’t work here...

 https://www.statista.com/chart/21857/people-killed-in-police-shootings-in-the-us/?utm_source=Statista+Global&utm_campaign=53874c11b7-All_InfographTicker_daily_COM_AM_KW22_2020_Fr&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_afecd219f5-53874c11b7-301088997 (https://www.statista.com/chart/21857/people-killed-in-police-shootings-in-the-us/?utm_source=Statista+Global&utm_campaign=53874c11b7-All_InfographTicker_daily_COM_AM_KW22_2020_Fr&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_afecd219f5-53874c11b7-301088997)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 31, 2020, 07:16:20 am
Obviously, it might be Semantic Memory, leading to false pattern recognition, but I only just got up on a Sunday morning and glanced at Twitter.

I think I’m seeing a pattern here.

I’ll put a couple of quid on another, similar, incident of “White person attacks protestors for protesting or simply walking past” before today is over.

 https://twitter.com/jordanuhl/status/1266895208115044354?s=21 (https://twitter.com/jordanuhl/status/1266895208115044354?s=21)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on May 31, 2020, 08:31:27 am
Anyway, on a related note but, up an octave...
Good piece in the New Yorker on how violent protest (and law and order issues in general) migh (and have historically) influence the middle ground “swing” voters.

 https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/how-violent-protests-change-politics?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_053020&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_medium=email&bxid=5bd6781724c17c104801b016&cndid=40001507&hasha=8d38aa627d08a32cbd5ffbd788687d96&hashb=672b2a5b30cfe731b9fa938876429bc4baab5d96&hashc=d092b1886d508311326be0fc6a49d3ce0ce2c544618b76899ad36d9216c64809&esrc=right_rail_cartoons&utm_term=TNY_Daily (https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/how-violent-protests-change-politics?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_053020&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_medium=email&bxid=5bd6781724c17c104801b016&cndid=40001507&hasha=8d38aa627d08a32cbd5ffbd788687d96&hashb=672b2a5b30cfe731b9fa938876429bc4baab5d96&hashc=d092b1886d508311326be0fc6a49d3ce0ce2c544618b76899ad36d9216c64809&esrc=right_rail_cartoons&utm_term=TNY_Daily)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 31, 2020, 08:49:28 am
Statistical significance would be measurable. Small numbers of black people being murdered by the police officers tasked with protecting them seems measurable in a context where we should expect n=0.

Given theEuropean Union has ~1.5 times US population, statistically we should expect a correlation with police violence.

Do we?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on May 31, 2020, 10:27:23 pm
For anyone interested in the empirical data on the actual extent of racially-motivated police brutality in the US and various similar topics, I strongly recommend (black) academic Wilfred Reilly's book "Taboo: 10 Facts You Can't Talk About".

There's a really good Radiolab podcast on the subject from a few years back.  It's called "Shots Fired", and is two parter.  Pretty shocking.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 02, 2020, 03:31:14 pm
While everyone is watching the riot/pandemic/Qannon-a-crap show, the real power grab  is attempting to sneak in a side entrance:

 https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/doj-suspend-constitutional-rights-coronavirus-970935/ (https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/doj-suspend-constitutional-rights-coronavirus-970935/)

Oh yeah, if you’re superstitious and into prophecy type twaddle:

 https://biblehub.com/revelation/13-5.htm (https://biblehub.com/revelation/13-5.htm)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on June 03, 2020, 03:54:08 pm
Interesting graph mapping various political parties by their commitment to liberal democratic ideals and minority rights.
The Republicans keep some unsavoury company.

https://twitter.com/PippaN15/status/1267935819047854080

(Disclaimer: not read the original report so unsure if the methodology is wonky.)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 03, 2020, 07:36:29 pm
He’s not getting it all his way.

Esper’s statement earlier was significant, this, even more so:

 https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/06/03/active-duty-troops-deployed-to-dc-region-start-to-leave/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_medium=social (https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/06/03/active-duty-troops-deployed-to-dc-region-start-to-leave/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_medium=social)


Edit:

Sorry, assuming again, Esper’s statement:
 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/03/mark-esper-military-deployment-protests-298314 (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/03/mark-esper-military-deployment-protests-298314)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 03, 2020, 08:00:38 pm
Following on from the above.

I think the military have significant issues with complying too closely to Trump’s rhetoric, or the narrative of the right.
Their senior staff know what they’re sitting on and are willing to fly close to outright opposition to Trump:

 https://www.militarytimes.com/2020/06/03/army-navy-leaders-latest-to-speak-out-about-racism-in-wake-of-george-floyds-death-in-police-custody/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL (https://www.militarytimes.com/2020/06/03/army-navy-leaders-latest-to-speak-out-about-racism-in-wake-of-george-floyds-death-in-police-custody/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL)

Because, some 30% or so of the personnel in their commands, are “other than white” and there seems a high probability of tension within the ranks:

 https://www.statista.com/statistics/214869/share-of-active-duty-enlisted-women-and-men-in-the-us-military/ (https://www.statista.com/statistics/214869/share-of-active-duty-enlisted-women-and-men-in-the-us-military/)

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 03, 2020, 10:09:23 pm
Apparently, a few Republicans are suddenly not wanting to appear racist.

Just ordinary, petty, corrupt:

 https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2020/06/03/historic-nomination-of-first-black-service-chief-to-move-forward-after-lawmaker-lifts-secret-hold/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL (https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2020/06/03/historic-nomination-of-first-black-service-chief-to-move-forward-after-lawmaker-lifts-secret-hold/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on June 04, 2020, 10:10:14 am
Twitter account that copies and reposts donald trumps posts is suspended after 3 days for glorifying violence...

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/trump-twitter-account-copy-tweets-glorifying-violence-suspended-a9545831.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on June 04, 2020, 11:08:14 am
Saw that, interesting

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/06/james-mattis-denounces-trump-protests-militarization/612640/

I guess you'd say well yes he would, but interesting reading.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 05, 2020, 07:24:45 pm
I think the tone of Military reporting is significant. “The Army Times” is hardly a “Liberal” publication. That the writer of this article, is a former enlisted Airman and Spec Ops, is possibly telling, too.

 https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/06/05/dc-mayor-asks-trump-to-withdraw-troops-and-federal-police/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_source=facebook.com (https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/06/05/dc-mayor-asks-trump-to-withdraw-troops-and-federal-police/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_source=facebook.com)

I’m seeing a lot of this from a former US Army Colonel and her Partner (a former US Navy CDR and now CEO of “Dark Sky Mitigation” security advisers to the Saudi RF).
I don’t know Bruce so well, only through Erika (the Colonel), but she’s no shrinking violet. She lectures at a Catholic Uni in Vermont, now she’s retired, quite conservative (small c). It’s obvious though, from FB comments, that their Peer group are very, very anti military involvement, really quite pro the protests and utterly anti Trump.

Also, this is grade A+ trolling of Trump:
 https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/05/us/black-lives-matter-dc-street-white-house-trnd/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/05/us/black-lives-matter-dc-street-white-house-trnd/index.html)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 06, 2020, 08:59:50 am
Looking at the increasing militarisation of US police (>$7bn ex military kit since 97), the aggressive comments toward protesters from Trump, his antagonisms towards journalists which is mirrored by police aggression, it’s hard not to see fascism as having already arrived in the US. It does not need to have taken full control to be there. I can’t view Trump in a more benign light I am afraid.

Twitter footage of police attacking journalists:
https://twitter.com/edouphoto/status/1267958349477249024?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1267958349477249024&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fus-news%2F2020%2Fjun%2F06%2Fgeorge-floyd-protests-reporters-press-teargas-arrested
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on June 06, 2020, 09:11:03 am
A few years back I remember reading about the police militarisation and it was partly due to govt money giving even small police departments a large budget for quasi military spec hardware. So you had small PD’s in a rural town owning an armoured hummer for example.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 06, 2020, 09:58:12 am
A few years back I remember reading about the police militarisation and it was partly due to govt money giving even small police departments a large budget for quasi military spec hardware. So you had small PD’s in a rural town owning an armoured hummer for example.

Breakdown of spending programme since 97 in guardian article here (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/05/why-are-some-us-police-forces-equipped-like-military-units)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 07, 2020, 08:48:10 am
So I mentioned a couple of retired American friends in a post above, because the nature of their ire struck me as, well, unexpected.

I mean, Erika seems to post mainly about organising baking sessions for the Vermont Round Table (or similar).

Then, on my feed today, this pops up from her partner Bruce:

(https://i.ibb.co/CJrKxLw/F34-FBEBD-F7-C5-4-E17-8-D35-D4-A4-A9-F7-D4-EC.jpg)

This is not normal. This is not “just another storm in a teacup” to be forgotten next week. This seems to be penetrating into areas I wouldn’t have expected.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on June 07, 2020, 11:28:19 am
Looking at the increasing militarisation of US police (>$7bn ex military kit since 97), the aggressive comments toward protesters from Trump, his antagonisms towards journalists which is mirrored by police aggression, it’s hard not to see fascism as having already arrived in the US. It does not need to have taken full control to be there. I can’t view Trump in a more benign light I am afraid.

Twitter footage of police attacking journalists:
https://twitter.com/edouphoto/status/1267958349477249024?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1267958349477249024&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fus-news%2F2020%2Fjun%2F06%2Fgeorge-floyd-protests-reporters-press-teargas-arrested

I agree that Trump and sections of US law enforcement bring fascist demeanour and beliefs into the mainstream.
But the US must be one of the hardest countries in the world for a fascist government to succeed at suppressing a population. It's one of very few countries remaining whose citizens haven't had their right to bear arms removed. People may despair at US gun laws and the number of deaths by shooting. But those constitutional laws were written to give citizens autonomy and prevent tyranny by a federal government. Any attempt by a federal government to impose itself through violence against the population would, if taken far enough, ultimately result in the population shooting back - not a good result in any way but it keeps fascist power in check. 

Suppression through financial pressure, sure..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on June 07, 2020, 11:50:17 am
Unless of course most of the homeowners with guns support any (unlikely) attempt at right wing popularist takeover. I think what Matt said is more relevant ... the the armed forces are the best protection from Trump thinking about doing something really stupid, like refusing to stand down if he loses the election. Well before we get to that stage GOP would be against him... a coup is just not good for business.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 07, 2020, 12:15:29 pm
He lost yesterday, utterly. He lost all authority and any possible claim to the moral high ground, if he had any. He and his proxies promised to dominate the "battlespace" with the most vicious dogs and most ominous weapons. But when, after days of police violence and these darks threats, it became obvious that the protests would be larger than ever on Saturday, all the machismo melted into nothing. Mayor Bowser, who commands DC's own police force, had already made it clear she would not be doing his dirty work and I suspect that behind the scenes the military and other federal agencies had made it clear that nor would they. The moral argument was lost and we all saw exactly how joyously and peacefully dominated the streets of DC, Philadelphia, and other cities yesterday. Meanwhile, he sits surrounded by two miles of fencing retweeting himself. In the meantime, the police have spent the last two weeks making the protesters' point for them, time and time again. Change has already begun in some jurisdictions, though how deep and lasting it will prove only time. How this will shape the election is anyone's guess at this stage.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 07, 2020, 12:16:50 pm
Unless of course most of the homeowners with guns support any (unlikely) attempt at right wing popularist takeover. I think what Matt said is more relevant ... the the armed forces are the best protection from Trump thinking about doing something really stupid, like refusing to stand down if he loses the election. Well before we get to that stage GOP would be against him... a coup is just not good for business.

Actually, Pete is probably correct.

The impression that gun ownership, distrust of the government and a dedication to the ideal of “freedom”, are the preserve of the right wing, in the US, is wrong.

I would posit, in an all out civil conflict, the “Liberal” faction would outnumber and overwhelm the currently vocal knob heads.

Trump lost the popular vote, his base are a shrinking demographic. That’s probably why they’re so loud.

I read a commentary by an American Liberal writer (can’t remember who, now, but one paragraph stuck). It read something like this:

“If you despair for the American dream, ask yourself this:
How many people do you know think a Gay couple should be denied a wedding cake, let alone be stoned to death?
How many, that think Black people are inferior?
How many think all Mexicans are “rapists and murderers”?
How many actually think “White people are endangered”?

Not many, is it? Maybe one or two in your social group? At work?
Out of how many people you know?
Only people you already know are weird.
Don’t despair.”
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 07, 2020, 12:48:08 pm
Five minutes well spent:

 https://time.com/5846970/kansas-protests-photographs/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_term=lightbox_&linkId=90253354 (https://time.com/5846970/kansas-protests-photographs/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_term=lightbox_&linkId=90253354)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 07, 2020, 12:48:26 pm
There are left wing gun groups and militia, but it's much more prevalent on the right, and they overwhelmingly support Trump. That said, I think the whole "2nd amendment is a defence against fascism" argument is just a bit silly. Should it chose to, the US military could clearly crush any popular revolt with ease. The real defence is the robustness of American institutions. I think the military have shown this week they're not willing to be used for political ends. There's a lot of speculation about what would happen if Trump loses and then refuses to leave office, but I don't think he would have military support (I trust the cops far less). I do think they will do everything to steal the election but they will do it by voter suppression in advance, not by trying to stage some kind of coup after the event.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on June 07, 2020, 01:23:35 pm
That said, I think the whole "2nd amendment is a defence against fascism" argument is just a bit silly. Should it chose to, the US military could clearly crush any popular revolt with ease.

⬆️ This. No matter how ‘well regulated’ these militia may be they have a distinct lack of armour and air support. In the hypothetical situation where you get a tyrant in charge with the full support of the forces, you can just imagine them bombing anyone well dug in in the back country!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 07, 2020, 07:44:04 pm
That said, I think the whole "2nd amendment is a defence against fascism" argument is just a bit silly. Should it chose to, the US military could clearly crush any popular revolt with ease.

⬆️ This. No matter how ‘well regulated’ these militia may be they have a distinct lack of armour and air support. In the hypothetical situation where you get a tyrant in charge with the full support of the forces, you can just imagine them bombing anyone well dug in in the back country!

Hmmmmm...
.
.
.
.
Afghanistan.
.
Um...
.
.
Vietnam.
.
.
Uh, any country that any nation has tried to suppress through superior fire power, let alone one where there are complicated, personal and familial relationships between opposing combatants.

Civil war in the US, would be highly unlikely to give either side total control of the existing military. That would likely fracture and you’d see units acting in opposition to each other. There’s substantial differences and rivalries between, for instance, East and West coast based troops, airmen and fleets. I would look to the events of the last little fracas of fraternal fucking up in that nation for clues about the likely shape of that scenario.

I’m always amused when people imagine the military to be composed of mindless drones, who blindly follow orders and have no personal integrity, moral compass or loyalty to a larger ideal, external to their military role.

Even in the face of contrary evidence.

Directing them to turn their weapons on their own people, would be a tough sell. It is not the same as sending them against a foreign foe.

For sure, some would go happily. I suspect, not enough to achieve what you envision.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on June 07, 2020, 08:16:09 pm
I agree entirely, that’s why I wrote ‘hypothetical situation’. It’s hard to come up with a scenario in the states where you have the military and intelligence etc on one side and the militia on the other side, but it’s fascinating to think about. I don’t think looking at historical foreign interventions by the US give a particularly good reference point either really.

Back more into Pete’s point I don’t really see a mechanism whereby these 2A people running around with  guns has any impact on the fascistic or otherwise leanings if the government. I can only remember one incident recently where a load of them got into a stand off at a nature reserve or something, but I can’t even remember what that was about. Not sure the displays at the various city halls of far people in too small vests with semi automatics changed anyone’s mind about anything!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 07, 2020, 08:34:54 pm
First of all, I think the possibility of an American civil war is diminishingly small. But the only even vaguely plausible scenario in which it might happen is a right wing/militia insurgency in support of a defeated Trump (and make no mistake, they would see themselves as defending America from liberal fascism) and for all their posturing I think they would be soon exposed as utterly insignificant. A comparison to either Vietnam or Afghanistan, both of which I thought about, seem completely misplaced, to me.

Far from thinking that the military are mindless drones (my father, my godfather, and both my grandfathers served in the British army) I actually have quite a bit of trust in their professionalism and judgement.

Edit: why I said "should it chose to."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 07, 2020, 08:48:33 pm
Speaking of the military, Colin Powell just endorsed Joe Biden.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 07, 2020, 09:02:54 pm
First of all, I think the possibility of an American civil war is diminishingly small. But the only even vaguely plausible scenario in which it might happen is a right wing/militia insurgency in support of a defeated Trump (and make no mistake, they would see themselves as defending America from liberal fascism) and for all their posturing I think they would be soon exposed as utterly insignificant. A comparison to either Vietnam or Afghanistan, both of which I thought about, seem completely misplaced, to me.

Far from thinking that the military are mindless drones (my father, my godfather, and both my grandfathers served in the British army) I actually have quite a bit of trust in their professionalism.

Edit: why I said "should it chose to."

No no no.

I’m talking about the idea that asymmetrical conflicts are easily prosecuted and therefore cited two recent highly asymmetric conflicts, where the “superior” force most certainly did not achieve total domination. Then went on to point out that it has rarely been achieved in any theatre or era. I could have cited any conflict or occupation from the Roman era to date. British action in Burma (as it was then) being the notable exception and even that short lived.
The original point (not mine) was that should the (hypothetical) US facist government carry the entire military, the “resistance” would be swept aside in a hail of precision guided munitions.
Whereas the reality would be a broadly majority supported resistance, embedded in a sympathetic population and a fractured “military”, if (if) said government enjoyed sufficient support to embark on such a route (highly unlikely).

I also agree that the existing “Militias” are both delusional and unlikely to be as effective as a spun sugar urinal in a rugby team locker room.

Edited because it sounded combative, when it was meant to be jovial (? Playfully sparring? I dunno, you get what I’m aiming at I hope).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 07, 2020, 09:33:12 pm
I think we're just unintentionally talking passed each other Matt - even talking about completely opposite scenarios. I think the only even vaguely plausible scenario is a militia attempt to keep a defeated Trump in power. But even this is just la la fantasy land.

The point about asymmetric conflicts is demonstrably true but it's just never going to happen in the US as it is today.

Meanwhile, all the stuff about defending themselves against tyrannical governments remains silly little macho posturing.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 07, 2020, 10:09:11 pm

Meanwhile, all the stuff about defending themselves against tyrannical governments remains silly little macho posturing.

Yes.

Hardly Sophie Scholl are they.

Amongst the (essentially) cosplay brigades of waddling machismo, beer gut and bingo-wing swinging there are a few serious contenders.
Unfortunately.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 08, 2020, 06:22:54 am
Hardly Sophie Scholl are they.

Exactly. And really the only point I was trying to make. I should have kept it simple.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 09, 2020, 07:48:35 pm
Fuck off Toby.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on June 09, 2020, 08:01:18 pm
That sounds fairly dismissive of the fact that a higher proportion of the violent crimes are committed by black people.  But surely that is kind of the whole point?  You can't just say "it's fine that loads of black people are victims of police violence because black people get themselves into those kinds of situations".  Surely there is a desperate need to address the reasons WHY black people are more likely to end up in those situations (poverty, job opportunities, social mobility).  Yes, there's going to be the minority of cops who are inherently racist, but the whole idea of this being systemic is much deeper than cops pulling triggers/kneeling on necks.

As an example of why black people are more likely to perhaps end up in those situations, an interesting point was made on the radio the other day.  White working class boys are more likely to come out with poor qualifications than black working class boys, but the white boys will STILL end up being more likely to get a job.  How messed up is that?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on June 09, 2020, 08:05:45 pm
The c. ten percent difference actually means there’s nearly twice as many (proportionate to population)...

That’s significant I’d say.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 09, 2020, 09:03:26 pm
For anyone interested in the empirical data on the actual extent of racially-motivated police brutality in the US and various similar topics, I strongly recommend (black) academic Wilfred Reilly's book "Taboo: 10 Facts You Can't Talk About".


Jeezus! Of course it’s a small minority. I think we’re all aware that there are ~300M people in the US and, as I said, immense variations in culture between states and regions.

....



Missed this response. Fairly typical of what passes for discussion on non-climbing matters on this forum: one guy writes a rambling takedown of a book that he hasn't read, Prof Pomp wads him.  ::)

Wilfred Reilly (as stated in my previous post: a black academic) makes a very large number of points in his book backed by data on a range of social issues in the US. He is not pro-Trump but is not sympathetic to BLM either. On the current topic du jour - alleged disproportionate targeting of african-americans by the police in the US - Reilly says that the data is almost exactly explained by african-american participation rates in violent crime. Thanks to Kindle for Desktop, here is a direct quote:

"Probably the archetypal taboo-but-obvious fact of the American race debate is this: there is no “epidemic” of African Americans being murdered by police in the U.S.A. The claim that there is such an epidemic is made constantly by members of movements like Black Lives Matter (BLM), the New Black Panthers (NBP), and Antifa. But it is flatly false. Serious empirical analyses done by everyone from myself1 to the Manhattan Institute’s Heather Mac Donald to www.killedbypolice.net—an entire web resource set up to study this topic—invariably conclude that fewer than 1,200 people of all races and sexes are killed annually by American police officers. In a typical year, such as the representative year of 2015, roughly 250 (258) of these people will be Black. It is true that the Black percentage of the individuals killed by police, 22–24 percent, is slightly higher than the 13–14 percent representation of Blacks in the overall U.S. population. However, this roughly 10 percent gap is wholly explained by the fact that the Black crime rate, violent crime rate, arrest rate, and police encounter rate are all significantly higher than the equivalent rates for whites. There is no evidence for any of Black Lives Matter’s major claims."

It is of course common to explain that some racial groups get more caught up in serious crime than others based on systemic discrimination within the economy, longer-term cultural factors, etc. But any theory of that kind needs to explain why other racial groups do fine? Maybe, it's - you know - nuanced ... complicated?

"According to a 2014 U.S. Census Bureau graphic so pleasantly surprising that it became a trending online meme, the highest income group in the United States is not WASPs, but Indian Americans, with a median household income of $100,295. In order, the next three groups were Taiwanese Americans ($85,500), Filipino immigrants ($82,389), and Americans of Japanese heritage ($70,261). All told, at least eighteen groups—including Lebanese Arabs ($69,586), Iranians or “Persians” ($66,186), Nigerians ($61,289), and Syrians ($61,151)—finished ahead of “whites” when whites were analyzed together as a group. Foreign Blacks specifically did quite well in income terms. Nigerians were joined on the top-twenty list by both Black and “white” immigrants from the polyglot African nation of Egypt ($60,543) and by the Guyanese ($60,234). All available data also indicate that Black West Indians—Jamaicans, Bahamians, and so forth—finished not far behind whites. This is important stuff. Nigerians and Black Guyanese look essentially identical to Black Americans, the huge majority of whose ancestors came from West Africa. The same is obviously true of West Indians. Nor, except perhaps for slight traces of an accent, do these high-performing Black immigrants generally display cultural or linguistic characteristics which would allow white Americans to rapidly distinguish them from potentially less favored native Blacks."

I have no idea whether this guy's numbers are accurate or over-cooked but I have searched for a serious statistical rebuttal to his book and found precisely nothing. I find that pretty weird. Is he ignored because his data is provably-wrong but no-one dares take him down for fear of being thought racist (somewhat ironic) or is he ignored because his data is inconveniently accurate?

For anyone open to unfashionable ideas ( :tumble: ) I recommend Reilly's  Twitter feed (https://twitter.com/wil_da_beast630).

Seriously Toby, read the linked stats from the other posters and then some of the articles that link to the FBI stats, then read my post again, which didn’t in anyway reference “THE BOOK”, then read some of the criticisms of the book (many) and try to remember you are not the only person who reads. I skimmed it, but couldn’t bring myself to really dig in. Some time back, just another one on my “will read someday”. Though it might move up the schedule if it’s actually worthy of debate.

None of that detracts or alters what is most certainly ingrained, cultural, racism in the US, which many people posting here have witnessed first hand, repeatedly. As I said, it doesn’t matter that “policemen killing black people “ is a minority “thing”, of course it is. It doesn’t matter, in this context, if black on black or black on white or white on black, crime is more or less prevalent than each or any of the other combinations.
This is about specific, well documented, incidents where black people were killed by police officers or vigilantes, without committing any crime or (if there was transgression) resisting arrest, because they were black.

Seriously, when was the last time vigilantes chased down and shot a white jogger for wandering into their neighbourhood?

As I said, pretty sure everyone posting in this thread is aware that these are the actions of a small number of people, trying to link this to crime stats is bogus.

There is an allegation, from the African American community (and something similar here) that they are disproportionately singled out for police attention/harassment without cause.
Since this can only be objectively assessed if every police encounter is logged and detailed, which patently isn’t going to happen; only the anecdotal evidence of the people who feel wronged is available. So it becomes an individual judgment call, whether you believe it’s a thing or not.

I find the various accounts I have read recently, along with my previous experience of attitudes that could well lead to such behaviour, convincing.

If saying “most violent crime is committed by black men”, even if it were true, would not justify the idea that “most black men are violent criminals”. That would be equivalent to saying (if hypothetically true) “most violent crime is committed by Short men wearing a green shirt and therefore all short men in green shirts are violent criminals”. Which is why the book seems irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Personally, I suspect the US police have become, in large part, overly violent and aggressive to the public, regardless of the ethnicity of that public. I can also see, that might in an equally large part be the result of a pretty violent, aggressive and well armed public.

Still, it doesn’t change the specific incidents that lead to the current explosion, only colours in the context.

If that’s incoherent, it’s because it’s typed on a phone after a long, bad, day; not proof read and certainly not comprehensive.
If you were not trying to discredit or belittle the BLM movement and just trying to broaden the debate, I apologise. That was how it appeared to me, however I’ve been getting some extra tuition in “how things appear to other people” around here recently, so I shouldn’t assume.

Edit:

I did find tome to reread it, quickly at least.
For clarity, the issue is not “do the police kill more black people than white people” because that’s a number(s) clouded by the “justifiable” kill.
The issue is “are innocent black people being killed by white people (including the police) because they are black”.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on June 09, 2020, 09:25:03 pm
The c. ten percent difference actually means there’s nearly twice as many (proportionate to population)...

That’s significant I’d say.

Yeah ‘slightly higher’ 🙄 ffs
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 09, 2020, 09:38:04 pm
Anyway, if Mohamed won’t go to the mountain...

 (https://i.ibb.co/0f4Tccr/900-A0659-4373-4-EF6-9745-D755-C4-AD2813.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nutty on June 09, 2020, 09:42:55 pm
I've not read the book habrich, but from the quotes you've picked I'm not convinced it would be worth my time.

Surely the statistics he uses to explain away the higher rate of police killings of blacks are also influenced by either racism of police officers or racist policing procedures? If you implement a stop and frisk policy that targets blacks, of course they're going to have higher police encounter rates, and then the higher arrest rates and crime rates flow from that. So his point is then that the fact that blacks are killed much more regularly by police can be explained because of racial profiling by the police?

And then he argues that America isn't racist because foreign blacks (who haven't grown up with American systemic racism limiting their opportunities) have income levels comparable to whites - ignoring the fact that US immigration favours those who work in higher earning professions/jobs. Of course the foreign blacks earn more than American blacks when you've filtered out the low earning foreigners. The question should maybe then be why they don't earn more than whites given this filtering? Would that be the racism again?

As tomtom says, 22-24% is not 'slightly higher' than 13-14%, it's a 70% increase. Calling it 'slightly higher' and a 'roughly 10 percent gap' is just poor stats.

So yeah, you've probably not seen a serious statistical rebuttal because it's so full of holes
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on June 09, 2020, 10:09:16 pm
If you're ever going to be able to sensibly discuss statistics in debates about identity I think you have to remove the emotion from the numbers. Not sure how you do that.. I'm not a statistician or criminology researcher. But surely it isn't beyond the wit of humans to properly and dispassionately analyse this stuff and understand why things are the way they are.
Fucking minefield. I wouldn't touch this topic online with a really long barge-pole.
Except to say I don't think Habrich should be shouted down for posting about that book, I get the impression he's more interested in trying to understand facts behind the numbers than in being discriminatory (maybe I'm wrong and he's a massive racist but I doubt it).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Lopez on June 09, 2020, 10:37:21 pm
I'm banding with the disbelievers here i'm afarid. This author was used in the other dimension also as evidence, and so i spent some time reading what i could from him, or at least what was available without having to pay moneys, so granted, my readings of him are limited.

However i did find some problems with his approach to be able to accept the evidence as shown. I had a few things in my head which i thought it'd have been a waste of time to offer the other contributor, so i'll recycle them here.

Just from the paragraphs you copied there's some alarm bells. To dissect it slightly:

He claims 'Serious empirical analyses done by everyone'

Now, why is he writing 'serious'. Is there a need for that qualifier? Are empirical analyses normally not serious? Or is he trying to add credence to it?

 But ok, lets see, they were done 'by everyone', and then he lists 'everyone' as being himself, a highly contorvesial speaker known for her extreme pro-police views, and a website that just keeps tabs on how many people is killed by Police.

Uh ok, i thought 'everyone'meant, like, you know, everyone.

So what do the 'serious empirical analyses' show? That 'invariably conclude that fewer than 1,200 people of all races and sexes are killed annually by American police officers'. and how many of those are black.

Seems 'serious empyrical analyses' is slang for googling something and checking a website. But the 'fewer' sticks out. Why would he use that qualifier? Is he trying to lead the thoughts of the reader? And you know, no need to assert they 'invariably conclude'. It's like he's worried people won't believe him.

The same comes right after. 'the Black percentage of the individuals killed by police, 22–24 percent, is slightly higher than the 13–14 percent representation of Blacks'

Double the rate is 'slightly higher'? Seems an odd assertion to make. In no way or form can any sensible person claim that 22–24 percent, is slightly higher than the 13–14 percent. He's trying to lead the reader and he's not particularly subtle about it .

But the clincher is also there

'this roughly 10 percent gap is wholly explained by the fact that the Black crime rate, violent crime rate, arrest rate, and police encounter rate are all significantly higher than the equivalent rates for whites'

Uh ok. We been going about data, serious analyses, statistics, and the whole argument stands on a completely unsubstantiated random statement? What's the point of even putting any numbers to it when they are after all irrelevant?

How is that 'wholly explained'? Where's the conclusive evidence with numbers and stuff instead of just a hunch?

Reading his work it seems to be just a load of smoke and mirrors, (mis)leading statements to condition the reader and trying too hard to legitimise, something, and then a reveal around which all his argument revolves, which is nothing more than a personal assumption.

So yes, you can surmise that from all i read from him i was not too impressed with his scientific method.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 09, 2020, 11:00:17 pm
If you're ever going to be able to sensibly discuss statistics in debates about identity I think you have to remove the emotion from the numbers. Not sure how you do that.. I'm not a statistician or criminology researcher. But surely it isn't beyond the wit of humans to properly and dispassionately analyse this stuff and understand why things are the way they are.
Fucking minefield. I wouldn't touch this topic online with a really long barge-pole.
Except to say I don't think Habrich should be shouted down for posting about that book, I get the impression he's more interested in trying to understand facts behind the numbers than in being discriminatory (maybe I'm wrong and he's a massive racist but I doubt it).

I don’t see how you could reliably get those numbers:

Stop and search, if it’s done for harassment purposes? Only if it’s officially recorded and if an officer is doing it for the wrong reasons, they’re hardly going to log it. So you’re left with victim complaints and anecdotes, unreliable.

As I said, in terms of overall share of “killed by the police” how would you filter out the justifiable from the malicious? Probably only when it’s blatant and confounding evidence is available to refute the “official” story(notable that an increase in such cases, clearly and demonstrably malicious, coincides with the increasing prevalence of high quality, personal recording devices).

I don’t believe it’s unreasonable to say that something is pretty wrong, when the recent high profile cases are considered. Set aside, perhaps, the Paramedic, killed in bed; as there seems a relatively high likelihood that that was just a fuck up. In the other cases, such as the choking or the jogger, the perpetrators had expectations of “getting away with it” or felt justified in their actions, despite the presence of witnesses and cameras. Even when some of those witnesses were not passive and were pretty loud in their objection to the perpetrator’s actions.


Anyway, don’t the protests, at base, simply reflect a desire to see the end of racism in all it’s forms? The specific events merely form the trigger?

Or are we saying racism isn’t a thing?

Oh yeah:

If your boss offers you a pay rise, of 13-14% and the turns to your colleague and offers them a 22-24% rise, tell me they’re pretty much the same thing...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on June 10, 2020, 10:54:38 am
George was accused of using a counterfeit twenty dollar note. He was safely in custody, unarmed and was cuffed. The officers knew it was being filmed by the public whilst they then grounded him and a big cop knelt on his neck whist cuffed. The officers were part of a police force that was under serious concern for past racist attitudes with a potential powder keg of protests and likely riots if something went wrong. They took 9 minutes to kill him on film. They then claimed he was resisting arrest despite no evidence on the filming or street CCTV. Think about that. That's a broken system with complete failure of everything: training, process, racial awareness and common sense. I thought the police were there to stop riots, not cause them.

Wilfred Reilly is an academic on the fringes, who online is forced to mainly publish this data on pretty extreme websites, despite his grand claims of public academic respectability,. His stats as Matt shows, don't match FBI data (data which doesn't show deaths proportional to racial criminal breakdown). The stats used in the way Reilly does, logically fail to meet sensible standards.. you are forced to detail what happens in shootings but if you target blacks more often, that will already have distorted the stats (more black potential criminals shot than white ones). He also points out that a black cop is more likely to kill a black criminal than a white cop; without reversing his own arguments and recognising black cops are on average more often policing mixed communities with the highest crime rates. Given how much publicly has been around BLM, remember this death has happened in police forces being more careful. We can add on that US courts convict blacks more often for the same crime with longer sentences on average for those convicted. Reilly is yet another example of how fact checking is unravelling in the US and how right wing propaganda spreads. His book fits the alt right support base perfectly. Racist cops are the latest group who have 'proof' from Reilly everyone else is wrong and that they don't need to change.

This doesn't deny that some of what is going on may relate to poverty (the much higher middle class African immigrant income doesn't protect them from racist motivated attack but does afford better lawyers to deal with the outcome). It's pretty shit being poor and white in the US as well.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 11, 2020, 02:49:41 pm
Well this is puzzling. If the recent deaths of George Floyd, Brennan Taylor (and Ahmed Aubrey by ex police officer) represent 22-24% of police killings proportionately, there should be in the region of 6 or 7 non-black killings over the same period. Has any been reported?

These people were unarmed, so we should be comparing similar circumstances, not shoot outs when challenged.
[/quote]

Bump. Wonder if you could point me to the multiple other killings of non black US citizens  over the equivalent period Have there been any?
[/quote]

There certainly are, plenty of, police killings and even more non-fatal shootings. The vast majority of which will be “justified” (that is a whole other kettle of fish, morally speaking).

I think people are confusing the total number of “killings” with the obviously unjustified, criminal, examples in the headlines; even confusing the vigilante stuff with the police perpetrated (33% of you chosen examples😜) and they are all very different things.

Which is why I’m confused by anyone trying to, I don’t know, diminish (?) the core BLM or antiracism arguments by clouding the issue with either those total numbers or the relative crime statistics.
What is important, is that some of those killings are unjustified and their perpetrators motives were racially tinged and the “system’s” response to those killings (where it took public outrage to induce disciplinary action/criminal proceedings (Aubrey, for instance).

Those incidents alone, are sufficient to conclude that there is a systematic problem with racism and lack of accountability within the state.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on June 11, 2020, 03:57:23 pm
Well put.  I did say Aubrey's murder was by an ex police officer which was why the equivalent proportions of killings of unarmed citizens would be 6-7 (from 2 examples) rather than 9-10 (from 3). But your point that it's the manner and context which are the key issues is absolutely right.

You may be interested in the Jt Chief of staff's apology for appearing at church with Trump … https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/11/politics/milley-trump-appearance-mistake/index.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 11, 2020, 05:53:00 pm
Bump. Wonder if you could point me to the multiple other killings of non black US citizens  over the equivalent period Toby? Have there been any?

I wouldn't hold your breath.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on June 13, 2020, 12:21:51 pm
Voting news from the US

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/12/us-presidential-election-fiasco-voter-suppression
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 16, 2020, 08:32:02 pm
This article adresses some of the aspects and context of the “police violence and it’s racial component” that I was trying to enunciate (poorly) further up this thread.
The numbers do clearly show a bias in the use of force and suggests a reasonable extrapolation to the killing of unarmed individuals.
Worth following the links to the studies:
 https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-stats-on-police-killings/ (https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-stats-on-police-killings/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 18, 2020, 10:00:34 am
 It's truly amazing how politically durable Trump is. He's about to hold a huge rally in a state with a steeply rising number of CV 19 cases, Boulton has leaked the stories about him trying to get China to help him in the election, foreign leaders saying he's full of shit, and his laughable ignorance ( he thought Finland was part of Russia) ; and yet he'll still win the election, guaranteed.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on June 18, 2020, 10:21:41 am
What odds are you offering on that assertion Toby? Looks pretty brave to me given most polls pundits and bookmakers expect a close race with Biden favourite.

https://www.casino.org/news/polls-odds-agree-joe-biden-man-to-beat-in-2020-presidential-election/

His durability is only really because the GOP establishment tolerate him and his election was based on solid GOP support and  voters who were promised change that would benefit them.  I can't see that GOP elastic stretching much further and voters seem to have sufferred (albeit C19 being the main disrupter). Then their are health rumours...

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/trump-health-ramp-walk-water-white-house-doctors-a9569531.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 18, 2020, 10:34:34 am
 He'll win. You're ignoring the fact that everyone who votes for him will discount everything said against him as fake news, the escalating death toll, job losses, well they're the fault of China, and the loser Dems.
Posting link from left wing or liberal British news media is rather pointless, to the average Trump voter they might as well be Lenin.
Trump's victory isn't 100% cast iron yet, he could blow it, but it's all his to lose.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on June 18, 2020, 10:36:23 am
The Economist have released a model which currently puts Biden as the likely winner.

https://projects.economist.com/us-2020-forecast/president
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on June 18, 2020, 10:51:33 am
The Economist have released a model which currently puts Biden as the likely winner.

https://projects.economist.com/us-2020-forecast/president

Yup.


Just like 2016.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ru on June 18, 2020, 11:19:51 am
Only 3 months ago they put Trump as the winner. A lot can change.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on June 18, 2020, 11:25:46 am
Someone just needs to ask Zuckerburg. He probably knows who’s won already.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on June 18, 2020, 11:34:05 am
The Economist have released a model which currently puts Biden as the likely winner.

https://projects.economist.com/us-2020-forecast/president

Yup.


Just like 2016.


It's updated daily, outcomes can change. Models can be improved.

This isn't a guarantee that Trump will lose, rather a picture of how things stand at the moment.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 18, 2020, 12:40:31 pm
I think he's far from guaranteed to win (though he might well). The much talked about base, those immune to all reason and evidence, is alone not enough for him to win and there are certainly signs of fatigue and disaffect amongst other groups that helped him win in 2016, such as college educated whites, women especially. He has handled the pandemic appallingly and that in turn is causing huge economic pain. Most surprisingly his reactions on race and policing have been weirdly out of step with the direction in which the nation has moved. The SCOTUS decision this week that LGBTQI employees have equal protection under the Civil Rights Act has deeply disappointed the Christian Right; most will still vote for him, but some may not.

And he didn't really win in 2016, Hillary lost through not getting the vote out. With the last four years having been so horrifying (not to mention everything that has gone on this year) Democratic voters should be motivated. Pennsylvania is a critical state and Biden should make a strong showing there, being a local boy made good.

But then again, there's voter suppression, which I am full of fears about.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on June 19, 2020, 08:51:45 pm
Two SCOTUS decisions against Trump in one week is surprising and encouraging.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on June 19, 2020, 08:58:54 pm
Finally he does something bad enough to make facebook step in... https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jun/18/facebook-removes-trump-re-election-ads-that-feature-a-nazi-symbol
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on June 19, 2020, 09:26:34 pm
I'm with Andy on this.  I think regardless of what Trump and his supporters want to believe and say, 2016 was less about Trump "winning" than it was about Hillary losing.  For 2020, it's on Biden to not lose. And he is much more personable/relatable than Hillary, which does indeed matter. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on June 20, 2020, 11:26:51 am
Barr tried to quietly fire the SDNY AG yesterday but he's having none of it and it looks like he can't anyway.  The SDNY have a bunch of sealed indictments waiting to rain down on Trump as soon as he's no longer the president.

Trump looks so impaired I wonder whether he'll even make it to November.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on June 20, 2020, 11:34:36 am
I expect today's rally in Tulsa to be an absolute shit show.

I don't think there's anyway it was an accident that it was originally planned for Juneteenth or that the upcoming Jacksonville rally is scheduled on the anniversary of Ax Handle Saturday.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on June 20, 2020, 08:07:56 pm
And 6 of Trump's team for Tulsa have just tested positive
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/06/20/tulsa-trump-rally/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on June 21, 2020, 07:42:47 am
Donald thinks testing for covid is a bad thing because it just reveals more cases.

Right.

Because covid is only bad if you notice its there.

The mind boggles.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on June 21, 2020, 08:26:39 am
Donald thinks testing for covid is a bad thing because it just reveals more cases.
Right.
Because covid is only bad if you notice its there.
The mind boggles.

Perhaps he's a Douglas Adams fan?

The Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal is a vicious wild animal from the planet of Traal, known for its never-ending hunger and its mind-boggling stupidity. One of the main features of the Beast is that if you can't see it, it assumes it can't see you. Due to this it has been considered one of the least intelligent creatures in the Universe.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 21, 2020, 09:21:57 am
Whilst its satisfying to laugh at Trump's almost unbelievable ignorance and at the revelations:
The Room Where It Happened review: John Bolton fires broadside that could sink Trump
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/21/the-room-where-it-happened-review-john-bolton-donald-trump?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

I still think that Trump will win reelection in November,  through a combination of Russian intervention,  cheating,  the loyalty of the evangelical and misguided 'patriotic' contingent, and Biden being too invisible. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on June 21, 2020, 09:30:44 am
I think the most telling impact of trumps rally may not be what he said or did - but that there were many many empty seats (and space on the floor). These will be apparent for all to see....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on June 21, 2020, 10:15:54 am
We could be charitable and say that Trump fans are more sensible than many give them credit for, and decided to stay away from a packed indoor space?

Also read that there was a coordinated effort from various groups to request a load of tickets, but not sure if the veracity of that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 21, 2020, 10:23:59 am
Obviously Trump's rally was a stupid, dangerous idea, he openly said he didn't want to test with the implication that the high infections made him look bad, attendance was worse than he expected etc, BUT, he'll still chalk it up as s victory on social media. Many will pay sufficiently little attention to believe him and Russian trolls will plant further bullshit to confuse people enough that they don't bother voting at all.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on June 30, 2020, 09:09:26 am
Another escalation of the madness. Attacking Fox polling this way isn't a sign of confidence or common sense. I really can't see his ego going into an election knowing he will be well beaten, so this is starting to look like an endgame.... fingers crossed he pulls out rather than heading for something really dangerous like cancellation of the election.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election/trump-2020-us-election-drop-out-fox-news-republican-a9592036.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on June 30, 2020, 09:23:28 am
Another escalation of the madness. Attacking Fox polling this way isn't a sign of confidence or common sense. I really can't see his ego going into an election knowing he will be well beaten, so this is starting to look like an endgame.... fingers crossed he pulls out rather than heading for something really dangerous like cancellation of the election.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election/trump-2020-us-election-drop-out-fox-news-republican-a9592036.html

Absolutely bugger all chance of him pulling out in my opinion,  I think it would be difficult at best for him to cancel the election.  I still think hes more likely to find a way to win through a combination of voter suppression and cheating. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 08, 2020, 09:05:06 am
This sounds like it would be an entertaining if extremely predictable read:

Inside the 'dysfunctional family' that gave us Trump, according to his niece

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/08/donald-trump-mary-trump-book-family?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Trump has always been a habitual cheat and liar with serious personality and family issues; who knew?!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 08, 2020, 01:36:01 pm
Agian your view seems out if touch.

https://betting.betfair.com/politics/us-politics/us-election-odds-mike-pences-odds-are-crashing-but-this-wont-be-the-last-outsider-gamble-290620-171.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 09, 2020, 09:41:40 am
Agian your view seems out if touch.

https://betting.betfair.com/politics/us-politics/us-election-odds-mike-pences-odds-are-crashing-but-this-wont-be-the-last-outsider-gamble-290620-171.html

I don't believe it for a minute,  his ego is just too big. The most Trumpian option if he does pull out would be for him to hand the reins over to Kanye West, whose ego is of comparable size.

I'd guess that there's more chance that he'll try to cancel the election and declare a state of emergency and claim that the dems were cheating.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 09, 2020, 12:13:00 pm
My point is the odds for him pulling out are not insignificant for nothing. It's just not completely unlikely. There are odds for a cancelled election as well.  His problem is carrying GOP, they must be thinking 'what the hell have we done?' given the collateral damage to their other party election odds, the state of the economy etc and any chance to dump him will seem like too good opportunity to miss. Hence if he tries to cancel, I think there is a good chance they will move against him and towill install Pence as their candidate.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on July 09, 2020, 12:32:14 pm
The most Trumpian option if he does pull out would be for him to hand the reins over to Kanye West, whose ego is of comparable size.
If Kanye is actually serious about running this time is it an attempt to somehow split the vote share and take away from Biden? I don't know enough about how US politics works but I read something recently about some high profile independents running in the past which actually swung the result.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on July 09, 2020, 01:35:06 pm
SCOTUS ruling on his tax disclosure today.  It’s the last day of their term so lots of speculation whether it will go one way or the other.  It’s going to be a crazy day.

There’s loads of leaking and off the record briefing going on about whether he’ll continue or not.  The trouble is that he’ll be arrested immediately if he quits voluntarily so he has every incentive going to hang in there and pull all sorts of shenanigans around the election itself.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 09, 2020, 02:56:24 pm
I don't think he'll go, but I'm no better briefed than the next man and could be completely wrong. And part of me - and I recognise this is an ugly emotion - would love to see him utterly crushed in November (which, of course, is not a given)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 09, 2020, 03:21:25 pm
So, he lost the SCOTUS case, 7-2 this time.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on July 09, 2020, 03:23:57 pm
part of me - and I recognise this is an ugly emotion - would love to see him utterly crushed in November
If having only part of you wanting to see him utterly crushed is an ugly emotion then I must be the devil cos 100% of me wants to see him completely destroyed. Total and utter humiliation by being emphatically trashed at the election and then ending up in jail is the only outcome that I'd be truly content with.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 09, 2020, 03:49:37 pm
So, he lost the SCOTUS case, 7-2 this time.

What happens to his financial records and tax returns now?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on July 09, 2020, 03:52:16 pm
So the Manhattan DA gets the tax records now but Congress (and the public) don't until after the election.  They'll have fraud charges ready to drop on November 4th.

He's having a total meltdown on Twitter.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on July 09, 2020, 07:10:57 pm
part of me - and I recognise this is an ugly emotion - would love to see him utterly crushed in November
If having only part of you wanting to see him utterly crushed is an ugly emotion then I must be the devil cos 100% of me wants to see him completely destroyed. Total and utter humiliation by being emphatically trashed at the election and then ending up in jail is the only outcome that I'd be truly content with.

This. I find it difficult to think of anyone - other than psychopathic criminals - who I'd rather see destroyed and in jail. It's only fitting for someone so criminally corrupt and lacking empathy for the people he's supposed to be representing and serving. Actually the most fitting end would be him rendered unable to carry out an effective campaign through a debilitating dose of covid contracted via a rally. Until after November. And then fade away into old-age and infamy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on July 09, 2020, 07:15:20 pm
My true hope is that if he loses, the media just completely forget about him, and stop giving him any kind of platform.  The world needs to see the back of him, and I truly hope people don't continue to publicize anything to do with him, either positive or negative.  Just cast him aside and move on.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Andy F on July 09, 2020, 08:49:39 pm
part of me - and I recognise this is an ugly emotion - would love to see him utterly crushed in November
If having only part of you wanting to see him utterly crushed is an ugly emotion then I must be the devil cos 100% of me wants to see him completely destroyed. Total and utter humiliation by being emphatically trashed at the election and then ending up in jail is the only outcome that I'd be truly content with.

This. I find it difficult to think of anyone - other than psychopathic criminals - who I'd rather see destroyed and in jail. It's only fitting for someone so criminally corrupt and lacking empathy for the people he's supposed to be representing and serving. Actually the most fitting end would be him rendered unable to carry out an effective campaign through a debilitating dose of covid contracted via a rally. Until after November. And then fade away into old-age and infamy.
It'd be rather unfair for COVID-19 to catch a nasty dose of Trump.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on July 09, 2020, 09:16:03 pm
So the Manhattan DA gets the tax records now but Congress (and the public) don't until after the election.  They'll have fraud charges ready to drop on November 4th.

He's having a total meltdown on Twitter.

538 views it as a legal loss but a short-term political win for Trump - as the records will be released after the election.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/were-not-going-to-see-trumps-tax-returns-anytime-s (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/were-not-going-to-see-trumps-tax-returns-anytime-s)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on July 09, 2020, 09:24:57 pm
Quote from: Andy F
It'd be rather unfair for COVID-19 to catch a nasty dose of Trump.

 :lol:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on July 09, 2020, 09:40:37 pm
part of me - and I recognise this is an ugly emotion - would love to see him utterly crushed in November
If having only part of you wanting to see him utterly crushed is an ugly emotion then I must be the devil cos 100% of me wants to see him completely destroyed. Total and utter humiliation by being emphatically trashed at the election and then ending up in jail is the only outcome that I'd be truly content with.

This. I find it difficult to think of anyone - other than psychopathic criminals - who I'd rather see destroyed and in jail. It's only fitting for someone so criminally corrupt and lacking empathy for the people he's supposed to be representing and serving. Actually the most fitting end would be him rendered unable to carry out an effective campaign through a debilitating dose of covid contracted via a rally. Until after November. And then fade away into old-age and infamy.
It'd be rather unfair for COVID-19 to catch a nasty dose of Trump.

Too good for him, I'm afraid. I'd like him to see him humiliated in a landslide defeat, whatever legacy he leaves behind destroyed, and for him to be imprisoned for the rest of his life.

Andy, don't beat yourself up. There are a few people in the world who are so monstrous that it's OK to hate them.

Now, Bolsonaro on the other hand, I eagerly await his prognosis.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dunnyg on July 09, 2020, 09:53:37 pm
I didn't know you considered yourself monstrous will?  :whistle:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 09, 2020, 10:58:37 pm
part of me - and I recognise this is an ugly emotion - would love to see him utterly crushed in November
If having only part of you wanting to see him utterly crushed is an ugly emotion then I must be the devil cos 100% of me wants to see him completely destroyed. Total and utter humiliation by being emphatically trashed at the election and then ending up in jail is the only outcome that I'd be truly content with.

This. I find it difficult to think of anyone - other than psychopathic criminals - who I'd rather see destroyed and in jail. It's only fitting for someone so criminally corrupt and lacking empathy for the people he's supposed to be representing and serving. Actually the most fitting end would be him rendered unable to carry out an effective campaign through a debilitating dose of covid contracted via a rally. Until after November. And then fade away into old-age and infamy.

Given the number of deaths he's probably caused through willfully ignoring all expert advice he really should be tried for genocide
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 11, 2020, 10:50:02 pm
Can anyone with an actual knowledge of the constitution explain to me why it's in the power of a president to commute or pardon sentenced prisoners?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 12, 2020, 11:15:43 am
It's in Article II of the constitution. The president only has the power to pardon for federal crimes, not those prosecuted at the state level (which is why the investigations of the DA's in Manhattan etc are so important) but within that the power to pardon is almost absolute. There is no settled opinion on whether presidents can pardon themselves, though one imagines Trump would try should he find himself in that position. There is meant to be a process through which criminals can appeal for clemency and these are meant to be considered by a special office but I think Trump has often gone ahead and simply pardoned friends and allies (that said all presidents use their power of pardon, especially before leaving office, and the decisions often look a little dodgy).

I've no idea why he commuted Stone's sentence rather than pardoning him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: sdm on July 12, 2020, 11:24:57 am
I heard that commuting vs pardoning could have implications regarding getting him to testify in future proceedings?

No idea if that's correct.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 12, 2020, 11:45:02 am
I heard that commuting vs pardoning could have implications regarding getting him to testify in future proceedings?

No idea if that's correct.

I believe, a commutation can be reversed, a pardon cannot?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 12, 2020, 10:38:29 pm
It's in Article II of the constitution. The president only has the power to pardon for federal crimes, not those prosecuted at the state level (which is why the investigations of the DA's in Manhattan etc are so important) but within that the power to pardon is almost absolute. There is no settled opinion on whether presidents can pardon themselves, though one imagines Trump would try should he find himself in that position. There is meant to be a process through which criminals can appeal for clemency and these are meant to be considered by a special office but I think Trump has often gone ahead and simply pardoned friends and allies (that said all presidents use their power of pardon, especially before leaving office, and the decisions often look a little dodgy).

I've no idea why he commuted Stone's sentence rather than pardoning him.

I understand that convicted people can appeal for clemency, but why constitutionally award the president that power? It seems very dubious.

Trump commuted rather than pardoned because a pardon implies guilt in the crime, whereas the former does not, I think.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 13, 2020, 05:46:31 am
I understand that convicted people can appeal for clemency, but why constitutionally award the president that power? It seems very dubious.

Trump commuted rather than pardoned because a pardon implies guilt in the crime, whereas the former does not, I think.

It's been in the constitution from the beginning and was essentially copied from the British royal power of pardon. But I agree, the power seems much too wide-ranging and unchecked.

Neither commutation nor pardon erases the conviction at all, though pardons have to formally accepted, which involves an acknowledgement of guilt. If Matt is right that commutations can be reversed then that looks like a message to Stone to maintain his loyalty to Trump, or else ... He received in a naked quid pro quo for not turning on Trump during his trial.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 13, 2020, 08:20:50 am
This is one of the most terrifying examples of crass stupidity I've seen in the pandemic,  I wonder how much this sort of behaviour is influenced by Trump's rhetoric?

30-year-old dies after attending 'Covid party' in Texas

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/13/30-year-old-dies-covid-party-texas?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on July 13, 2020, 12:57:17 pm
No mention of underlying health conditions, wonder if it was an enormous viral load?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 14, 2020, 09:31:11 am
Responses to the commutation, an index of false claims and poll problems in Wisconsin (that he needs to win).

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/12/roger-stone-donald-trump-reaction-republicans-democrats

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/13/donald-trump-20000-false-or-misleading-claims

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/13/can-trump-win-swing-state-wisconsin-again
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 16, 2020, 05:52:31 am
A terrible new record for the US:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/15/drugs-opioids-americans-overdoses

And concerns linked to Covid:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/09/coronavirus-pandemic-us-opioids-crisis
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 18, 2020, 10:40:46 am
In Portland, Oregon, unidentifiable federal agents in unmarked vans, ordered into the city by President Trump against the express wishes of the Mayor and Governor, are snatching people off the streets. I've always steered clear of the accusations of fascism because I think they're wrong, but this is getting uncomfortably close.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 18, 2020, 12:52:15 pm
In Portland, Oregon, unidentifiable federal agents in unmarked vans, ordered into the city by President Trump against the express wishes of the Mayor and Governor, are snatching people off the streets. I've always steered clear of the accusations of fascism because I think they're wrong, but this is getting uncomfortably close.

It’s not close, it’s an interference fit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 18, 2020, 11:18:42 pm
In Portland, Oregon, unidentifiable federal agents in unmarked vans, ordered into the city by President Trump against the express wishes of the Mayor and Governor, are snatching people off the streets. I've always steered clear of the accusations of fascism because I think they're wrong, but this is getting uncomfortably close.

On what pretext? I'd probably subscribe to the description of Trump as gangster capitalist rather than fascist. He, like Boris Johnson incidentally, seems to hold no discernible idealogy or conviction other than a ludicrously over inflated self regard.
I genuinely think that Trump believes in little other than the importance of his ego. Most of his racism could well just be in the interest of personal advancement.
In short, I'm not sure he's thoughtful or interesting enough to be a fascist. He's probably a rather boring fat old man who's shit at golf and cheats a lot. At least Hitler, Mussolini et al were probably   interesting in a criminally insane kind of way.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 19, 2020, 08:52:45 am
I think Trump is incidental.

These DHS goons would not have been his idea, this is someone lower down the food chain taking advantage of poor oversight.

These are the fascists. The real danger. Hardliners normally kept in check by the “system” who suddenly find themselves free to act and seize power.
Trump is a useful idiot.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 19, 2020, 10:28:58 am
You think it’s Barr then?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 19, 2020, 10:34:41 am
You think it’s Barr then?

I think there’s a cabal.

Jackals, loosely affiliated, but with some common goals.

Ironically, creating a “Deep state” of unaccountable authoritarian agencies; exactly the thing Trumps’ “base” seek to root out.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on July 19, 2020, 10:40:05 am
You think it’s Barr then?

Or Putin is pulling some of his strings....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 20, 2020, 08:03:56 am
I knew things were bad, but I hadn’t grasped the potential for how much worse it could get:

 https://www.thedailybeast.com/i-was-a-military-covid-planner-trust-me-texas-is-in-deep-deep-trouble?utm_source=web_push (https://www.thedailybeast.com/i-was-a-military-covid-planner-trust-me-texas-is-in-deep-deep-trouble?utm_source=web_push)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 20, 2020, 11:23:19 am
Latest fFox car crash

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/19/donald-trump-fox-news-sunday-chris-wallace-interview
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 20, 2020, 03:38:21 pm
Post all the Guardian links you like (please don't...  ;)) Trump will still be president in 2021.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on July 20, 2020, 04:09:13 pm
Post all the Guardian links you like (please don't...  ;)) Trump will still be president in 2021.
Is this some sort of psychological preparation so you can only be pleasantly surprised if he does lose? Or are you genuinely absolutely 100% convinced he won't?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 20, 2020, 05:43:53 pm
Unless he drops dead/resigns it is absolutely certain Trump will be President in 2021 as the inauguration is not until Wednesday January 20th.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 20, 2020, 07:00:09 pm
Less flippantly, I think Toby's absolute confidence that Trump will win in November is mistaken (caveat: as I've said many times, he may still win). He's looking more vulnerable than at any point and his every turn looks more ill-judged and less effective. There are obviously also a lot of unknowns in play, far more than normal, and his room for manoeuvre looks limited. The economy is not going to come roaring back, there isn't time, and judging from the huge surge in cases this month then deaths are going to look really bad in August. God knows what else what else may happen in the next three and a half months. There are few places left for him to hide. Caveat (just to be sure), he might well still win.

At the same time I think it is wrong to dismiss him as incidental to current events. His racism is very real and strong enough to think white supremacy is now his central ideological plank. Yes, to an extent he is a useful idiot to people such as Barr, Pompeo (who is here in Copenhagen on Wed), and Stephen Miller, but it's also hard to overestimate the extent to he has captured the Republican Party and made them beholden to him. And I do think the federal thugs in Portland (and Chicago next) are there at Trump's behest.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on July 20, 2020, 07:08:04 pm
You can add voter suppression, Kanye West and any number of executive ordered shockers into the volatile mix.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 20, 2020, 10:44:32 pm
Less flippantly, I think Toby's absolute confidence that Trump will win in November is mistaken (caveat: as I've said many times, he may still win). He's looking more vulnerable than at any point and his every turn looks more ill-judged and less effective. There are obviously also a lot of unknowns in play, far more than normal, and his room for manoeuvre looks limited. The economy is not going to come roaring back, there isn't time, and judging from the huge surge in cases this month then deaths are going to look really bad in August. God knows what else what else may happen in the next three and a half months. There are few places left for him to hide. Caveat (just to be sure), he might well still win.

At the same time I think it is wrong to dismiss him as incidental to current events. His racism is very real and strong enough to think white supremacy is now his central ideological plank. Yes, to an extent he is a useful idiot to people such as Barr, Pompeo (who is here in Copenhagen on Wed), and Stephen Miller, but it's also hard to overestimate the extent to he has captured the Republican Party and made them beholden to him. And I do think the federal thugs in Portland (and Chicago next) are there at Trump's behest.

I wasn't necessarily saying he'd actually win the election, guaranteed he has people working on how to stay in power even if he does lose. Interesting points you make, but as I said above I don't think he really has an idealogy. He is certainly a racist but I see it as more of a casual racism of blind prejudice and ignorance rather than a thought process; I really don't think he has that much intelligence.
I don't think he's incidental but he seems far more interested in himself than he is in advancing an idealogy, in the way that Orban is doing in Hungary.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 20, 2020, 10:46:06 pm
Post all the Guardian links you like (please don't...  ;)) Trump will still be president in 2021.
Is this some sort of psychological preparation so you can only be pleasantly surprised if he does lose? Or are you genuinely absolutely 100% convinced he won't?

On the first question, yes, partially.
On the second, I think it's still his to lose.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 21, 2020, 08:27:18 am
Less flippantly, I think Toby's absolute confidence that Trump will win in November is mistaken (caveat: as I've said many times, he may still win). He's looking more vulnerable than at any point and his every turn looks more ill-judged and less effective. There are obviously also a lot of unknowns in play, far more than normal, and his room for manoeuvre looks limited. The economy is not going to come roaring back, there isn't time, and judging from the huge surge in cases this month then deaths are going to look really bad in August. God knows what else what else may happen in the next three and a half months. There are few places left for him to hide. Caveat (just to be sure), he might well still win.

At the same time I think it is wrong to dismiss him as incidental to current events. His racism is very real and strong enough to think white supremacy is now his central ideological plank. Yes, to an extent he is a useful idiot to people such as Barr, Pompeo (who is here in Copenhagen on Wed), and Stephen Miller, but it's also hard to overestimate the extent to he has captured the Republican Party and made them beholden to him. And I do think the federal thugs in Portland (and Chicago next) are there at Trump's behest.
I wasn't necessarily saying he'd actually win the election, guaranteed he has people working on how to stay in power even if he does lose.

Thanks Toby, I understand better what you meant now and can definitely see your point. I still don't think it's guaranteed he will be able to keep himself in power. I see two possibilities. Voter suppression will undoubtedly occur and there will be every attempt to leverage that as much as possible. The other is incompetence leading to chaos; numerous times this year (in primaries) the US has shown itself incapable of running orderly, well-regulated elections. There have been many chaotic scenes at polling stations and extremely delayed results. The pandemic has exposed a lot of inadequacies in many basic American institutions. There's going to be huge pressure on the US postal service, which is already struggling, as mail in ballots increase dramatically, which is of course why Trump constantly attacks both mail-ins and the USPS. Unless there is a landslide, I would be amazed if we wake up to a clear result on the morning after election day; there could be weeks of wrangling, misinformation, court cases etc. As an aside, I think it's certain he will lose the popular vote again
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 21, 2020, 09:22:16 am
As an aside, I think it's certain he will lose the popular vote again

Definitely agree. His ratings are abysmal.
I'd guess he could try to declare the result invalid claiming postal voting fraud, and declare a state of emergency or something.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on July 21, 2020, 09:28:11 am
Or delay the election due to pandemic, and hope people forget the disaster if the economy starts to recover.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 21, 2020, 12:51:51 pm
Come on Toby his ratings are poor in quite a few states he needs to win. If he does win (low probability in my view currently, as per our bet) it's unlikely the gap in the popular vote will be hugely different to that against Hillary.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 22, 2020, 10:10:15 am
Come on Toby his ratings are poor in quite a few states he needs to win. If he does win (low probability in my view currently, as per our bet) it's unlikely the gap in the popular vote will be hugely different to that against Hillary.

I thought I bet you about Rishi Sunak not Trump?

Several elections have been won without carrying the popular vote. He's now counting on people having very short attention spans and getting a little more serious about the pandemic, I think he might be being fairly cunning here. As Johnson proved here you can make a total clusterfuck of everything 6 months before an election, then fight a well managed campaign and win easily.
I seriously hope that he fails dismally (Trump) but I think if you listen to John Sopels excellent commentary on him on the BBC, he's certainly not where he'd like to be, but he has a history of defying expectations and fighting dirty to get his way.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 22, 2020, 01:30:04 pm
I agree with all of that (including my absentmindedness about bets). Sure he has a chance, but he is simply nowhere near as likely to win this time.

This is quite simply by far his biggest mountain yet. Covid is getting worse and he is directly responsible and worst still, attacking his chief public health advisor and the science. The economy is a mess and he promised a fast rebound from covid which has not happened. He hasn't delivered on his promises to most blue collar ex democrats who won him those key swing states by small margins. A lot of his strongest supporters in the last election and some he appointed and then sacked in government have been trashed by him, and many of them are speaking out against him, as some recent views being dangerous. The polls are far worse for him this time around and it's a simple fact that to win, his share of the popular vote can't shrink that much.. Fox News is pushing back against him. Twitter and Facebook are censoring him. He has pissed off many in the military by attacking well respected leaders. Well educated moderate metropolitan republicans are showing increasing concerns. Republican candidates in other 2020 elections are getting worried and some are starting to distance themselves. The Democrats have learnt from their mistakes last time and Clinton was much more disliked than Biden by centrists and had more serious skeletons. The key state demographics have shifted further towards Biden. The security services and big social media are watching closer for outside interference.

On the plus side for him his base seems delighted but his base doesn't include those swing voters or those moderate metropolitan republicans who voted for him last time and need to this time.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 22, 2020, 08:20:39 pm
I agree with all of that (including my absentmindedness about bets). Sure he has a chance, but he is simply nowhere near as likely to win this time.

This is quite simply by far his biggest mountain yet. Covid is getting worse and he is directly responsible and worst still, attacking his chief public health advisor and the science. The economy is a mess and he promised a fast rebound from covid which has not happened. He hasn't delivered on his promises to most blue collar ex democrats who won him those key swing states by small margins. A lot of his strongest supporters in the last election and some he appointed and then sacked in government have been trashed by him, and many of them are speaking out against him, as some recent views being dangerous. The polls are far worse for him this time around and it's a simple fact that to win, his share of the popular vote can't shrink that much.. Fox News is pushing back against him. Twitter and Facebook are censoring him. He has pissed off many in the military by attacking well respected leaders. Well educated moderate metropolitan republicans are showing increasing concerns. Republican candidates in other 2020 elections are getting worried and some are starting to distance themselves. The Democrats have learnt from their mistakes last time and Clinton was much more disliked than Biden by centrists and had more serious skeletons. The key state demographics have shifted further towards Biden. The security services and big social media are watching closer for outside interference.

On the plus side for him his base seems delighted but his base doesn't include those swing voters or those moderate metropolitan republicans who voted for him last time and need to this time.

Ok, BUT, Biden is a weak candidate ultimately,  although I don't think he's a bad one personally.  He's known for gaffes and incoherence like Trump. It's true that its easy to think from Europe that hes got it sewn up but the economy could well just recover enough for Trump to keep enough people happy and see him through.  All the internal politics and people who hate Trump don't really matter, they all hated him in 2016 as well.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 23, 2020, 09:10:17 am
His own team hated him back then?

https://mobile.twitter.com/scaramucci/status/1286142041446133761
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Wil on July 23, 2020, 09:20:45 am
Maybe I shouldn't, but I find this intriguing (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/23/person-woman-man-camera-tv-trump-insists-cognition-test-was-difficult). Trump seems proud that he can pass a simple test for early stage dementia.

Of course, Trump likes to harp on about how intelligent he is, but does he genuinely not realise this is a basic test of cognitive health and nothing to do with intelligence? It's come up several times now, and he keeps doubling down on how impressed doctors are that anybody can do this. My favourite feature is his inability to understand that the 5 words in the test are deliberately not connected (Face, Velvet, Church, Daisy, Red) while his 5 are all just things he can see in the room.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on July 23, 2020, 09:26:14 am
https://twitter.com/sarahcpr/status/1281631729409822722
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: i.munro on July 23, 2020, 01:57:03 pm
What's scary to me is that he is still in the running for the election at all.
Imagine how well a candidate might do with the same policies if they could find one who was
a) able to at least briefly pass for sane b) not obviously a crook c) able to get through a whole sentence
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 23, 2020, 11:18:03 pm
What's scary to me is that he is still in the running for the election at all.
Imagine how well a candidate might do with the same policies if they could find one who was
a) able to at least briefly pass for sane b) not obviously a crook c) able to get through a whole sentence

What's more concerning is that actually none of these things matter. Populist leaders (or often their advisors or backers) the world over have cottoned on the fact that if you have an entertaining media profile, do a few things to keep them happy and make them laugh then all of the rest of the business of intelligent decision making under pressure, an ability to negotiate or martial a vast range of facts, briefs and competing priorities might be necessary for being a very good leader, but are unnecessary for winning elections.

Our own Johnson is actually a rather poor opinion columnist, obviously a crook, an acknowledged serial liar and lazy academic underachiever but millions voted for him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on July 24, 2020, 07:59:56 am
With Trump there's the added issue that pro-lifers / evangelicals etc might dislike him as a personality but still vote for him, feeling he is their best bet to get more conservative Justices into the Supreme Court.  A Supreme Court appointment is for life and in a finely balanced court can have more profound and long-lasting influence than a President (some are more than 80 and Ruth Bader Ginsberg has announced she has cancer, so there could be openings in a few years).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 24, 2020, 09:30:13 am
With Trump there's the added issue that pro-lifers / evangelicals etc might dislike him as a personality but still vote for him, feeling he is their best bet to get more conservative Justices into the Supreme Court.  A Supreme Court appointment is for life and in a finely balanced court can have more profound and long-lasting influence than a President (some are more than 80 and Ruth Bader Ginsberg has announced she has cancer, so there could be openings in a few years).

Did you listen to Americast by any chance Luke? It is a good point though; the bizarre system of presidential appointment of supreme court judges is one reason that Trump will carry a lot of conservative votes however stupid,  crass and incompetent he is. They care more about abortion rights, gay rights etc (or about curtailing them) than they do about all the rest of politics, and the supreme court decides on most of these issues.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 24, 2020, 12:03:00 pm
All well and good but they were never going to vote for Biden anyhow. They don't determine swing states (other than losing faith in the orange one and gifting Biden a state he thought he couldn't win).

Back to the news, another ex official speaks out:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/24/trump-goon-squad-john-sandweg-homeland-security-ice
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on July 24, 2020, 08:44:17 pm
Did you listen to Americast by any chance Luke?

I did, and there have also been a lot of 538 articles and podcasts on thebalance of the Supreme Court e.g. this article on whether the swing Justice, Roberts, has become more liberal, or if the rest of the Court has moved rightwards around him (TR:DL - could be either or neither!).

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/roberts-is-the-new-swing-justice-that-doesnt-mean-hes-becoming-more-liberal/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/roberts-is-the-new-swing-justice-that-doesnt-mean-hes-becoming-more-liberal/)

By the way, an interesting podcast on the history and pivotal cases of the Supreme Court is NPR / RadioLab's "More Perfect".  I would ignore the most recent "Most Perfect Album" episodes and pick and choose from the earlier episodes.   My favourites are "Gun Show", on how unimportant and marginal the 2nd amendment was until the 60/70s (the NRA only then made it a hobby horse in the wake of restrictions imposed to stop Black Panthers from bearing arms).  And, "One Nation Under Money" on how a decision on whether a farmer could be penalised for growing wheat for his own use ended up being very far-reaching e.g. it was used to stop segregation in private businesses, which the Civil Rights Act was unable to do (the CRA stopped inequality by states, but at the time struggled against businesses / individuals).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 25, 2020, 08:38:04 am
Did you listen to Americast by any chance Luke?

I did, and there have also been a lot of 538 articles and podcasts on thebalance of the Supreme Court e.g. this article on whether the swing Justice, Roberts, has become more liberal, or if the rest of the Court has moved rightwards around him (TR:DL - could be either or neither!).

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/roberts-is-the-new-swing-justice-that-doesnt-mean-hes-becoming-more-liberal/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/roberts-is-the-new-swing-justice-that-doesnt-mean-hes-becoming-more-liberal/)

By the way, an interesting podcast on the history and pivotal cases of the Supreme Court is NPR / RadioLab's "More Perfect".  I would ignore the most recent "Most Perfect Album" episodes and pick and choose from the earlier episodes.   My favourites are "Gun Show", on how unimportant and marginal the 2nd amendment was until the 60/70s (the NRA only then made it a hobby horse in the wake of restrictions imposed to stop Black Panthers from bearing arms).  And, "One Nation Under Money" on how a decision on whether a farmer could be penalised for growing wheat for his own use ended up being very far-reaching e.g. it was used to stop segregation in private businesses, which the Civil Rights Act was unable to do (the CRA stopped inequality by states, but at the time struggled against businesses / individuals).

Its just that what you wrote was pretty much exactly the same as their comments on it! That said I totally agree.  Yeah I've listened and read a few things on the history of the NRA, which hasn't always been  a very wealthy political lobbying organisation, and used to be about conservation and land management. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 25, 2020, 10:58:02 am
The NRA is not as wealthy as it was
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/29/nra-financial-crisis-layoffs-furloughs
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 25, 2020, 05:10:38 pm
The NRA is not as wealthy as it was
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/29/nra-financial-crisis-layoffs-furloughs

I rather doubt they're in crisis though, and they're a powerful political lobby group. The problem with reading articles about Trump, or American politics in UK newspapers is that they're far too fond of falling into the trap of laughing at Trump, writing him off and underestimating the strength of right wing conservatives in the US. They may not ever have voted for Biden, but they may not have voted for Trump either if it weren't for the fact he's likely to conservatise the supreme court and fulfil their anti abortion dreams.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 26, 2020, 07:58:37 am
The Guardian is a US paper as well. It has a full staff over there and a full US edition. It's saying no more than other leading  US media. NRA has run out of money and desperately needs some rich doners.

On abortion there is the small matter for a democracy that a large majority want to keep Roe vs Wade (albeit with conditions).  It's highly complex but does illustrate perfectly the split between the educated liberal and religious conservative viewpoints.

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/730183531/poll-majority-want-to-keep-abortion-legal-but-they-also-want-restrictions
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 26, 2020, 11:29:13 pm
The Guardian is a US paper as well. It has a full staff over there and a full US edition.

I knew that. Is it actually a print edition, and I wonder how many American people see it as a 'US paper as well'?

The NRA might be short of a few bob, but if you're arguing that the pro gun lobby is on the wane, I think you might be onto a loser.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 27, 2020, 01:27:00 pm
A look at problems in the border force agents being used in US cities and a new campaign highlighting the climate risks if Trump is re-elected.

 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/27/trump-border-patrol-troops-portland-bortac

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/27/global-climate-fight-could-be-lost-trump-re-elected
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 29, 2020, 09:32:19 am
Another curtailed news conference after trying to promote a conspiracy theory quack...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/28/trump-covid-19-briefing-hydroxychloroquine-video
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 30, 2020, 09:43:23 am
Another curtailed news conference after trying to promote a conspiracy theory quack...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/28/trump-covid-19-briefing-hydroxychloroquine-video

Despite how frothy the Guardian get at any opportunity to have a supercilious giggle at Trump, he's just not the idiot that they'd like to think he is.
A profoundly unpleasant person, in every way possible, certainly if his media profile is any guide. But a certain body of opinion holds that the rambling simpleton is all a persona and a sound electoral tactic. It works for Boris, after all.
Offwidth, there's really little need to post Guardian links, I suspect at least 90% of ukb read it anyway. I'm not denying it can publish a lot of quality journalism and is in many ways a great newspaper, but I had a read through the Fox news report of that conference which actually represents what many Americans will think, it actually wasn't quite as different as I thought it might be, though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on July 30, 2020, 03:46:02 pm
I think Offwidth's account may have been taken over by a bot that posts links to the Guardian but which never generate any meaningful discussion.

As Toby says, we can all pick up on embarrassing news conferences in the press or other social media. If there's no discussion to be had about them then what's the point in posting? Is this thread just meant as a catalogue of Trump's shitness? I can get that much more comprehensively elsewhere.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on July 30, 2020, 07:20:38 pm
I think Offwidth's account may have been taken over by a bot that posts links to the Guardian but which never generate any meaningful discussion.

As Toby says, we can all pick up on embarrassing news conferences in the press or other social media. If there's no discussion to be had about them then what's the point in posting? Is this thread just meant as a catalogue of Trump's shitness? I can get that much more comprehensively elsewhere.

Are you downgrading posts as well now? :D
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 30, 2020, 10:25:05 pm

As Toby says, we can all pick up on embarrassing news conferences in the press or other social media. If there's no discussion to be had about them then what's the point in posting? Is this thread just meant as a catalogue of Trump's shitness? I can get that much more comprehensively elsewhere.

Indeed, although I wasn't trying to get at Offwidth at all, I enjoy anyone's comments if it doesn't consist of just a link. I'm sure I've done it in the past, but it's not terribly condusive to a conversation or debate. Fun though laughing at Trump is, I suspect that's part of his game plan and there is every chance he'll find a way to remain in power.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on July 30, 2020, 10:31:47 pm
Problem is (for a thread) that he’s such a fucking car crash that there’s no counter argument... it’s hard to be surprised at anything he does now (today is a case I. Point).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 30, 2020, 11:25:40 pm
Problem is (for a thread) that he’s such a fucking car crash that there’s no counter argument... it’s hard to be surprised at anything he does now (today is a case I. Point).

However, it's remarkable how far being like he is has got him. He is / was a mediocre businessman at best, but from this background fronted a ludicrously popular reality TV show and pretended he'd written the art of the deal, both of which gained him popularity, exposure and notorioty.

He's a joke of a politician, but the fact remains that he is president. He clearly has a sense of what appeals to people and can make it work. The idiotic behaviour may well be what appeals to people. Will it appeal to enough people to keep him in office? I think, perhaps.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 31, 2020, 08:50:55 am
Problem is (for a thread) that he’s such a fucking car crash that there’s no counter argument... it’s hard to be surprised at anything he does now (today is a case I. Point).

However, it's remarkable how far being like he is has got him. He is / was a mediocre businessman at best, but from this background fronted a ludicrously popular reality TV show and pretended he'd written the art of the deal, both of which gained him popularity, exposure and notorioty.

He's a joke of a politician, but the fact remains that he is president. He clearly has a sense of what appeals to people and can make it work. The idiotic behaviour may well be what appeals to people. Will it appeal to enough people to keep him in office? I think, perhaps.

The truth probably lays somewhere between the two extremes.

There are several inside accounts of his dejection and expectation of failure on election night, for instance.

The voting patterns back in 2016, really point to the Dems losing the election, rather than the GOP winning (if that makes sense) as it were. Clinton was not a good candidate, or at least, too unpopular amongst her own party and swing voters.
Hard to tell exactly how much influence that had, but I think we’ll find out in November.
Ultimately, for me, I think the turnout for his Tulsa rally and the recent sequela for his most prominent African American supporter, is going to be indicative of his future.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 31, 2020, 10:40:16 am

However, it's remarkable how far being like he is has got him. He is / was a mediocre businessman at best, but from this background fronted a ludicrously popular reality TV show and pretended he'd written the art of the deal, both of which gained him popularity, exposure and notorioty.

He's a joke of a politician, but the fact remains that he is president. He clearly has a sense of what appeals to people and can make it work. The idiotic behaviour may well be what appeals to people. Will it appeal to enough people to keep him in office? I think, perhaps.

Perhaps? Anyone sensible says that. You said he would most likely win. My resulting debate on the subject highlights the greater problems he faces this time.

As for the rest, he is the front man for GOP. He follows in their grand recent line of dumb leaders. Without GOP he is nowhere and he must be getting close to to the point when distancing moves to something bigger. Trying to distract from my debate and the links evidencing with that cheap Guardian line is below you.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on July 31, 2020, 11:18:58 am

As for the rest, he is the front man for GOP. He follows in their grand recent line of dumb leaders. Without GOP he is nowhere and he must be getting close to to the point when distancing moves to something bigger.

What strategy do the GOP have besides supporting the incumbent president?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on July 31, 2020, 11:22:39 am

As for the rest, he is the front man for GOP. He follows in their grand recent line of dumb leaders. Without GOP he is nowhere and he must be getting close to to the point when distancing moves to something bigger.

What strategy do the GOP have besides supporting the incumbent president?

Yeah - I don't see this. I suspect the GOP went for Trump so they could get in power - now they have a dictator wannabe who whilst may be dumb and malleable - is also highly erratic and hard to predict. I suspect they'd much rather have someone else in charge.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 31, 2020, 11:28:55 am
There is the nub. If the numbers for all the other GOP elections start to look too bad the question becomes is Plan B to take the hit and rebuild, or jump the gun, get rid of the orange one and look at damage limitation with Pence, another potential dumb leader.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mike-pence-coronavirus-fake-video-doctors-donald-trump-twitter-deleted-a9646071.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on July 31, 2020, 11:33:39 am
There is the nub. If the numbers for all the other GOP elections start to look too bad the question becomes is Plan B to take the hit and rebuild, or jump the gun, get rid of the orange one and look at damage limitation with Pence,

What mechanism do you envisage for this though, siding with Dems to try and trigger 25th Amendment? It seems vanishingly unlikely that they will do anything besides rally behind Trump.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 31, 2020, 11:40:40 am
There is the nub. If the numbers for all the other GOP elections start to look too bad the question becomes is Plan B to take the hit and rebuild, or jump the gun, get rid of the orange one and look at damage limitation with Pence,

What mechanism do you envisage for this though, siding with Dems to try and trigger 25th Amendment? It seems vanishingly unlikely that they will do anything besides rally behind Trump.

It's remarkable how inventive political parties can become when the leader is a genuine liability. Trump didn't risk GOP senate elections last time. There is a logical line of terrible polls for many GOP candidates and his escaping with his legacy relatively intact (obviously from a GOP perspective), the inevitable mountains of dirt, threats to block him if elected and probably a few other methods.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 31, 2020, 05:49:48 pm
I think Offwidth's account may have been taken over by a bot that posts links to the Guardian but which never generate any meaningful discussion.

As Toby says, we can all pick up on embarrassing news conferences in the press or other social media. If there's no discussion to be had about them then what's the point in posting? Is this thread just meant as a catalogue of Trump's shitness? I can get that much more comprehensively elsewhere.

I've counted to 10 now. One of the great things about UKB is our profiles have a list of our posts. It doesn't take long to go back through mine to see I'm hardly guilty of constant 'link bombing' with no obvious context or of failing to debate. On one occasion I was guilty of that, Pete and others rightly called me out and I apologised and explained what I meant  (it was one of those life overtaking thinking incidents people get when stressed). Other posters have pointed out that other site users don't get the negative scrutiny I do for. You do seem to have an issue with me that looks unhealthy.

As a point of irony I find the repository aspect of UKB and site structure incredibly useful; for everyone's links not just mine. Finding old news articles and Twitter spats and even scientific papers (as I have left Uni and lost access to academic search facility ) can be a real pain but I can find everything I was interested in posted here, if I need it again for something else.

Anyhow another opinion where the author thinks Trump is losing his past success on his 'common touch' in the response to Portland.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/31/trump-portland-antifa-voters-miscalculated
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on July 31, 2020, 07:11:32 pm
I think Offwidth's account may have been taken over by a bot that posts links to the Guardian but which never generate any meaningful discussion.

As Toby says, we can all pick up on embarrassing news conferences in the press or other social media. If there's no discussion to be had about them then what's the point in posting? Is this thread just meant as a catalogue of Trump's shitness? I can get that much more comprehensively elsewhere.

I've counted to 10 now. One of the great things about UKB is our profiles have a list of our posts. It doesn't take long to go back through mine to see I'm hardly guilty of constant 'link bombing' with no obvious context or of failing to debate. On one occasion I was guilty of that, Pete and others rightly called me out and I apologised and explained what I meant  (it was one of those life overtaking thinking incidents people get when stressed). Other posters have pointed out that other site users don't get the negative scrutiny I do for. You do seem to have an issue with me that looks unhealthy.

As a point of irony I find the repository aspect of UKB and site structure incredibly useful; for everyone's links not just mine. Finding old news articles and Twitter spats and even scientific papers (as I have left Uni and lost access to academic search facility ) can be a real pain but I can find everything I was interested in posted here, if I need it again for something else.

Anyhow another opinion where the author thinks Trump is losing his past success on his 'common touch' in the response to Portland.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/31/trump-portland-antifa-voters-miscalculated

I was reading an article on the beach earlier, over a cup of tea...

Which is to say, I can’t find the link again now and don’t have time at this second to look harder.

It was about the “Free Sheriffs” (or similar) movement and how they believe the Sheriff is the ultimate authority and arbiter of the Constitution. It’s surprisingly widespread.
To be clear, it’s an organisation of duly elected Sheriffs and they are actively opposing things like Lockdowns and mask orders, on the basis of some underlying unconstitutionality of a Governor’s executive order (also quite a lot of 2nd amendment related issues, like background checks etc).
Since they are incredibly pro-Trump and despite some pretty extreme reactionary activities, these guys are generally not facing recall in their jurisdictions, it seems likely that Trumps support might be much greater at grassroots level than polling or the media coverage suggests.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on July 31, 2020, 07:34:59 pm
Again, we will see. This is not the same as last time: Trump only just beat Clinton and she was getting pretty bad press and
made stupid errors and got ill; his actions hadn't contributed to 100,000 unneccesary extra excess deaths, a crashed economy and millions out of work as a result. Attacking respected military leaders, many of his ex cabinet and advisors and even Fox News with GOP possibly heading to a lost senate. The demographic has shifted to Democrats benefit. Social media will be better policed.

https://bookies.com/news/senate-races-odds-tracker

Yes he could still win but it doesn't look most likely right now.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on July 31, 2020, 07:37:41 pm
I read the article. I'm not saying there isn't strong grassroots support, but the Constitutionalist Sheriffs movement is not evidence of it. They generally represent scattered small pockets, mostly in the South West and West, places that already had pronounced anti governments traditions. They're elected at the county level, which are small administrative units. Pennsylvania (to which I always recur, I realise) is a big place; nonetheless it's worth bearing in mind that it has 67 counties, most of them small or empty or both.

TL:DR - you can be a Sheriff in the US and represent almost no-one, especially in Montana.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on July 31, 2020, 10:23:32 pm

However, it's remarkable how far being like he is has got him. He is / was a mediocre businessman at best, but from this background fronted a ludicrously popular reality TV show and pretended he'd written the art of the deal, both of which gained him popularity, exposure and notorioty.

He's a joke of a politician, but the fact remains that he is president. He clearly has a sense of what appeals to people and can make it work. The idiotic behaviour may well be what appeals to people. Will it appeal to enough people to keep him in office? I think, perhaps.

Perhaps? Anyone sensible says that. You said he would most likely win. My resulting debate on the subject highlights the greater problems he faces this time.

As for the rest, he is the front man for GOP. He follows in their grand recent line of dumb leaders. Without GOP he is nowhere and he must be getting close to to the point when distancing moves to something bigger. Trying to distract from my debate and the links evidencing with that cheap Guardian line is below you.

I'm not sure if guardian comment columns constitute evidence.

When I said perhaps it was intended to suggest that I thought this was likely. There no doubt that presidency has not gone well for Trump. There are a thousand reasons why he shouldn't be reelected, but I'd still maintain he could win with a combination of dirty tricks, voter apathy about Biden and a genuinely trump supporting minority.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on August 01, 2020, 12:33:53 am
Post all the Guardian links you like (please don't...  ;)) Trump will still be president in 2021.


A bit of a change in a week. I feel a bit sad pointing this out as I think you are right about the US liberal elite underestimating his reach and the possible dirty tricks route.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 01, 2020, 09:33:20 am
Post all the Guardian links you like (please don't...  ;)) Trump will still be president in 2021.


A bit of a change in a week. I feel a bit sad pointing this out as I think you are right about the US liberal elite underestimating his reach and the possible dirty tricks route.

My comments are only light hearted guesswork,  informed by a reasonably wide breadth of media consumption including US media, the BBC and British papers.
Don't get me wrong I also want nothing better than Biden / Rice (??) handing him a total humiliation, and him then being bankrupted by numerous legal costs arising from all the people who want to take him to court.  But unfortunately hes still a strong media performer and compelling, even if you hate him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on August 02, 2020, 09:14:25 am
Jon Naughton with a whiff of optimism from the grilling of tech titans by the democrats on the Congress anti-trust committee (and the depressing obsessions of the Republicans).

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/commentisfree/2020/aug/02/at-last-the-tech-titans-nerd-immunity-shows-signs-of-fading
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ru on August 02, 2020, 10:59:16 am
One concern is that the current spike in covid cases in the UK/EU, Hong Kong, Japan etc turn into second waves. All of a sudden, Trump's management of covid won't look as bad as it once did.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 02, 2020, 12:19:05 pm
One concern is that the current spike in covid cases in the UK/EU, Hong Kong, Japan etc turn into second waves. All of a sudden, Trump's management of covid won't look as bad as it once did.

You're assuming that a significant number of American voters are interested in and understand what is happening in other countries. Of course, there are millions of Americans who are well travelled and internationally oriented, but there are also many millions with very little knowledge of the wider world. Patriotism and belief in American exceptionalism are very strong and for many Americans it is practically inconceivable that another country might actually be better at anything.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on August 02, 2020, 02:57:47 pm
[...] but there are also many millions with very little knowledge of the wider world. Patriotism and belief in American exceptionalism are very strong and for many Americans it is practically inconceivable that another country might actually be better at anything.

Alas, I have found this to be true in every single country I have spent significant time in (except Norway, they magnanimously  admit that the roads might be straighter and wider in Sweden).

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 02, 2020, 04:25:39 pm
[...] but there are also many millions with very little knowledge of the wider world. Patriotism and belief in American exceptionalism are very strong and for many Americans it is practically inconceivable that another country might actually be better at anything.


Alas, I have found this to be true in every single country I have spent significant time in (except Norway, they magnanimously  admit that the roads might be straighter and wider in Sweden).

Noted:
*Might*
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 02, 2020, 10:29:09 pm
[...] but there are also many millions with very little knowledge of the wider world. Patriotism and belief in American exceptionalism are very strong and for many Americans it is practically inconceivable that another country might actually be better at anything.

Alas, I have found this to be true in every single country I have spent significant time in (except Norway, they magnanimously  admit that the roads might be straighter and wider in Sweden).

I'd agree apart from the African countries I've been in for a while: Morocco, Namibia and Kenya. Fairly self depreciating as far as I remember.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 05, 2020, 10:31:16 pm
Unless he really knows more than anyone else is letting on, Trump's remarks about Beirut are insanely, unforgivably stupid. Sadly it won't harm his election chances one bit.

Bidens comments about Trump not doing his job seem as though they might make a difference. The number of days trump has spent playing golf recently are frankly disgusting. I wonder if anyone who matters is listening though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on August 07, 2020, 08:49:07 am
More bad news for the NRA

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/06/nra-new-york-attorney-general-lawsuit-wayne-lapierre
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 07, 2020, 10:16:11 pm
I'm hardly guilty of constant 'link bombing' with no obvious context or of failing to debate.

Just saying.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on August 08, 2020, 09:03:43 am
I partly posted it for you Toby...as a light-hearted nudge, now it's clear we agree on Trump (the odds are he won't win but there is still a significant chance he might and he shouldn't be underestimated)  I thought it was quite funny that the legal defence will eat the little money the NRA have left after their leaders squandered funds and may lead to them no longer existing as the NRA (a new association with similar aims is sure to form if they are wound up). The NRA put 30 million into the last Trump campaign. The members won't automatically trust a leadership with clear public evidence for significant charges of corruption. I certainly didn't expect you to be missing the double relevance.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 08, 2020, 09:25:21 am
I partly posted it for you Toby...as a light-hearted nudge, now it's clear we agree on Trump (the odds are he won't win but there is still a significant chance he might and he shouldn't be underestimated)  I thought it was quite funny that the legal defence will eat the little money the NRA have left after their leaders squandered funds and may lead to them no longer existing as the NRA (a new association with similar aims is sure to form if they are wound up). The NRA put 30 million into the last Trump campaign. The members won't automatically trust a leadership with clear public evidence for significant charges of corruption. I certainly didn't expect you to be missing the double relevance.

First, its really good to actually get proper posts and not just flipping links with little or no comment,  you're not the only one by any means, but I did wonder about the intention behind this one!
Two points there; in reply i don't agree that Trump is unlikely to win. That may well be what the polls say, and that may well be what a bookie would say, but Trump has behaved more like a mafia boss than a president and I fully expect him to find a way to remain in office, whatever that is.

The second is about clear charges of corruption; I totally disagree here, corrupt is now meaningless when the president is clearly corrupt, he calls Democrats corrupt about ten times a day, and anyone else who seems to get in his way.

I honestly think that Trump seems to have poisoned the public discourse to the extent the almost any extent of venality becomes admissible.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 08, 2020, 10:27:30 am
Interesting viewpoint on Skynews site this morning about foreign interference in the election.

Apparently, the Kremlin want Trump to stay on in power so are busy discrediting Biden, whereas China and Iran desperately want Trump out and are working hard to get rid of him...

This raises the (amusing? Almost...) spectre of two superpowers trying to decide the fate of another superpower via social media manipulation... Do they ultimately cancel each other out?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 08, 2020, 10:45:05 am
Interesting viewpoint on Skynews site this morning about foreign interference in the election.

Apparently, the Kremlin want Trump to stay on in power so are busy discrediting Biden, whereas China and Iran desperately want Trump out and are working hard to get rid of him...

This raises the (amusing? Almost...) spectre of two superpowers trying to decide the fate of another superpower via social media manipulation... Do they ultimately cancel each other out?

Oh how the tables have turned...

Who’da thunk it, enormously wealthy and powerful “Superpowers” meddling in the democratic processes of a politically and socially unstable (but strategically important) nation...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on August 08, 2020, 10:57:34 am
I think it’s fascinating. Previous interference seems to have been to destabilise the USA (and still is from Russia’s POV) but clearly this level of cluster fuck of an administration is too much for China!

“Vladimir- we didn’t think it would be THIS bad...”
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 08, 2020, 12:27:51 pm
China and Iran desperately want Trump out and are working hard to get rid of him...


If this references Evanina’s report, not sure it represents its findings accurately.. Russian evidence of covert meddling is pretty plentiful, China evidence is what, beyobd public uttterances?

Edit- spelling Evanina
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on August 08, 2020, 01:00:46 pm
I partly posted it for you Toby...as a light-hearted nudge, now it's clear we agree on Trump (the odds are he won't win but there is still a significant chance he might and he shouldn't be underestimated)  I thought it was quite funny that the legal defence will eat the little money the NRA have left after their leaders squandered funds and may lead to them no longer existing as the NRA (a new association with similar aims is sure to form if they are wound up). The NRA put 30 million into the last Trump campaign. The members won't automatically trust a leadership with clear public evidence for significant charges of corruption. I certainly didn't expect you to be missing the double relevance.

First, its really good to actually get proper posts and not just flipping links with little or no comment,  you're not the only one by any means, but I did wonder about the intention behind this one!
Two points there; in reply i don't agree that Trump is unlikely to win. That may well be what the polls say, and that may well be what a bookie would say, but Trump has behaved more like a mafia boss than a president and I fully expect him to find a way to remain in office, whatever that is.

The second is about clear charges of corruption; I totally disagree here, corrupt is now meaningless when the president is clearly corrupt, he calls Democrats corrupt about ten times a day, and anyone else who seems to get in his way.

I honestly think that Trump seems to have poisoned the public discourse to the extent the almost any extent of venality becomes admissible.

The odd are from the bookies. This isn't an accusation it's a legal move on evidence from a state DA where the company is resident.  Despite your cynical views, the law still seems to be working there (despite the Trump appointments giving a conservative supreme court majority, even they are now delivering him the odd defeat).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 08, 2020, 11:12:10 pm
I partly posted it for you Toby...as a light-hearted nudge, now it's clear we agree on Trump (the odds are he won't win but there is still a significant chance he might and he shouldn't be underestimated)  I thought it was quite funny that the legal defence will eat the little money the NRA have left after their leaders squandered funds and may lead to them no longer existing as the NRA (a new association with similar aims is sure to form if they are wound up). The NRA put 30 million into the last Trump campaign. The members won't automatically trust a leadership with clear public evidence for significant charges of corruption. I certainly didn't expect you to be missing the double relevance.

First, its really good to actually get proper posts and not just flipping links with little or no comment,  you're not the only one by any means, but I did wonder about the intention behind this one!
Two points there; in reply i don't agree that Trump is unlikely to win. That may well be what the polls say, and that may well be what a bookie would say, but Trump has behaved more like a mafia boss than a president and I fully expect him to find a way to remain in office, whatever that is.

The second is about clear charges of corruption; I totally disagree here, corrupt is now meaningless when the president is clearly corrupt, he calls Democrats corrupt about ten times a day, and anyone else who seems to get in his way.

I honestly think that Trump seems to have poisoned the public discourse to the extent the almost any extent of venality becomes admissible.

The odd are from the bookies. This isn't an accusation it's a legal move on evidence from a state DA where the company is resident.  Despite your cynical views, the law still seems to be working there (despite the Trump appointments giving a conservative supreme court majority, even they are now delivering him the odd defeat).

If it's a legal move from a DA then they stand accused of corruption, surely? Therefore it is an accusation.

The supreme court doesn't rule on the vast majority of the law, you're confusing politics and everyday legal proceedings here, unless I am very much mistaken.

It's well worth listening to the Americast podcast, they've interviewed several Trump campaign officials or campaigners all of whom sound extremely confident that they're going to win easily (it's worth noting that so have the democratic ones, but given polling they have good reason to). I'm suspicious that the Trump campaign has something more up its sleeve.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on August 09, 2020, 09:13:30 am
Trump aides predicting an easy win.... must be so then.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 11, 2020, 06:46:27 am
His latest train wreck speech is being widely reported.
Most media outlets are pointing out his confusion.

It has also been picked up and reported by the US “Military Times” (which, as I’m sure I’ve mentioned before, is not exactly a “Liberal” publication).

Perfectly balanced report, merely detailing and correcting the inaccuracies.

Mostly.

Read the last couple of lines:

 https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/military-culture/2020/08/10/trump-says-1918-flu-pandemic-probably-ended-the-second-world-war-which-ended-in-1945/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social (https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/military-culture/2020/08/10/trump-says-1918-flu-pandemic-probably-ended-the-second-world-war-which-ended-in-1945/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 11, 2020, 10:36:10 pm
His latest train wreck speech is being widely reported.
Most media outlets are pointing out his confusion.

It has also been picked up and reported by the US “Military Times” (which, as I’m sure I’ve mentioned before, is not exactly a “Liberal” publication).

Perfectly balanced report, merely detailing and correcting the inaccuracies.

Mostly.

Read the last couple of lines:

 https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/military-culture/2020/08/10/trump-says-1918-flu-pandemic-probably-ended-the-second-world-war-which-ended-in-1945/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social (https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/military-culture/2020/08/10/trump-says-1918-flu-pandemic-probably-ended-the-second-world-war-which-ended-in-1945/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social)

Jeepers, the man's crass stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds. To keep making mistakes like this as he does, it's either a deliberate tactic, of he always thinks that he knows better than whoever writes his speeches and thinks he'll do some improvisation to impress people. There's no way anyone writing a speech can be this thick, it's virtually primary school history. Sadly this will make precisely no difference to the election.

I wonder what anyone (particularly Andy and anyone else who lives there) thinks of Biden's selection of Kamala Harris, and how it'll influence the voting.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on August 11, 2020, 10:49:19 pm
Deleted as pointless post!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 12, 2020, 06:57:21 am
I wonder what anyone (particularly Andy and anyone else who lives there) thinks of Biden's selection of Kamala Harris, and how it'll influence the voting.

I thought this would (and should) be the choice he'd make - she seemed like the most viable candidate at this point. She's qualified, articulate and sharp (see some of her performances in Senate hearings), and tough - she won't be intimidated by Trump (his reaction has already shown he doesn't have a clear line of attack on her) and should eviscerate Pence in a debate. She will animate and excite important elements of the Democrats' electorate and won't scare moderates. She seems personable. Sure, the very progressive don't like her and I've seen a couple negative reactions on social media from friends (as well as positive ones), but if you were already prepared to vote for Biden, however grudgingly, then this won't change your mind. Overwhelmingly, people I know on the left understand the importance of this election. She's already had a very strong endorsement from Shaun King, a prominent racial/criminal justice activist, which is encouraging. It would have been good if he could have picked someone from a swing state but that option wasn't really available and at least her Senate seat should be an easy hold for the Dems.

Overall, I think she will solidify Biden's position. I don't see a better choice.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on August 12, 2020, 07:55:51 am
I wonder if there's an element of choosing Kamala Harris to bait Trump? One of the most persistent Trump traits has been unpleasantness to black / latina  women in positions of authority - often going beyond the political into personal attacks. 

Choosing Kamala almost guarantees lots of headlines of Trump making crass, dog-whistling, misogynist, racist remarks  - perhaps a "give him enough rope" strategy.  Mind you, making racist remarks will probably cement his popularity with a decent number of voters and not cost him any black votes (last I saw, his approval rating was only 11% with black voters anyway) - although, being misogynist might cost him women's votes.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 12, 2020, 08:12:36 am
I doubt it's a deliberate strategy, though it might be an unintended consequence. Biden committed to picking a woman months ago and though he never publicly committed to picking a person of colour that had come to be pretty much inevitable over the summer. Once those criteria were in place she was the strongest candidate by far (IMO). It's worth noting Biden has said he is a transitional figure. Harris is now in effect the Democratic candidate for President in 2024 if Biden wins this year.

Trump has actually never gone after her that strongly given her prominence and his response so far has been lame; she's a crazy "leftist" and a "nasty" woman. That seems to be all he has.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 12, 2020, 08:37:08 am
In other news, a full blown QAnon conspiracy theorist (and raving racist) won a primary for a safe Republican house seat in Georgia last night: this lunatic will almost certainly be in Congress in November - I think large swathes of even the GOP are dismayed at the prospect.

On the Dem side, Rep Ilhan Omar easily saw off a challenge in her primary last night, as did Rashida Tlaib recently, and last week Cori Bush, a BLM activist, unseated a deeply entrenched incumbent in St Louis. There is every sign of the House becoming more progressive in November.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 12, 2020, 10:54:33 pm
I wonder what anyone (particularly Andy and anyone else who lives there) thinks of Biden's selection of Kamala Harris, and how it'll influence the voting.

I thought this would (and should) be the choice he'd make - she seemed like the most viable candidate at this point. She's qualified, articulate and sharp (see some of her performances in Senate hearings), and tough - she won't be intimidated by Trump (his reaction has already shown he doesn't have a clear line of attack on her) and should eviscerate Pence in a debate. She will animate and excite important elements of the Democrats' electorate and won't scare moderates. She seems personable. Sure, the very progressive don't like her and I've seen a couple negative reactions on social media from friends (as well as positive ones), but if you were already prepared to vote for Biden, however grudgingly, then this won't change your mind. Overwhelmingly, people I know on the left understand the importance of this election. She's already had a very strong endorsement from Shaun King, a prominent racial/criminal justice activist, which is encouraging. It would have been good if he could have picked someone from a swing state but that option wasn't really available and at least her Senate seat should be an easy hold for the Dems.

Overall, I think she will solidify Biden's position. I don't see a better choice.

Thanks Andy. That was pretty much what I thought, I saw that one of Trump's initial attacks on her was that she is strong on law and order, which as the reporter observed, is rather bizarre as that's more likely to endear her to wavering Republican voters, which are the ones that Biden, and Kamala Harris need.

Moose, I don't think it matters at this stage about Trump being a misogynist or a racist, anyone who doesn't vote for him is unlikely to start now unless they like these things and Trump voters have already priced these things into their Faustian deal. Remember that he was recorded bragging about grabbing women by the pussy and this was played endlessly at the last election, to which it probably made little difference.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Teaboy on August 14, 2020, 06:50:57 pm
Can anyone explain to me why restrictions on postal voting will hamper Democrats more than the GOP?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on August 14, 2020, 07:07:33 pm
I think it's to do with the placement of polling stations and their ease of accessibility - fewer in certain democrat-strong areas, harder for poorer people (no cars) to get to them (accentuated when public transport is more dangerous due to COVID etc. Whatever the causes (probably a mix of multiple things), I'm sure I've seen stats that Dems do better than Republicans in postal ballots
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on August 14, 2020, 07:54:19 pm
Due to the fact that a significant number of republicans still believe covid is "no big deal" or a hoax.  Therefore they'll go to the polls.  Democrats on the other hand seem to view Covid as a real concern, so going to a crowded indoor location to vote is dangerous, and will therefore result in lower turnout.

The only reason is the reaction to covid.  In the past republicans have been pro mail in voting.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 15, 2020, 07:39:33 am
As Barrows suggests, an increase in mail-in voting has been seized on as an excuse to close polling stations, often in largely black or low income neighbourhoods. This has happened numerous times in primaries this year, resulting in huge lines etc. Milwaukee went from 180 polling stations to five.

The irony is that Trump has voted by mail in Florida, where is registered to vote at Mar a Lago, which registration is probably illegal as it is zoned as a club and may not be used as a private domestic residence.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 15, 2020, 09:05:43 am
Not content with trying to cripple the postal service,  Trump is airing a 'birther' conspiracy about Kamala Harris,  as widely reported. This does feel like desperation and I wonder how much hes really starting to worry about the election.  The Israeli/ UAE deal is another example of using power for thinly veiled electioneering.

I hope hes unsuccessful,  but I'm concerned that as hes clearly prepared to sink to any depth to retain office, he will find a way to 'win'.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 15, 2020, 07:36:25 pm
I'm concerned that as hes clearly prepared to sink to any depth to retain office, he will find a way to 'win'.

Or dispute the result.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 15, 2020, 11:07:21 pm
I'm concerned that as hes clearly prepared to sink to any depth to retain office, he will find a way to 'win'.

Or dispute the result.

That's exactly the sort of thing I mean. But I'm sure that however low you or I might guess he'll sink, he'll do something worse.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 16, 2020, 08:22:13 am
What's especially gross about the Kamala Harris "birther" smears is that it's all by his normal innuendo - "Well, I don't know but some people are saying. And by the way, he's a smart lawyer" etc. etc. He doesn't even have the balls to own it. One White spokesperson said something along the lines of "these are very serious questions and she should answer," implying Harris is somehow being less than transparent. The facts of her birth and citizenship are entirely known and to argue she is not a citizen can't even be described as a fringe position. Newsweek should be ashamed of themselves for ever printing the original article.

The attacks on the USPS are deeply concerning - though they also seem to be making people even more determined to vote.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 16, 2020, 09:30:46 am
What's especially gross about the Kamala Harris "birther" smears is that it's all by his normal innuendo - "Well, I don't know but some people are saying. And by the way, he's a smart lawyer" etc. etc. He doesn't even have the balls to own it. One White spokesperson said something along the lines of "these are very serious questions and she should answer," implying Harris is somehow being less than transparent. The facts of her birth and citizenship are entirely known and to argue she is not a citizen can't even be described as a fringe position. Newsweek should be ashamed of themselves for ever printing the original article.

The attacks on the USPS are deeply concerning - though they also seem to be making people even more determined to vote.

I suspect that both of these, and the Iranian sanctions issue are a strategy of gaslighting to distract as many people as possible from the bald fact that while the Don has been playing golf and exhibiting gross incompetence, hundreds of thousands of people have been dying and the economy has been disappearing down the toilet.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 20, 2020, 04:30:33 pm
In other news, a full blown QAnon conspiracy theorist (and raving racist) won a primary for a safe Republican house seat in Georgia last night: this lunatic will almost certainly be in Congress in November - I think large swathes of even the GOP are dismayed at the prospect.


Well he’s come right out and given it his usual slippery endorsement now, hasn’t he? He puts me in mind of Nero. Bananas.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 29, 2020, 11:31:31 pm
I'm increasingly even more convinced that Trump will win a second time. It's looking like 2016 all over again, and the Republican convention was just the sort of insane reality TV that draws attention. He's willing to lie and completely make up accusations about Biden.
I just don't think that he can make any worse gaffes than he has already, Biden would have to do something pretty special at this point to win, it's not going to be enough to be affable, presidential and sensible. Sadly, I don't think any of the other Democrat candidates would have been any better.

I seriously hope I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on August 30, 2020, 10:14:07 am
I hope you are wrong too, but admit it is perfectly possible.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: IanP on August 30, 2020, 01:18:20 pm
I hope you are wrong too, but admit it is perfectly possible.

Agree that its possible but a long way from a certainty.  I don't want to be over optimistic but the numbers for Trump look significantly worse than they did in 2016 so I hold on to hope.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/ (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/) - Clinton's lead was generally around 3 to 7 points and she was never at more than 46%.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/ (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/) - Biden's lead since mid June has been generally been between 8 and 9.5 points and he's only dropped below 50% for a couple of short periods.

Obviously lots of time to go and Trump will bring all his lies and madness to bear but don't think we need to despair yet.



Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 30, 2020, 11:03:37 pm
I hope you are wrong too, but admit it is perfectly possible.

Agree that its possible but a long way from a certainty.  I don't want to be over optimistic but the numbers for Trump look significantly worse than they did in 2016 so I hold on to hope.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/ (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/) - Clinton's lead was generally around 3 to 7 points and she was never at more than 46%.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/ (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/) - Biden's lead since mid June has been generally been between 8 and 9.5 points and he's only dropped below 50% for a couple of short periods.

Obviously lots of time to go and Trump will bring all his lies and madness to bear but don't think we need to despair yet.

You're ignoring the distribution of voting. This is unbelievably disproportionate, the popular vote doesn't earn anyone any prizes. Also, in some circles saying that you will vote for Trump is socially embarrassing; when they poll who people think that their neighbours will vote for Trump does much better.

There was a political strategist on Americast who said that the undecided portion of the population who will have vast amounts of money thrown at them in the form of advertising is about 2.5%; and that given the expenditure, it'd actually be cheaper to buy them all a steak dinner and a glass of wine as a bribe instead.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: IanP on August 31, 2020, 08:31:46 am
I hope you are wrong too, but admit it is perfectly possible.

Agree that its possible but a long way from a certainty.  I don't want to be over optimistic but the numbers for Trump look significantly worse than they did in 2016 so I hold on to hope.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/ (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/) - Clinton's lead was generally around 3 to 7 points and she was never at more than 46%.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/ (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/) - Biden's lead since mid June has been generally been between 8 and 9.5 points and he's only dropped below 50% for a couple of short periods.

Obviously lots of time to go and Trump will bring all his lies and madness to bear but don't think we need to despair yet.

You're ignoring the distribution of voting. This is unbelievably disproportionate, the popular vote doesn't earn anyone any prizes. Also, in some circles saying that you will vote for Trump is socially embarrassing; when they poll who people think that their neighbours will vote for Trump does much better.


Not ignoring distribution of voting, it's clear that Trump has an advantage in the electoral college but that doesn't mean he can win the election whatever happens.  In 2016 Trump lost the popular vote by 2% as against polls which had him around 3-4% behind.  In the current situation if the same happened and he lost the popular vote by 6-7% improving by 2% on polls which have him 8-9% behind his electoral college advantages almost certainly wouldn't help him.

Just to repeat - I'm not saying Trump definitely won't win, but to say he's definitely going to win seems pessimistic and not supported by the current evidence.   I know the bookmakers got it wrong last time but they currently have it neck and neck which doesn't feel miles out to me - I won't be putting my money either way!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on August 31, 2020, 09:36:44 am
Just to repeat - I'm not saying Trump definitely won't win, but to say he's definitely going to win seems pessimistic and not supported by the current evidence.   I know the bookmakers got it wrong last time but they currently have it neck and neck which doesn't feel miles out to me - I won't be putting my money either way!

But... a proportion of people who will vote for him won't admit it. He's doing his utmost to exploit the BLM protests, repulsive though it is, as hes tweeting his sadness about the shooting of members of white supremacist groups but not about black people who have died.  This will, horrible though it is, gain him a few more votes. I doubt if it'll lose him any since anyone who really dislikes him decided that long ago.
Biden has to do a lot more than hoping that people are sick of Trump and after a bit of  P&Q.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on August 31, 2020, 10:19:53 am
Just to repeat - I'm not saying Trump definitely won't win, but to say he's definitely going to win seems pessimistic and not supported by the current evidence.   I know the bookmakers got it wrong last time but they currently have it neck and neck which doesn't feel miles out to me - I won't be putting my money either way!

But... a proportion of people who will vote for him won't admit it. He's doing his utmost to exploit the BLM protests, repulsive though it is, as hes tweeting his sadness about the shooting of members of white supremacist groups but not about black people who have died.  This will, horrible though it is, gain him a few more votes. I doubt if it'll lose him any since anyone who really dislikes him decided that long ago.
Biden has to do a lot more than hoping that people are sick of Trump and after a bit of  P&Q.

There is a significant change in the attitude of many:
 https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/08/31/as-trumps-popularity-slips-in-latest-military-times-poll-more-troops-say-theyll-vote-for-biden/ (https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/08/31/as-trumps-popularity-slips-in-latest-military-times-poll-more-troops-say-theyll-vote-for-biden/)

For instance, amongst the enlisted ranks of the military, he enjoyed a great deal of support a few years ago. Several high profile incidents tarnished that recently, for sure, but the housing and health care scandals of the past months (both for serving and veterans) have seriously eroded his popularity.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on August 31, 2020, 02:41:17 pm
Toby, I think you are probably overestimating the numbers of genuinely undecided voters and underestimating the willingness of many to voice their support for Trump. Doesn't mean your prediction is necessarily wrong though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on August 31, 2020, 08:47:27 pm
I think there is a big difference between Trump 2016 (who was an unknown from a political perspective) running against Hillary (who was actively disliked by many moderates), and Trump 2020 vs Biden. 

Those who were uncertain of Trump are no longer uncertain.  The DNC's actions in 2016 pushed many away from Hillary and they were willing to take a chance on an outsider.  I think it is foolish to underestimate the number of people who voted against Hillary (or just didn't show up) as opposed to those who voted "for" Trump.  Now Trump is a known commodity.  Those who vote for him are doing so because they support his policies. No longer is it a "lesser of two evils" question. 

Toby - you say his tweeting may gain him a few votes.  I don't see it.  Those people voted for him already and aren't in the swing votes. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on September 01, 2020, 09:30:11 am
I think there is a big difference between Trump 2016...o
Those who were uncertain of Trump are no longer uncertain.  The DNC's actions in 2016 pushed many away from Hillary and they were willing to take a chance on an outsider.  I think it is foolish to underestimate the number of people who voted against Hillary (or just didn't show up) as opposed to those who voted "for" Trump.  Now Trump is a known commodity.  Those who vote for him are doing so because they support his policies. No longer is it a "lesser of two evils" question. 
Toby - you say his tweeting may gain him a few votes.  I don't see it.  Those people voted for him already and aren't in the swing votes.

However,  you and I might actually pay attention to a politician or party's policies before voting for them, but many, many people don't.  They pay little or no attention to politics or the news, and make a snap decision based on whatever they most remember.  Trump's booming that he's the president of law and order and the ceaseless tweeting will have some cut through. I actually quite like Biden and think that he would be a decent president,  I just don't think he's doing enough.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on September 02, 2020, 10:40:39 am
This analysis is interesting:
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2020/08/new-statesman-s-2020-us-presidential-election-forecast-explained

One can only hope they're right... I'm not optimistic though
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: IanP on September 02, 2020, 04:20:32 pm
Fivethirtyeight favour Biden as well, but have it significantly closer (70-30)

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/ (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/)

Methodology

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-fivethirtyeights-2020-presidential-forecast-works-and-whats-different-because-of-covid-19/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-fivethirtyeights-2020-presidential-forecast-works-and-whats-different-because-of-covid-19/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on September 02, 2020, 09:27:39 pm
Fivethirtyeight favour Biden as well, but have it significantly closer (70-30)

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/ (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/)

Methodology

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-fivethirtyeights-2020-presidential-forecast-works-and-whats-different-because-of-covid-19/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-fivethirtyeights-2020-presidential-forecast-works-and-whats-different-because-of-covid-19/)

IIRC the 538 had a 70/30 probability for Hilary Clinton versus Trump.  So, they didn't predict the result but were one of the only polling sites to give Trump an appreciable chance at all.  They also always maintained that because of the precarious nature of swing states, a Trump victory was within the margin of error.

Personally, I have a horrible feeling that the US Postal Service /  mail-in votes issue will prove scandalous, and preclude a clear-cut victory - litigation ahoy and "hanging chads" all-over again.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on September 04, 2020, 10:34:05 pm
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/trump-americans-who-died-at-war-are-losers-and-suckers/615997/

Found this pretty fascinating/horrifying.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 09, 2020, 03:40:40 pm
So, people may have seen Trump has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

But much more importantly, as a by-product, I've just discovered that as a professor of history I'm on the relatively restricted list of people eligible to make a nomination. Now, who should I choose?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on September 09, 2020, 04:13:29 pm
Fiend.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 09, 2020, 04:41:17 pm
Fiend.

I'm not sure how much he's contributed to aural peace?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on September 09, 2020, 05:00:25 pm
Fiend.

I'm not sure how much he's contributed to aural peace?

More than Trump has. Just 😃
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 09, 2020, 06:13:07 pm
This story is - or should be - utterly devastating. For those paying attention none of this is new; but there is copious audio. He knew in early February that it was extremely serious, deadly. In mid-March he admits he has always tried to play it down. Complete betrayal of his fellow US citizens. And then there's the incredible extent to which he fell for the ludicrous flattery of Kim Jung Un.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bob-woodward-rage-book-trump/2020/09/09/0368fe3c-efd2-11ea-b4bc-3a2098fc73d4_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-high_woodward-1210p%3Ahomepage%2Fstory-ans
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 09, 2020, 06:59:12 pm
This story is - or should be - utterly devastating. For those paying attention none of this is new; but there is copious audio. He knew in early February that it was extremely serious, deadly. In mid-March he admits he has always tried to play it down. Complete betrayal of his fellow US citizens. And then there's the incredible extent to which he fell for the ludicrous flattery of Kim Jung Un.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bob-woodward-rage-book-trump/2020/09/09/0368fe3c-efd2-11ea-b4bc-3a2098fc73d4_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-high_woodward-1210p%3Ahomepage%2Fstory-ans

What?

Another revelation that would have sunk any politician in almost any period of modern democratic history, in almost any nation that calls itself democratic?

Shame that doesn’t appear to apply to the US anymore (or, it sometimes feels, the UK either).

 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on September 09, 2020, 09:23:19 pm
I’m hoping and have a hunch that this and the other revelations to come (The Atlantic have more up their sleeve on the military stuff by all accounts) will be the end of him. The campaign is running out of money too which is no surprise given the grift.

He can still resign and have Pence issue a pardon in the Nov-Jan interregnum which is perhaps his safest way out at this point.

Its all absolutely batshit crazy and frightening.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on September 09, 2020, 11:34:22 pm
I’m hoping ...

Its all absolutely batshit crazy and frightening.

But not quite as batshit crazy and frightening as the fact that he has a very good chance of being re-elected. I have a strong feeling that all the revelations in the world wont matter one bit. 
An awful lot of people who vote for him hate him anyway, but think that he may further their interests in regression of abortion rights, lack of gun control or favouring fuel or manufacturing companies over environmental issues.

Four years ago many people,  I'm pretty sure including myself thought that he would be sunk by the pussy grabbing tape, but in the end, it was all but forgotten by the time of the election. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on September 11, 2020, 06:07:03 pm
I am astonished by how widespread the QAnon conspiracy theory seems to have spread in the US, at least if reports are correct (I have no reason to assume they are wrong).

"In more than seven dozen interviews conducted in Wisconsin in early September, from the suburbs around Milwaukee to the scarred streets of Kenosha in the aftermath of the Jacob Blake shooting, about 1 in 5 voters volunteered ideas that veered into the realm of conspiracy theory, ranging from QAnon to the notion that COVID-19 is a hoax...

"On a cigarette break outside their small business in Ozaukee County, Tina Arthur and Marcella Frank told me they plan to vote for Trump again because they are deeply alarmed by “the cabal.” They’ve heard “numerous reports” that the COVID-19 tents set up in New York and California were actually for children who had been rescued from underground sex-trafficking tunnels."

https://time.com/5887437/conspiracy-theories-2020-election/

This is truly a spasm of insanity. I don't think it means Trump is automatically going to be re-elected. This Vox piece is good on how his ratings are stable, but actually low - https://www.vox.com/2020/9/2/21409364/trump-approval-rating-2020-election-voters-coronavirus-convention-polls

But I struggle to see how a huge swell of conspiracy minded individuals can be anything but bad for a major state like the US.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on September 11, 2020, 06:24:16 pm
Don’t need to look far from home... 51% of the UK voted* for Brexit fed on conspiracy theories ranging from bent cucumber laws to plagues of migrants flooding in from Turkey. 

And that’s the silly ones. The darker more qanon style stories about the European state wanting to take us over - Beurocrats in Brussels planning to wrestle power from Westminster etc etc...

*(Not all - but many...)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on September 11, 2020, 07:05:30 pm
Don’t need to look far from home... 51% of the UK voted* for Brexit fed on conspiracy theories ranging from bent cucumber laws to plagues of migrants flooding in from Turkey. 

And that’s the silly ones. The darker more qanon style stories about the European state wanting to take us over - Beurocrats in Brussels planning to wrestle power from Westminster etc etc...

*(Not all - but many...)

It's not often I'm easy on the Brexit fools, but on some things I think their ignorance is... understandable. Turkey joining the EU was obvious bollocks with a racist edge to it, but to our fellow citizens who don't much understand politics then it might have seemed at the least reasonable. The EU does indeed take some power from member states, in a very limited way, so I can see where that comes from. Obviously I think these are lies, distortions and playing on people's ignorance - and I feel nothing but anger and disgust at those who spread those lies - but I feel there's a real difference both in kind and extremity between the £350m claims and QAnon, which is basically a medieval Blood Libel cult.

I think Brexit has been super-corrosive to our society. God knows what believing this extreme stuff will do to America.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on September 11, 2020, 10:31:52 pm
Don’t need to look far from home... 51% of the UK voted* for Brexit fed on conspiracy theories ranging from bent cucumber laws to plagues of migrants flooding in from Turkey. 

And that’s the silly ones. The darker more qanon style stories about the European state wanting to take us over - Beurocrats in Brussels planning to wrestle power from Westminster etc etc...

*(Not all - but many...)

It's not often I'm easy on the Brexit fools, but on some things I think their ignorance is... understandable. Turkey joining the EU was obvious bollocks with a racist edge to it, but to our fellow citizens who don't much understand politics then it might have seemed at the least reasonable. The EU does indeed take some power from member states, in a very limited way, so I can see where that comes from. Obviously I think these are lies, distortions and playing on people's ignorance - and I feel nothing but anger and disgust at those who spread those lies - but I feel there's a real difference both in kind and extremity between the £350m claims and QAnon, which is basically a medieval Blood Libel cult.

I think Brexit has been super-corrosive to our society. God knows what believing this extreme stuff will do to America.

I'm extremely concerned about the degree of acceptance of anti vaccination conspiracy theories in the UK and the USA.  This has an imminent and very real risk of rendering even a completely perfect vaccine ineffective even if someone were to find one.
Following on from your post Sean, I know people got this from Wakefield, but I really can't understand how anyone can be that stupid,  there is no excuse for it and it should probably be a criminal offence. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 11, 2020, 10:48:13 pm
Don’t need to look far from home... 51% of the UK voted* for Brexit fed on conspiracy theories ranging from bent cucumber laws to plagues of migrants flooding in from Turkey. 

And that’s the silly ones. The darker more qanon style stories about the European state wanting to take us over - Beurocrats in Brussels planning to wrestle power from Westminster etc etc...

*(Not all - but many...)

It's not often I'm easy on the Brexit fools, but on some things I think their ignorance is... understandable. Turkey joining the EU was obvious bollocks with a racist edge to it, but to our fellow citizens who don't much understand politics then it might have seemed at the least reasonable. The EU does indeed take some power from member states, in a very limited way, so I can see where that comes from. Obviously I think these are lies, distortions and playing on people's ignorance - and I feel nothing but anger and disgust at those who spread those lies - but I feel there's a real difference both in kind and extremity between the £350m claims and QAnon, which is basically a medieval Blood Libel cult.

I think Brexit has been super-corrosive to our society. God knows what believing this extreme stuff will do to America.

I'm extremely concerned about the degree of acceptance of anti vaccination conspiracy theories in the UK and the USA.  This has an imminent and very real risk of rendering even a completely perfect vaccine ineffective even if someone were to find one.
Following on from your post Sean, I know people got this from Wakefield, but I really can't understand how anyone can be that stupid,  there is no excuse for it and it should probably be a criminal offence.

Have you read “The Machine stops”?

Fiction, of course, but seemingly prophetic.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on September 12, 2020, 10:44:25 pm
Don’t need to look far from home... 51% of the UK voted* for Brexit fed on conspiracy theories ranging from bent cucumber laws to plagues of migrants flooding in from Turkey. 

And that’s the silly ones. The darker more qanon style stories about the European state wanting to take us over - Beurocrats in Brussels planning to wrestle power from Westminster etc etc...

*(Not all - but many...)

It's not often I'm easy on the Brexit fools, but on some things I think their ignorance is... understandable. Turkey joining the EU was obvious bollocks with a racist edge to it, but to our fellow citizens who don't much understand politics then it might have seemed at the least reasonable. The EU does indeed take some power from member states, in a very limited way, so I can see where that comes from. Obviously I think these are lies, distortions and playing on people's ignorance - and I feel nothing but anger and disgust at those who spread those lies - but I feel there's a real difference both in kind and extremity between the £350m claims and QAnon, which is basically a medieval Blood Libel cult.

I think Brexit has been super-corrosive to our society. God knows what believing this extreme stuff will do to America.

I'm extremely concerned about the degree of acceptance of anti vaccination conspiracy theories in the UK and the USA.  This has an imminent and very real risk of rendering even a completely perfect vaccine ineffective even if someone were to find one.
Following on from your post Sean, I know people got this from Wakefield, but I really can't understand how anyone can be that stupid,  there is no excuse for it and it should probably be a criminal offence.

Have you read “The Machine stops”?

Fiction, of course, but seemingly prophetic.

No, but holy shit I just read a plot summary on wikipedia,  terrifying!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 12, 2020, 11:25:07 pm
Don’t need to look far from home... 51% of the UK voted* for Brexit fed on conspiracy theories ranging from bent cucumber laws to plagues of migrants flooding in from Turkey. 

And that’s the silly ones. The darker more qanon style stories about the European state wanting to take us over - Beurocrats in Brussels planning to wrestle power from Westminster etc etc...

*(Not all - but many...)

It's not often I'm easy on the Brexit fools, but on some things I think their ignorance is... understandable. Turkey joining the EU was obvious bollocks with a racist edge to it, but to our fellow citizens who don't much understand politics then it might have seemed at the least reasonable. The EU does indeed take some power from member states, in a very limited way, so I can see where that comes from. Obviously I think these are lies, distortions and playing on people's ignorance - and I feel nothing but anger and disgust at those who spread those lies - but I feel there's a real difference both in kind and extremity between the £350m claims and QAnon, which is basically a medieval Blood Libel cult.

I think Brexit has been super-corrosive to our society. God knows what believing this extreme stuff will do to America.

I'm extremely concerned about the degree of acceptance of anti vaccination conspiracy theories in the UK and the USA.  This has an imminent and very real risk of rendering even a completely perfect vaccine ineffective even if someone were to find one.
Following on from your post Sean, I know people got this from Wakefield, but I really can't understand how anyone can be that stupid,  there is no excuse for it and it should probably be a criminal offence.

Have you read “The Machine stops”?

Fiction, of course, but seemingly prophetic.

No, but holy shit I just read a plot summary on wikipedia,  terrifying!

Yup.
Well educated, comfortable and secure people, with the entirety of humanity’s knowledge at their fingertips; slip into quasi religious-mystic worship of their own technology and become morons. Particularly the older generations.
Published in 1909.
Pretty much envisioned the internet perfectly.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on September 15, 2020, 09:29:56 am
Perhaps even more frightening than the century old dystopian science fiction is Trump's campaign strategy. 

Support guns? Check. Climate change denial? Check. Casual racism? Check. Lie openly about everything? Insult veterans? Check.
As one final insurance policy against the Russians having any need to do any disruption this time, use Russian jet fighters in your campaign advertising? https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/15/trump-election-ad-uses-stock-military-image-featuring-russian-fighter-jets?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Yet, still they'll vote for him. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on September 25, 2020, 08:48:35 am
Perhaps even more frightening than the century old dystopian science fiction is Trump's campaign strategy. 

Support guns? Check. Climate change denial? Check. Casual racism? Check. Lie openly about everything? Insult veterans? Check.
As one final insurance policy against the Russians having any need to do any disruption this time, use Russian jet fighters in your campaign advertising? https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/15/trump-election-ad-uses-stock-military-image-featuring-russian-fighter-jets?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Yet, still they'll vote for him.

I think the point some like me have been making here is "they'll" likely not. The crazed Trump fans didn't make him President, middle class GOP supporters and disaffected rust belt blue collar workers did. The reason I think Trump might still be in power is legal complexity on some big states he won last time, if the vote is still close this time.

An excellent article ( published early)  shows how this could and might happen. How Trump could lose the election but have the legitimacy to stay in power... not by coup but by twisting local issues in state legislation. This can only work in what would constitute a close enough result in those states for legal challenge.  A problem for US democracy is what constitutes "close" is a lot bigger than it was.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/what-if-trump-refuses-concede/616424/

Trump could also win fairly but I think that is still unlikely and that position would need significant events to reverse (such things do happen in politics).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on September 26, 2020, 11:35:52 pm
I can't emphasise how much I dislike Trump and particularly his vile racism,  misogyny, support for climate change denial and ownership of automatic weapons; but the endless liberal left justification for his election that it was all on a technicality of which states he won etc etc is only a denial that there are clearly serious issues within society if relatively normal people will vote for him, which they did, and will. I'd say the same about Johnson to be honest.  What does it say about people's respect for the political system if they'll vote for brainless wannabe autocrats like these?
Trump may well have got in on a few swing states, but that's the system and both sides play it. Many people will vote for Trump, like it or not, but why? I think that's more worthy of consideration than trying to deny that anyone really does vote for him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 27, 2020, 12:06:00 pm
No-one I know on the left in American denies that people really did vote for him - almost all of them have one, sometimes many, family members who did and plan to again. But it is important to understand just how skewed the electoral system is. White conservatives - the GOP constituency - are a minority that yields outsized power.

We all know about the electoral college and how Clinton won the popular vote by 3 million. The current GOP senate majority - the one that is about to ram through a conservative SCOTUS nomination, a move with potentially momentous implications for the outcome of the election - is 53/47 and was elected in the 2018 midterms. Democratic senatorial candidates gained 15-18 million more votes at that election than their Republican counterparts. And yet it is McConnell who holds the reins of power.

Sure, both sides indulge in gerrymandering when they can, but far from both playing the same game Democrats have arguably been nowhere near aggressive enough. Working at the state level Republicans have fought relentless wars of voter suppression and disenfranchisement for decades. They know they almost certainly can never again win the Presidency or the Senate on a straight vote and are shameless in their attempts to overcome that deficit.

Of course, it's important to understand why people did and will again vote for him, but that is somewhat separate from just how broken the electoral system is.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on September 27, 2020, 10:24:17 pm
NYT.

Mic drop.

 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/09/27/us/donald-trump-taxes.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&fbclid=IwAR2LTdTCQ7dKFSHpa_HXJFa-4b3NOW2A-N1cFRQfUG5b0Ay3sNdNE1OknNA (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/09/27/us/donald-trump-taxes.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&fbclid=IwAR2LTdTCQ7dKFSHpa_HXJFa-4b3NOW2A-N1cFRQfUG5b0Ay3sNdNE1OknNA)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on September 27, 2020, 11:08:02 pm
No-one I know on the left in American denies that people really did vote for him - almost all of them have one, sometimes many, family members who did and plan to again. But it is important to understand just how skewed the electoral system is. White conservatives - the GOP constituency - are a minority that yields outsized power.

We all know about the electoral college and how Clinton won the popular vote by 3 million. The current GOP senate majority - the one that is about to ram through a conservative SCOTUS nomination, a move with potentially momentous implications for the outcome of the election - is 53/47 and was elected in the 2018 midterms. Democratic senatorial candidates gained 15-18 million more votes at that election than their Republican counterparts. And yet it is McConnell who holds the reins of power.

Sure, both sides indulge in gerrymandering when they can, but far from both playing the same game Democrats have arguably been nowhere near aggressive enough. Working at the state level Republicans have fought relentless wars of voter suppression and disenfranchisement for decades. They know they almost certainly can never again win the Presidency or the Senate on a straight vote and are shameless in their attempts to overcome that deficit.

Of course, it's important to understand why people did and will again vote for him, but that is somewhat separate from just how broken the electoral system is.

You're not kidding, its absolutely incredible that Wyoming has the same number of seats in the Senate as California.  It's like London having one MP,  and Cornwall the same.  It is skewed in the UK as well,  but not nearly as much. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on September 28, 2020, 12:49:51 am
This might tax him a bit

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/27/new-york-times-publishes-donald-trumps-tax-returns-election
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on September 28, 2020, 07:28:58 am
If Trump gets reelected, will Deutsche Bank foreclose on a sitting US president? That would be funny.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on September 28, 2020, 08:29:31 am
This might tax him a bit

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/27/new-york-times-publishes-donald-trumps-tax-returns-election

The original NYT piece OMM linked 2 posts up is well worth a read. In another world it would be revelatory, and the immorality of the president paying less than $1000 / year income tax on billions of dollars in revenue would have an impact on his popularity (Nixon, anybody?).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on September 28, 2020, 09:16:20 am
This might tax him a bit

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/27/new-york-times-publishes-donald-trumps-tax-returns-election

The original NYT piece OMM linked 2 posts up is well worth a read. In another world it would be revelatory, and the immorality of the president paying less than $1000 / year income tax on billions of dollars in revenue would have an impact on his popularity (Nixon, anybody?).

However,  unfortunately it will make little if any difference to the election.  A great chunk of his voters care only about the supreme court judges and being able to overturn abortion rights and gay rights.  I agree though,  I read the NYT report. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on September 28, 2020, 09:22:27 am
TeflonDon.

Sadly.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on September 28, 2020, 10:01:34 am
This might tax him a bit

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/27/new-york-times-publishes-donald-trumps-tax-returns-election

The original NYT piece OMM linked 2 posts up is well worth a read. In another world it would be revelatory, and the immorality of the president paying less than $1000 / year income tax on billions of dollars in revenue would have an impact on his popularity (Nixon, anybody?).

However,  unfortunately it will make little if any difference to the election.  A great chunk of his voters care only about the supreme court judges and being able to overturn abortion rights and gay rights.  I agree though,  I read the NYT report.

I think for a large proportion of his base it isn’t even that complicated. It completely boils down to us vs them and literally nothing will ever convince them they are backing the wrong horse. Because then they’d have to admit they were wrong. I don’t think it’s about intelligence either. I’m sure many of his supporters are relatively smart. It’s blinding stubbornness. We’ve all met people like that. Who will never admit they made a mistake. This tax reveal won’t change their mind.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on September 28, 2020, 10:16:46 am

I think for a large proportion of his base it isn’t even that complicated. It completely boils down to us vs them and literally nothing will ever convince them they are backing the wrong horse. Because then they’d have to admit they were wrong. I don’t think it’s about intelligence either. I’m sure many of his supporters are relatively smart. It’s blinding stubbornness. We’ve all met people like that. Who will never admit they made a mistake. This tax reveal won’t change their mind.

Brexit voters perhaps?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on September 30, 2020, 08:03:09 am
I’ve deliberately not watched any debate footage - thinking it would wind me up too much.

Having read a couple of reports I suspect I was right - and it sounds a tight mess. Did anyone watch it or part of it?

I wonder if Trump is going for a similar strategy to last time by suppressing turnout by making folk so disaffected with the whole thing.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Anti on September 30, 2020, 08:41:46 am
There's an interesting book called Mistakes were made but not by me, talking about cognitive dissonance. I imagine a lot of Trump supporters double down on their view the more they're told it's wrong, because then they're wrong and bad. It's easier to pretend Trump isn't so bad for them.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 30, 2020, 09:22:24 am
Did anyone watch it or part of it?

Christine stayed up to watch - just a complete shitshow apparently. I've seen other people float the idea that it's an attempt at voter suppression but I can't see it. I don't think he knows any other way. The reality is that he is the one behind and in need of winning new voters. I can't see anything he did last night doing that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on September 30, 2020, 09:26:44 am
Did anyone watch it or part of it?

Christine stayed up to watch - just a complete shitshow apparently. I've seen other people float the idea that it's an attempt at voter suppression but I can't see it. I don't think he knows any other way. The reality is that he is the one behind and in need of winning new voters. I can't see anything he did last night doing that.

Good effort.. I woke at 2am (unrelatededly) and contemplated watching - then swiftly decided no.

Watched some clips this morning - he is just a horrible shouty man. Problem is - that does eventually win over (in what you remember) to what Biden said...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 30, 2020, 10:01:04 am
You did the right thing. I plan to stay up (or probably go to bed and then get up) on the 3rd, even though I doubt there will be a result.

Hard as it is to believe there are undecided voters and he didn't do anything to win them over. No-one else will have moved camp and I suspect Dems will now be even more motivated to remove him. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on September 30, 2020, 10:05:32 am
Now they know his form of over talking and interrupting, it seems like they just need to change the format of the debates: have only one mic on at a time so only either him or Biden can talk in an proper answer and response style. I know this won’t happen as there’s no way he’d agree to anything that wouldn’t play to his ‘strengths’.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on September 30, 2020, 11:59:39 am
I believe the next debate is a town hall style debate with questions from voters. So it will be a bit more difficult for him to just shout down everyone, since this would look really bad. One thing to talk over an opponent, but looks much worse to just talk over 'undecided' voters. I think he struggles with the town hall format.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on September 30, 2020, 12:10:25 pm
I believe the next debate is a town hall style debate with questions from voters. So it will be a bit more difficult for him to just shout down everyone, since this would look really bad. One thing to talk over an opponent, but looks much worse to just talk over 'undecided' voters. I think he struggles with the town hall format.

Hopefully with a female compare.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on September 30, 2020, 12:15:32 pm
Apparently it is someone called Steve Scully from C-Span. Details here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_debates#Second_presidential_debate_(Adrienne_Arsht_Center_for_the_Performing_Arts)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on September 30, 2020, 12:24:24 pm
I think he struggles with the town hall format.

He tried interrupting a member of the public at a recent town hall in Philadelphia and she told him to let her finish.

Town halls play to Biden's strengths.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 01, 2020, 08:59:12 am
This is an interesting perspective:

 https://gen.medium.com/i-lived-through-collapse-america-is-already-there-ba1e4b54c5fc (https://gen.medium.com/i-lived-through-collapse-america-is-already-there-ba1e4b54c5fc)

Aside:

I was fortunate enough (? This is in part an ironic statement) to spend a few months in Sri Lanka during the tail end of my RN service; in fact, I was still there when I officially became a civilian again in April’96. ( I was even more fortunate to preserve my friendship with one of the Clearance Divers I got to know, even into our Dubai days. Strange to see that tough and determined warrior become a paunchy, jolly, swimming coach for rich Arab kids. My guess is he would echo the sentiments of the article).


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on October 01, 2020, 11:19:01 am
This is an interesting perspective:

 https://gen.medium.com/i-lived-through-collapse-america-is-already-there-ba1e4b54c5fc (https://gen.medium.com/i-lived-through-collapse-america-is-already-there-ba1e4b54c5fc)

Aside:

I was fortunate enough (? This is in part an ironic statement) to spend a few months in Sri Lanka during the tail end of my RN service; in fact, I was still there when I officially became a civilian again in April’96. ( I was even more fortunate to preserve my friendship with one of the Clearance Divers I got to know, even into our Dubai days. Strange to see that tough and determined warrior become a paunchy, jolly, swimming coach for rich Arab kids. My guess is he would echo the sentiments of the article).

This is an interesting article and whilst it rings true from my visits to Sri Lanka during the end of the war period, I don't think what the author is describing is actually collapse. It wasn't even, for many Sri Lankans (Tamils excepted, of course) the worst period of the war. My partner lived there as a teenager in the mid-90s and it was really grim: Colombo was regularly shut down for days at a time and everyone would have to hunker down at home with no idea what was happening after various explosions hit the city. And yet talking to slightly older relatives the late 1980s was even worse. The country was run by Premadasa who was a thug and a gangster, and there was a three-way civil war between the government, the Tigers and the JVP, a communist guerilla group. All of them abducted boys and either press ganged them into fighting, or murdered them. My stepmum recently told me how she was at home one evening with her niece and nephew and a gang of thugs  - government? JVP? who knows? - prowled around outside shouting in through the window for them to come out and bring them any boys. She had to stand by the door with a four foot stone pestle in her hands ready to try and kill them if they entered, and I have no doubt that my stepmum - whose maiden name meant "fighting lion" - would have given it a bloody good go.

I think any society in which it is fairly unremarkable that a perfectly ordinary woman is prepared - for very good reasons - to bash someone's brains out with a kitchen implement is one that is quite profoundly sick. This was particularly the case in the Premadasa years, and less so now I feel, though I'm not totally confident saying that. The past isn't even past, etc, and the horrific act of violence that ended the war may well come back to haunt the country. 

But I don't think Sri Lanka was a society in collapse, in the way that say Syria, Afghanistan or South Sudan are or have been. Maybe in the northern Tamil areas, which saw an awful lot of refugees, but certainly not in much of the country. People lived in fear and under great stress and uncertainty. But the state carried on providing most basic functions, healthcare and education were good, transport was fine in most of the country. Social structures endured and hadn't broken or become perverted, eg people got married for perfectly normal reasons, rather than giving protection to vulnerable girls, drug running had not become the major business of the country, etc. Things had not regressed, unlike say in Congo where parents have to explain to their mystified children what the rusting railway tracks once carried.

In case it's not clear, I really love Sri Lanka, and I also really like America, but to me whilst the article is over-egging things a little, some of the same sickness that took hold of the former also seems to be well rooted and flourishing in the later.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Johnny Brown on October 01, 2020, 11:29:20 am
Interesting, agreed on the over-egging. Either bombs are going off around you or they aren't. Would seem to be a fairly major distinction. US not quite there yet...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 01, 2020, 12:04:28 pm
Interesting, agreed on the over-egging. Either bombs are going off around you or they aren't. Would seem to be a fairly major distinction. US not quite there yet...

I think “collapse” in societal terms exists on a continuum that ranges from “Troubles” (Basque country, deepening to NI), through “Civil war lite” and all the way down to utter rout. I’d put Sri Lanka at the lighter end of the middle ground, at least when I was there, compared to Lebanon, that I brushed up against a couple years earlier (at the end of the deepest troubles there) and the even briefer visits to the “Former Yugoslavia” (mostly second hand tales for me) of that decade. Syria, sounds awful, as does Afgan and I’m secretly quite glad not to bear the burden those of the generation that were or are involved there. Autumn of ‘92, I spent in West Africa, Ivory Coast and Nigeria, but only on the ships supporting operations or in the High Commission in Lagos. Still, eye opening for for a 21 year old...

I would characterise all of those places as “collapsed”.

I don’t think the writer is over-egging, I think he’s trying to warn his audience how far along the continuum the US has already slipped.
I tend to agree with the author, I think.
I’m not sure it would take a huge amount of increased “outrage” to tip the US off the edge.

There’s another poster on this forum, who has (I believe) deeper insight on both NI and (fmr) Yugoslavia, though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on October 01, 2020, 12:54:43 pm
Interesting, agreed on the over-egging. Either bombs are going off around you or they aren't. Would seem to be a fairly major distinction. US not quite there yet...

I think “collapse” in societal terms exists on a continuum that ranges from “Troubles” (Basque country, deepening to NI), through “Civil war lite” and all the way down to utter rout. I’d put Sri Lanka at the lighter end of the middle ground, at least when I was there, compared to Lebanon, that I brushed up against a couple years earlier (at the end of the deepest troubles there) and the even briefer visits to the “Former Yugoslavia” (mostly second hand tales for me) of that decade. Syria, sounds awful, as does Afgan and I’m secretly quite glad not to bear the burden those of the generation that were or are involved there. Autumn of ‘92, I spent in West Africa, Ivory Coast and Nigeria, but only on the ships supporting operations or in the High Commission in Lagos. Still, eye opening for for a 21 year old...

I would characterise all of those places as “collapsed”.


I have a stricter definition of "collapsed" which doesn't include high levels of violence, either political (NI, SL) or non-political (Mexico), and see it more as a question of state capacity and governance. For example, early modern Europe was really violent, including lots of political violence, but although those states were by our standards weak, they had not collapsed completely. In fact they were expanding and building their capacities in nearly every sphere. Northern Ireland was awful, but it didn't "collapse" as far as I understand it: elections were still held, infrastructure was working, territorial integrity remained (indeed, clearly too much territorial integrity), etc. Whereas Lebanon, as you say, terrible, Beirut a complete mess, lots of refugees, many millitias running different bits of it, Israeli invasion, etc.

I made a very short visit to Afghanistan under the Taliban, and a slightly longer one in 2009 when Kabul was almost a different city. The first visit was mind-bendingly awful, I have since visited a bunch of other failed states and this was by far the worst. Driving from the Khyber Pass to Kabul felt safe-ish, at no point did I think I was going to get shot (taxi driver was beaten up for having a music cassette in front of us, but the Taliban parked the car under the shade of a tree so we didn't get uncomfortably hot whilst they did it) but the country was completely and utterly fucked. It wasn't just that everything was damaged or destroyed - lamposts bending over like drooping flowers, miles of derelict villages - but that the society was in bits. Millions of refugees, no health service, not really any police, all that stuff. And by all accounts it had been even worse a few years before.

To me, "collapsed" societies are fairly rare and extremely unpleasant, whereas having high levels of political violence together with a fraying of the state has been a pretty common situation, if declining in prevalance today. You mention West Africa, and there's also an interesting distinction to be made between collapsed states and ones that were never really there in the first place, but that's perhaps for another day.


I don’t think the writer is over-egging, I think he’s trying to warn his audience how far along the continuum the US has already slipped.
I tend to agree with the author, I think.
I’m not sure it would take a huge amount of increased “outrage” to tip the US off the edge.

There’s another poster on this forum, who has (I believe) deeper insight on both NI and (fmr) Yugoslavia, though.

It definitely seems - from a distance - that the US has slipped a long way towards authoritarian rule and/or persistent, low level political violence. I think (hope!) that it's a long way from being tipped "off the edge", because I'm not sure how many of its citizens are actually willing to die for their political cause. How much of the militia activity we are seeing is cosplay and how much is a genuine violent political movement that will last when it faces an armed enemy, I have no idea. One imagines that the US police and intelligence services have a sense of this.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 01, 2020, 02:09:11 pm
Actually, this is really worth a split, isn’t it?

I think it’s fascinating and would like to hear others opinions and experiences around the topic.

I get Sean’s strict definition and accept I’m conflating “collapse” of democracy, with an utter end to any sort of organised society.

Edit:

On the last point, which Andy had similar thoughts on a few weeks ago.
I believe the decent into really quite violent insurrection and even all out civil war, can be quite a bit quicker and require a smaller percentage of the population to actively participate; than we would like to imagine.

I think you can learn as much from the nations that managed to dodge the bullet, Romania post revolution (given their ethnic Hungarian and Moldovan populations and the tensions that still exist) for instance, as you can from those that saw greater collapse.

 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 01, 2020, 02:30:33 pm
Also depends on your location and your lens.... ??

Someone in SW Afghanistan might piss themselves laughing at the idea that the US is falling apart (in comparison to their lot) - whereas it may seem that the world was disintegrating when peeking over the white picket fences of a small Minnesotan town...

Equally you mention Sri Lanka (Sean) and note that in the Tamil areas it may well have been a shit load worse...

etc.. etc..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 01, 2020, 11:07:35 pm
To drag the thread back into its subject... (although I read all the above posts with considerable interest)
I watched some clips and listened to some excerpts from the debate and found it profoundly depressing.  Trump really is planning to literally bully, lie and cheat his way back into office to continue a campaign of nepotism,  corruption and tax evasion.  American society may not be in collapse, but coherent mature political discourse is fucked.
The one glimmer of hope was Biden's exasperated exclamation of "will you shut up man" I think he spoke for most people there, even though he didn't exactly cover himself in glory otherwise. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 02, 2020, 05:20:36 am
So, does he have it?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 02, 2020, 06:21:37 am
Yes, he does.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on October 02, 2020, 07:19:22 am
Any news on Pence as they were both potentially exposed? If the President and Veep both become seriously ill the constitutional position on who is next in line is a scary prospect for the Republicans. There have already been calls for Pelosi to consider protective isolation.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 02, 2020, 07:24:17 am
So, does he have it?

Sympathy vote ploy?

Is it BS?

Unfortunately, I’m so jaded by all this, this is my first reaction.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 02, 2020, 07:28:13 am
No, no news on Pence yet. I know the line of succession if the President and then the VP become too ill to serve. But I don't know what happens if the President is too ill (or not alive enough) to run. Can Pence run? He's on the ballot, but only as the VP candidate.

In any case, he is now out of active campaigning for at least two weeks and the next debate (15th) is almost certainly off, leaving this week's ugliness to be the abiding memory. And, of course, it reveals just how stupid everything he has said about the pandemic has been.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 02, 2020, 07:30:22 am
So, does he have it?

Sympathy vote ploy?

Is it BS?

Unfortunately, I’m so jaded by all this, this is my first reaction.

My first post was genuinely made before the news of the positive result. I had those thoughts, of course, but I think the potential downsides to this news are bigger (for him) than the upsides. I think it's true.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on October 02, 2020, 07:40:55 am
Sympathy vote ploy?

Is it BS?

Unfortunately, I’m so jaded by all this, this is my first reaction.
That was exactly my first thought too.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Dac on October 02, 2020, 07:44:00 am
I'm going to need an I.V. line and a bottle of bleach.....

If Trump is out of action could they get Pence to stand in for the debates? He couldn't do worse than Trump and has the advantage that any questions linked to Wotsit Hitler's tax affairs or business dealings can be parried away as something you have to ask the orange one himself.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on October 02, 2020, 07:44:48 am
Several people seem to be speculating if this could be another political distraction move but it seems unlikely as his Doctor also reported it. Trump is now apparently the biggest spreader of covid fake news afterall:

 https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/evanega-et-al-coronavirus-misinformation-submitted-07-23-20-1/080839ac0c22bca8/full.pdf
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 02, 2020, 07:50:44 am
If Trump is out of action could they get Pence to stand in for the debates?

No, most likely they simply won't go ahead. We can still look forward to Kamala eviscerating Pence however.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 02, 2020, 08:16:44 am
Over the next two weeks we’re going to see whether Karma exists or not...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on October 02, 2020, 08:26:38 am
Maybe he doesn’t have it. So when he goes through two weeks quarantine without so much as a sniffle. Just think of the scenarios that he could then use.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 02, 2020, 08:31:27 am
So, does he have it?

Sympathy vote ploy?

Is it BS?

Unfortunately, I’m so jaded by all this, this is my first reaction.

That was exactly what I thought. It's so depressing that he's such an unpleasant individual that that is not a surprising or uncommon response.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on October 02, 2020, 08:40:41 am
Over the next two weeks we’re going to see whether Karma exists or not...

Karma in the form of Kamala. Like andy said, I expect it will be a bloodbath.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on October 02, 2020, 08:55:42 am
More bad news for his family in the latest detail from the tax story

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/28/politics/ivanka-trump-donald-trump-tacves/index.html

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on October 02, 2020, 09:15:29 am
Need Ben Affleck on the case yo'
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nibile on October 02, 2020, 09:25:17 am
Yes, he does.
The thing that should make people think is, in my opinion, the fact that he knew Hicks's positivity and hid it, going on normally with social life: meeting supporters, going on TV, etc.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 02, 2020, 09:29:41 am
Yes, he's been recklessly endangering the American people for months, he carried on doing it on Thursday knowing Hicks was ill (even if the test wasn't back), and he has recklessly endangered the nation's leadership at a critical moment.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nibile on October 02, 2020, 09:45:52 am
Normal day at the office, then.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 02, 2020, 12:41:13 pm
Of course, this means Trump exposed Biden too.
There was a fair amount of shouting in that debate, so all those cartoons of Biden being drowned in Trumps spray, might be prophetic...

Harris for Pres?

(https://i.ibb.co/BPZxJCq/B56184-BE-124-F-4900-9770-63-BE62-EAE547.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 02, 2020, 01:14:34 pm
In other news today: Melania's take on being expected to show sympathy for children separated at the border, "Give me a fucking break."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 02, 2020, 02:40:01 pm
In other news today: Melania's take on being expected to show sympathy for children separated at the border, "Give me a fucking break."

I liked the appellation given her by one publication this morning:

A Double Agent in the war on Christmas...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 02, 2020, 10:36:26 pm
So, he’s in Walter Reed.

They surely have fairly extensive med facilities and staff in the White house?

But he needs to be in a hospital for “tests”?

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 03, 2020, 07:55:23 am
So, he’s in Walter Reed.

They surely have fairly extensive med facilities and staff in the White house?

But he needs to be in a hospital for “tests”?

They can react quicker there I guess. But maybe it’s for the reverse reason. They’ll have to quarantine and deep clean large parts of the White House - so maybe just easier to move the source somewhere else rather than work around him?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 03, 2020, 09:05:26 am
I think there's no doubt he's sick, possibly quite sick.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 03, 2020, 09:13:37 am
Several people seem to be speculating if this could be another political distraction move but it seems unlikely as his Doctor also reported it. Trump is now apparently the biggest spreader of covid fake news afterall:

 https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/evanega-et-al-coronavirus-misinformation-submitted-07-23-20-1/080839ac0c22bca8/full.pdf

The same doctor who proclaimed Trump the fittest strongest man he had ever examined. 

Having said that it is admittedly pretty unlikely hes faking it. 

I would think that the main  reason youd move someone to a hospital rather than the white house is that they'd have access to a ventilator if required.  Everything else youd have at the white house I imagine. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on October 03, 2020, 09:20:14 am
Clearly some unhappiness in the Conway household:

https://twitter.com/spenceralthouse/status/1312211105813458944?s=21
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 03, 2020, 09:30:46 am
Interesting analysis in the media. General consensus seems to be that trumps campaign has more to lose from this than gain. Mainly it shifts the focus away from law and order where the GOP were trying to push the news cycle - firmly towards CV19 where Trump has let’s be frank an awful record.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on October 03, 2020, 09:38:28 am
Several people seem to be speculating if this could be another political distraction move but it seems unlikely as his Doctor also reported it. Trump is now apparently the biggest spreader of covid fake news afterall:

 https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/evanega-et-al-coronavirus-misinformation-submitted-07-23-20-1/080839ac0c22bca8/full.pdf

The same doctor who proclaimed Trump the fittest strongest man he had ever examined. 

Having said that it is admittedly pretty unlikely hes faking it. 

I would think that the main  reason youd move someone to a hospital rather than the white house is that they'd have access to a ventilator if required.  Everything else youd have at the white house I imagine.

There is a big difference between a bit of positive hyperbole (some of which, it turns out, the doctor didn't even write) and telling a lie to the nation on the President having covid.  Trump must have 'good genes' as most with his attitudes to diet and exercise would have major health problems by now, and many would be dead.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/03/trump-covid-flip-flop-trump
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on October 03, 2020, 09:58:36 am
They can react quicker there I guess. But maybe it’s for the reverse reason. They’ll have to quarantine and deep clean large parts of the White House - so maybe just easier to move the source somewhere else rather than work around him?

His ego will warm to that 😂 A man who has falsely downplayed the threat of the virus is unlikely to be hamming it up and drawing attention to it now. He’s in Walter Reed because they’re worried.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on October 03, 2020, 10:35:43 am
Most likely outcomes?

1. trump dies from covid, or remains so ill for so long he can't be considered a viable candidate in the election for POTUS.
2. trump recovers just in time, and gets re-elected on the back of his 'triumphant battle against covid'.
3. trump recovers just in time, and gets beaten for being trump.

Hope it's 1, too ill. Suspect it will be 3.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on October 03, 2020, 11:20:31 am
Hope it’s 3.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 03, 2020, 11:21:51 am
I hope it’s some form of three. 1 would probably lead to all sorts of complications.

Anyway - this will take a couple of weeks or longer to play out...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 03, 2020, 11:40:24 am
I want to see him and the GOP utterly crushed at the election.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 03, 2020, 11:08:56 pm
Most likely outcomes?

1. trump dies from covid, or remains so ill for so long he can't be considered a viable candidate in the election for POTUS.
2. trump recovers just in time, and gets re-elected on the back of his 'triumphant battle against covid'.
3. trump recovers just in time, and gets beaten for being trump.

Hope it's 1, too ill. Suspect it will be 3.

There's a significant amount of weakness in a line of leadership succession in which they're all pretty elderly. Trump - Pence - Pelosi... Not very secure during the current pandemic really.

I suspect that he'll recover and it'll be spun as a glorious victory over the virus. I'm not sure that the whole thing will actually change anything politically. It really doesn't seem like the sort of thing that would sway many undecided voters.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on October 04, 2020, 09:55:00 am
I suspect that he'll recover and it'll be spun as a glorious victory over the virus. I'm not sure that the whole thing will actually change anything politically. It really doesn't seem like the sort of thing that would sway many undecided voters.

It partially depends on how severe it is for him, and it could really go either way.

I think the significant impact is on what it prevents; it's stopped his rallies, his ability to hold events and engage with his base,  probably stopped the televised debates (which I think he'd see as a strong point) and, most of all, holds the narrative firmly on a topic he's particularly weak on as opposed to allowing him to move it on to other areas.

All of that doesn't help him make up ground he apparently needed even before this happened.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on October 04, 2020, 10:00:40 am
I think you're all mad for thinking he won't win. I expect him to retain office and will jump for joy if I'm proven wrong.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 04, 2020, 10:12:13 am
I think you're all mad for thinking he won't win.

I've never said he can't/won't win and have repeatedly said he very well may.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on October 04, 2020, 08:21:20 pm
Maybe "all" is too strong. I've not catalogued everyone's opinion but the vibe I'm picking up is that people expect a win for Biden.
My experience of the last four years is that if something shit can happen then it will happen. Unfortunately.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 04, 2020, 08:31:51 pm
Maybe "all" is too strong. I've not catalogued everyone's opinion but the vibe I'm picking up is that people expect a win for Biden.
My experience of the last four years is that if something shit can happen then it will happen. Unfortunately.

Apparently Trump is already well enough to be discharged from hospital...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on October 04, 2020, 08:41:23 pm
Maybe "all" is too strong. I've not catalogued everyone's opinion but the vibe I'm picking up is that people expect a win for Biden.
My experience of the last four years is that if something shit can happen then it will happen. Unfortunately.

538 make it roughly 70/30 for the Dems... which is roughly what they made it last time.  The problem seems to be that the popular vote share is relatively easy to model (a hefty margin for Biden) but the electoral college is very unbalanced and gerrymandered.  So, small numbers of votes in swing states have hugely outsized effects - which makes it within the margin of error for Trump to win.  Last time: Hilary got millions more votes overall but the margin was redundant; Trump's votes were efficiently distributed where it mattered.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on October 04, 2020, 09:33:37 pm
I think you're all mad for thinking he won't win. I expect him to retain office and will jump for joy if I'm proven wrong.

Note I said he apparently needs to make up ground. As you say he could very well profit from the bizarre structure of the electoral college.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 05, 2020, 09:38:40 am
I think you're all mad for thinking he won't win. I expect him to retain office and will jump for joy if I'm proven wrong.

Note I said he apparently needs to make up ground. As you say he could very well profit from the bizarre structure of the electoral college.

It's all very well complaining about voting systems, but brushing off winning the electoral college but not the popular vote as an underhand technicality is rather supercilious and if this were the case he would have won fairly within the existing system. 
Voting systems are variously complicated and unfair to someone,  but this is a different argument and it's not going to change soon. Complaining about it is like saying that in the UK the Lib Dems did awfully well in the election last year, which in a way they did, being close to winning 80 or 90 seats, but actually second place is worth nothing, just like noone gets medals for winning the popular vote.  Biden needs to win where it matters, I hope his team have their social media campaign in Florida etc streamlined and working overtime on telling everyone that Trump is weak, incompetent and dangerous.  The USA and the world would frankly be a safer place if he had no power, but I suspect that he will scrape through it again. 

NB I wasn't trying to get at anyone on here re voting systems,  it's a commonly cited complaint in the media which irks me a little. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: IanP on October 05, 2020, 09:47:23 am

538 make it roughly 70/30 for the Dems... which is roughly what they made it last time.  The problem seems to be that the popular vote share is relatively easy to model (a hefty margin for Biden) but the electoral college is very unbalanced and gerrymandered.  So, small numbers of votes in swing states have hugely outsized effects - which makes it within the margin of error for Trump to win.  Last time: Hilary got millions more votes overall but the margin was redundant; Trump's votes were efficiently distributed where it mattered.

538 now has it approx 80/20 for Biden, as election gets closer and no move on poles getting tighter their likelihood of Biden win increases.  Still 20% is not nothing for Trump and who the hell knows what mad news could come next so no room for complacency.   

On the electoral college thing I believe their view is that if Biden wins popular vote by 5% or more he's pretty much certain to win overall but at tighter margins the Repulicans advantages in this area start to be more significant.   They have a 10% chance of Trump losing popular vote but winning electoral college, so thats about half of his overall chance of winning.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on October 05, 2020, 10:47:34 am
Do not look too much at 538, a.k.a. overfitting.com

Look at the polls in the swing-states and remember that the total error is about two times the sampling error. So if the 95% confidence interval is ±3% due to sampling errors the actual 95% confidence intervall including methodological errors (mostly due to figuring out how successful voter suppression is going to be) is about ±6%.

This will give you a good idea of how close an election is, and is the reason I gave Hillary a 50/50 chance last time.

I will look into the probabilities closer to the election, but roughly speaking it seems like Biden has an edge unless the methodological error is larger than what it historically has been.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: IanP on October 05, 2020, 11:03:42 am
I'm certain your statistics knowledge is greater than mine but on the overfitting side its seems that quite a lot of people are taking the position that Trump won when he wasn't expected last time so therefore the same thing is certain or likely to happen this time.

Looking at info around polls (national and state) and also around the other issues in US (including Covid and fact that Trump is now a known, and for many very bad, quantity) it seems to me plausible that Trump is less likely (potentially significantly less) to win than last time.  Doesn't mean that it can't happen and Trump also has levers of government that he can potentially attempt to use to his advantage, but I hold on too hope.

Though I don't have a good record on this from 2016 (Brexit and Trump)!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on October 05, 2020, 11:57:44 am
Note I said he apparently needs to make up ground. As you say he could very well profit from the bizarre structure of the electoral college.

After reading about it on here, I've tried googling the electoral college system to try and find out more, but I admit I still don't get it...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: largeruk on October 05, 2020, 02:41:47 pm
After reading about it on here, I've tried googling the electoral college system to try and find out more, but I admit I still don't get it...
This is a decent explainer of the Presidential voting process - https://www.usa.gov/election#content (https://www.usa.gov/election#content).

This BBC one includes an outline of some of the weaknesses of the current split of electors by state - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15764542 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15764542).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on October 05, 2020, 04:20:30 pm
Nice one , thanks
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on October 05, 2020, 05:17:31 pm
I think voter turnout is the key question, and we don't know what will happen.  way too many variables.  One interesting one that I've noticed a substantial change in is the push across all online platforms for voter registration and turnout.  It'll be interesting to see if that improves younger voter turnout.  If so, then that could certainly sway the election.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on October 05, 2020, 07:37:45 pm
The virus is ripping through the White House. There are 28 people now confirmed positive.

Donald Trump
Melania Trump
Kayleigh McEnany
Hope Hicks
Kellyanne Conway
Chris Christie
Sen Mike Lee
Sen Thom Tillis
Sen Ron Johnson
Ronna McDaniel
John Jenkins
Bill Stepien
Nick Luna
1x WH jr staffer
3x reporters
11x Ohio debate staff

The Trump people and admin are literally insane.


He’s just tweeted a request to sign up to join the “Trump Election Poll Watchers”. Jeez.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on October 07, 2020, 05:05:42 pm
https://metro.co.uk/2020/10/06/top-donald-trump-aides-daughter-claims-covid-stricken-president-is-doing-badly-13380022/

Whole thing is bizarre.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on October 07, 2020, 08:00:34 pm
Not sure we should read too much into the angry social media ramblings of a 15 year old...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 07, 2020, 08:32:26 pm
Not sure we should read too much into the angry social media ramblings of a 15 year old...

About the same as we should read into her 74 year old mums employer 😀
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 07, 2020, 09:01:07 pm
Holy crap, I’d read articles but not watched it.

He was struggling to breath.

 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2020/oct/06/footage-suggests-trump-was-short-of-breath-during-maskless-photo-op-at-white-house-video?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1601979094 (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2020/oct/06/footage-suggests-trump-was-short-of-breath-during-maskless-photo-op-at-white-house-video?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1601979094)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 07, 2020, 09:15:47 pm
Yes, when you watch it he's clearly in discomfort. Standing there in a strange mix of trying to suck his gut in so he doesnt look fat - whilst trying not to look out of breath.

Saw a tweet from a US doctor who suggested in a 'no shit sherlock' tone that it wasnt surprising he had antibodies in his blood test today - given the 8mg of antibodies he was given on Friday/Sat as part of his treatment!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on October 07, 2020, 11:08:41 pm

About the same as we should read into her 74 year old mums employer 😀

She looks good for 74. 😀
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 08, 2020, 08:59:00 am
Trump's latest Twitter-diahorrea stream looks like desperation. Which isn't to say it won't be effective with some people.  The regeneron free for all Americans must be the most unlikely election promise ever.

Good to see the VP debate at least appeared to be between adults.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 08, 2020, 04:17:02 pm
I don’t see him maintaining very much support in the Military, the tone of reporting within the community is on balance negative and he just keeps shitting on them:
 https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/10/08/trump-suggests-he-may-have-contracted-coronavirus-from-gold-star-families/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR3gMd7JNhyjqK9QHzoxRJGmKm-ef1Kz_USxuqHPlpAcFeGo1Tv3JOViacU (https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/10/08/trump-suggests-he-may-have-contracted-coronavirus-from-gold-star-families/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR3gMd7JNhyjqK9QHzoxRJGmKm-ef1Kz_USxuqHPlpAcFeGo1Tv3JOViacU)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 09, 2020, 09:30:41 am
I don’t see him maintaining very much support in the Military, the tone of reporting within the community is on balance negative and he just keeps shitting on them:
 https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/10/08/trump-suggests-he-may-have-contracted-coronavirus-from-gold-star-families/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR3gMd7JNhyjqK9QHzoxRJGmKm-ef1Kz_USxuqHPlpAcFeGo1Tv3JOViacU (https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/10/08/trump-suggests-he-may-have-contracted-coronavirus-from-gold-star-families/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR3gMd7JNhyjqK9QHzoxRJGmKm-ef1Kz_USxuqHPlpAcFeGo1Tv3JOViacU)

Even the usually Republican supporting Times columnist Gerald Baker writes today that he thinks that the American people are just tired of his attention seeking now. Humdrum though the VP debate was, both Harris and Pence made Trumps performance look really infantile. 

I see Trump is hoping to do a rally this weekend; I'm sure people will be stupid enough to sign up for this one, but really?
In a telephone interview widely broadcast today Trump seems to mute the phone to cough in a very ill sounding manner,  and generally sounds pretty awful. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on October 09, 2020, 02:10:42 pm
Mitch McConnel:

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/mitch-mcconnell-donald-trump-coronavirus-protocols/index.html

Quote
"I actually haven't been to the White House since August 6, because my impression was their approach to how to handle this was different than mine and what I insisted that we do in the Senate, which is to wear a mask and practice social distancing," said McConnell.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 09, 2020, 02:59:38 pm
Yeah / he looks pretty ashen faced/pissed off when he gives that quote too... wonder how many in the GOP were secretly hoping it was a bad dose..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 09, 2020, 04:09:01 pm
Yeah / he looks pretty ashen faced/pissed off when he gives that quote too... wonder how many in the GOP were secretly hoping it was a bad dose..

Not yet convinced it wasn’t.

Have you listened to his interview on Fox? Pretty damn wheezy and definitely coughing, considering he’s supposedly been “symptom free” for two days according to his doctor.
Anyway, I thought days 8-10 from onset of symptoms were the critical ones? Which are tomorrow and Sunday, no?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on October 09, 2020, 05:13:57 pm
Quite - and no one knows when he may have first contracted it.

May well be a second bite...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 15, 2020, 10:04:22 am
https://rockandice.com/climbing-news/tommy-caldwell-trump-is-going-to-ruin-rock-climbing/

A totally unsurprising opinion given that I'd have thought 99.9% of climbers would probably agree. 

I've been sure so far that Trump was going to pull it out of the bag somehow,  but at the moment all the reports seem to indicate that hes struggling,  and sounding increasingly desperate. Even pundits like John Sopel have been muttering that indications are that Biden is doing well, hes usually talking up Trumps chances.
However,  I still have a nasty feeling that Trump has something up his sleeve and may end up 'winning' somehow...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JamieG on October 15, 2020, 01:10:23 pm
I suspect that he will just declare that he has won on election night, since a lot of the blue votes are likely to be mail in ballots and will take longer to count. So whilst it might look good for trump at first it is likely it will shift from red to blue as these are counted (which may take days). Hence all the the talking about voter fraud from mail in ballots, he's trying to make these seem illegitimate. Then I suspect that there will be a legal battle possibly ending in a supreme court decision, hence why they are trying to push through that right wing lunatic at the moment. As far as I can tell that seems to be the 'plan'. Plus a few other tricks like voter suppression and intimidation. Hopefully it all blows up in his face.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on October 15, 2020, 02:51:27 pm
I suspect that he will just declare that he has won on election night, since a lot of the blue votes are likely to be mail in ballots and will take longer to count.

There is massive in person early voting going on in many states and counting these will not suffer the same delays as mail in. This early voting is completely dominated by Democratic voters. Republicans better be praying for fine weather on November 3rd, far from guaranteed across large swathes of the North-east and Midwest.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on October 15, 2020, 05:26:44 pm
I suspect that he will just declare that he has won on election night, since a lot of the blue votes are likely to be mail in ballots and will take longer to count.

There is massive in person early voting going on in many states and counting these will not suffer the same delays as mail in. This early voting is completely dominated by Democratic voters. Republicans better be praying for fine weather on November 3rd, far from guaranteed across large swathes of the North-east and Midwest.
Yup.  This is what I'm seeing/hearing in Alaska as well.  I think the fact that Alaska is a swing state is a pretty shocking indictment of Trump and Trumpist Politics.  Both our house and senate seat seem in play as well which is crazy. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on October 15, 2020, 05:31:03 pm
Not really Trump per se, but definitely related to Trumpism:

https://newrepublic.com/article/159662/libertarian-walks-into-bear-book-review-free-town-project

A tale of libertarians, failing collective goods... and bears.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on October 15, 2020, 07:17:10 pm
Not really Trump per se, but definitely related to Trumpism:

https://newrepublic.com/article/159662/libertarian-walks-into-bear-book-review-free-town-project

A tale of libertarians, failing collective goods... and bears.
Perhaps worth noting:
Toxoplasmosis is not exclusive to non-primate mammals...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 16, 2020, 09:32:30 am
Not really Trump per se, but definitely related to Trumpism:

https://newrepublic.com/article/159662/libertarian-walks-into-bear-book-review-free-town-project

A tale of libertarians, failing collective goods... and bears.
Perhaps worth noting:
Toxoplasmosis is not exclusive to non-primate mammals...

I know that Irvine Welsh novels aren't exactly science,  but wasn't that what one of the characters in Trainspotting died from?

Apparently,  if the election result is disputed in the courts for ages and it gets to the inauguration day without being resolved, the leader of the house of representatives becomes president.  I do think that would be preferable to Trump,  but, as the Times column says today, precisely noone will have voted for that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on October 25, 2020, 09:44:46 am
This will cheer you up Andy

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/25/biden-trump-polls-elderly-suburban-women-voters

As much as state results are hard to predict Trump can't lose on every key demographic compared to 2016 and win without weirdly exceptional turnouts from the demographics that favour him. It looks to me now to be most likely (and an increasing probability of this) for a clear win for Biden (ie beyond likely legal challenge shenanigans) unless something exceptional happens in the next week. I cant see how a clear Trump win emerges (ie with no long legal disputes in some states). Trump needs to win nearly all of the swing states tracked here:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/24/us-election-polls-tracker-trump-biden-swing-states

Sure the numbers were wrong last time but not by the margins we see this time.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on October 26, 2020, 06:06:02 pm
I really think much of the wrong polling in 2016 had to do with voter apathy for the middle and moderate left.  I don't see that this year at all.  Those two groups are highly motivated while the moderate right has more apathy. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on October 26, 2020, 06:42:30 pm
On the new Springsteen album on the track House of a thousand guitars
The criminal clown has stolen the throne
He steals what he can never own
May the truth ring out from every small town bar
And we’ll light up the house of a thousand guitars

One can only hope.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on October 26, 2020, 07:10:00 pm
I really think much of the wrong polling in 2016 had to do with voter apathy for the middle and moderate left.

I could be wrong but I suspect there may be parallels with the UK polling errors from 2017. In 2019 Labour were holding on to the hope that despite awful polling before the election “the pollsters were wrong” last time. But then got trounced.

This time maybe the Republicans are the ones clinging on to the same hope. Fingers crossed anyway.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on October 26, 2020, 08:33:55 pm
Now I have spent some time looking at US polls. I fail to see how Trump can win this election, barring a more massive voter suppression than in previous elections. Even if I assume that the pollsters have failed to reach/understand a large group of Trump supporters it looks like Biden is likely to win. Assuming that the polls are of normal first-world standard and that voter suppression is only marginally more successful than last time, I would say that Biden's winning in a blow out.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Wil on October 26, 2020, 08:34:47 pm
A mildly terrifying episode from Radiolab (https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/what-if)

"There’s plenty of speculation about what Donald Trump might do in the wake of the election. Would he dispute the results if he loses? Would he simply refuse to leave office, or even try to use the military to maintain control?"

This one looks into the wargaming for what happens if Trump decides to try any of the above. Seems unlikely, but there are mechanisms that can work in his favour.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on October 27, 2020, 09:31:25 am
Now I have spent some time looking at US polls. I fail to see how Trump can win this election, barring a more massive voter suppression than in previous elections. Even if I assume that the pollsters have failed to reach/understand a large group of Trump supporters it looks like Biden is likely to win. Assuming that the polls are of normal first-world standard and that voter suppression is only marginally more successful than last time, I would say that Biden's winning in a blow out.

I still think that he will remain in office whether it's by supreme court decision, gerrymandering,  voter suppression,  or the success of his outstanding policies of denying climate change,  being racist and retweeting every conspiracy theory he sees. I very much hope to be proved wrong but I'd still bet on him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 01, 2020, 08:10:03 pm
https://www.axios.com/trump-claim-election-victory-ballots-97eb12b9-5e35-402f-9ea3-0ccfb47f613f.html?utm_campaign=organic&utm_medium=socialshare&utm_source=twitter

Quite a chilling read. My money is on Biden winning this election but there will be some shenanigans I have no doubt. An important week...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 01, 2020, 09:40:17 pm
Can anyone explain why it might take longer to count mail in ballots than votes cast in person? Something to do with verifying it's valid presumably?

Even if it does take longer per vote it seems bizarre that we might not have a result for days after; surely you just get more people in to do the count.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 01, 2020, 09:45:02 pm
Can anyone explain why it might take longer to count mail in ballots than votes cast in person? Something to do with verifying it's valid presumably?

Even if it does take longer per vote it seems bizarre that we might not have a result for days after; surely you just get more people in to do the count.

AFAIK its because in some states they cant start counting the mail in votes until the polls are closed. Then (again depending on state) the postmark may have to be verified (to confirm the date) then there are checks to confirm the authenticity of who voted (signature check or something..). All of which have to be done manually.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 01, 2020, 09:54:15 pm
I understood they go into counting machines and need to be smooth before feeding in, which involves a bit of a faff. Also to be valid they have to be sent in a special sealed envelope inside an outer postal envelope. so I read, at least. Maybe Andy P knows first hand? Or Coops?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 02, 2020, 05:31:55 am
Also to be valid they have to be sent in a special sealed envelope inside an outer postal envelope.

This certainly describes mail in ballots in Pennsylvania, but voting processes are set at state level and vary enormously, so its really not possible to generalise. Even within states things are not uniform; my wife's ballot (voting in PA from abroad) is not machine readable. In lots of places organization and infrastructures are also not really fit for purpose.

Significantly, Florida is one of 17 states that allow the counting of early and mail in ballots before election day (typically after early voting closes. Another 16 states allow counting to begin on the day but before polls close), so we could see an early call from Fl, which is currently a toss up and a must win for Trump. If he does win there he will try and call the whole thing, even though polls might still be open on the west coast
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 03, 2020, 03:24:17 pm
A friend of mine was in line to vote early this morning, in a really very lovely, safe Pennsylvanian town that narrowly voted for Hillary last time, when a man came out having just voted with an AR15 strapped across his back. Just so bizarre.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 03, 2020, 03:29:24 pm
Only in America.

Things like that make me still think Trump might well win.

Thanks for the info on mail in ballots. Makes sense in terms of why they take longer to count. What doesn't make sense is the variation between states on a national vote!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 03, 2020, 03:34:01 pm
There was a great graphic on C4 news last week - that showed how because of the large mail in component this time and the likelihood that more Rep voters vote in person on the day - how on the night it may look like a 400-200 Trump win - but this could completely reverse as the early votes are then counted.

Though I think Florida will have counted most of its votes on the day - and being an early announcing "bellweather" state I might stay up to midnight to see what the early signs are from there....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 03, 2020, 03:39:19 pm
Thanks for the info on mail in ballots. Makes sense in terms of why they take longer to count. What doesn't make sense is the variation between states on a national vote!

I should have added that some mail in ballots require manual processing because state laws demand that signatures have to be verified etc. Yes, it is completely bizarre that there is not a single standard for conducting a national election. But State's rights remains a very powerful cornerstone of the political system.

@TT, if Trump doesn't win Florida it's almost certainly over. However, the polls don't close until 7pm EST. I'm going to go bed and get up around 3. But I guess there will be exit polls.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 03, 2020, 04:31:30 pm
My election night approach is always to just go to bed and find out in the morning. Triggers far too much anxiety watching early results come in, and that's just for UK elections where the process makes a modicum of sense :lol:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 03, 2020, 05:21:01 pm
My election night approach is always to just go to bed and find out in the morning. Triggers far too much anxiety watching early results come in, and that's just for UK elections where the process makes a modicum of sense :lol:

I'll see how I feel :) last night I felt knackered by 9, but for some reason stayed awake until 11 researching how to put LED's on my board :D bonkers.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 04, 2020, 06:01:29 am
Razor thin ... but far from over yet. But it's clear there is no blue wave. GOP will retain the Senate, totally hobbling Biden if he wins.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 04, 2020, 06:46:10 am
Squeaky bum time as they say...

Woke up a few times in the night and checked...

Like you said no over yet - but it’s going to be close.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 04, 2020, 07:11:08 am
I can’t see Biden getting there.
It is amazing how split places like Texas actually are though.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on November 04, 2020, 07:16:46 am
Fuck fuck fuck
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 04, 2020, 07:28:17 am
I can’t see Biden getting there.

I'm not optimistic but it shouldn't be ruled out yet.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 04, 2020, 07:42:05 am
Hold on - keep the faith - some of those inc Penn have loads of postal votes that are still to be counted....

It’s got strong echoes of 2016 but it’s not that bad - yet....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 04, 2020, 07:57:38 am
Trump just tried to short circuit the whole process in a completely unprecedented way, but it is not over. However, I now think he will win a straight victory, within the rules of the game as they are.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 04, 2020, 08:06:04 am
AP just called Arizona for Biden... means he doesn’t ‘need’ Pen.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 04, 2020, 08:08:11 am
This is a fascist coup in real time. We all knew it was coming but its unbelievable to watch it unfolding. Not over yet for Biden but the fight is only just beginning as Trump will not leave unless forced by the courts.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on November 04, 2020, 08:36:52 am
The bookies have Trump odds-on to win (implied probability around 65%), and they are often a better guide than polls and embedded experts:

https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2020/winner?selectionName=donald-trump
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 04, 2020, 09:03:12 am
Looking at the rust belt votes so far, irrespective of the Democrat's advantage in remaining votes, the betting sites are close where I sit now. Trump at least as likely to win clean. Also with a possible score draw and the state representatives in the house almost certainly re-electing Trump (also a clean win). About half of Biden's possible ways to win now look like a potential legal quagmire.

You can play with the numbers here:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2020/oct/30/build-your-own-us-election-result-plot-a-win-for-biden-or-trump

Chapeau to Toby and I worry for the future.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 04, 2020, 09:28:50 am
Looking at the rust belt votes so far, irrespective of the Democrat's advantage in remaining votes, the betting sites are close where I sit now. Trump at least as likely to win clean. Also with a possible score draw and the state representatives in the house almost certainly re-electing Trump (also a clean win). About half of Biden's possible ways to win now look like a potential legal quagmire.

You can play with the numbers here:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2020/oct/30/build-your-own-us-election-result-plot-a-win-for-biden-or-trump

Chapeau to Toby and I worry for the future.

Christ it's fucking depressing predicting vote results.  Since 2016, just assume everything will be slightly worse than you can imagine. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 04, 2020, 10:06:39 am
It really is amazing just how many countries in the world are run by thoroughly unpleasant people at the moment. Orban, Erdoghan, Trump, Bolsanaro..... Johnson looking like a saint.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fultonius on November 04, 2020, 10:13:33 am
Is it wrong to say that this is a lot down to have shit democratic candidates? Much as I hate trump, Biden is just another in the succession of Clinton, no? Another Neolib suit, with a right wing running partner?

Fuck em, if America want this, leave em to it....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 04, 2020, 10:14:16 am
It really is amazing just how many countries in the world are run by thoroughly unpleasant people at the moment. Orban, Erdoghan, Trump, Bolsanaro..... Johnson looking like a saint.

Not as worrying as the amount of support they enjoy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 04, 2020, 10:19:12 am
The bookies have Trump odds-on to win (implied probability around 65%), and they are often a better guide than polls and embedded experts:

https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2020/winner?selectionName=donald-trump

Dead levels on Betfair now. Edit, Biden a very narrow favourite. When I woke up Biden had drifted out to 3.5. Bookies are no more or less reliable than any other source; if anything they are reactive and so should be treated with more caution.

Nate Silver still optimistic for Biden. He3 has just gone ahead in Wisconsin.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 04, 2020, 10:23:27 am
Chapeau to Toby


Ahem.  :ang:

I think you're all mad for thinking he won't win. I expect him to retain office and will jump for joy if I'm proven wrong.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 04, 2020, 10:28:38 am
Trump may still win, but it is categorically not over. Pennsylvania may not declare until Friday.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tim palmer on November 04, 2020, 10:35:38 am
It isn't over, Biden just needs Nevada, Wisconsin and one more state.  Seems possible/probable (he says crossing everything).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 04, 2020, 10:48:42 am
I'm trying to cling to my original pessimism like a life raft. In truth, the pollsters got to me and I allowed myself to become slightly optimistic - a grave mistake, I fear. It all depends on how many mail-in ballots there are in these swing states, what proportion they are Democrat, and whether or not they ever get counted.

Honestly, between the House and the Senate I don't care. I just want the orange cunt to get beat.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Footwork on November 04, 2020, 10:58:21 am
I just want Trump to lose all protection being President entails and he can be dragged through the courts for the rest of his life.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 04, 2020, 11:27:38 am
This feels like the Brexit results, a slow motion car crash, with the "leader" crowing about fraud and demanding recounts  until it was apparent they actually won.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bonjoy on November 04, 2020, 12:23:37 pm
Really wishing I'd made that emotional hedge bet now at 50-1 odds earlier this week...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 04, 2020, 12:39:25 pm
I'm no expert but this is moving Biden's way as far as I can see. Huge overreaction from the betting markets this morning which has spooked the UK observers. Biden went out to 4.2 and is now back in to 1.29. Trump was heavy odds on when I woke up and is now out to 4.4. If you took them seriously earlier then they should be taken even more seriously now more votes have been counted and what is left to count should favour Biden by virtue of being absentee/mail in ballots.

Obviously a clusterfuck of Trump claiming fraud is incoming but I think Biden is winning this election as it stands.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 04, 2020, 01:00:00 pm
Crikey I hope you're right SM!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JohnM on November 04, 2020, 01:08:59 pm
Quote
Really wishing I'd made that emotional hedge bet now at 50-1 odds earlier this week...

I never saw odds as good as that for a Trump win. I put £100 on a Trump win as I had a feeling he might win despite what the polls were saying and I am still not 100% convinced otherwise. I would get £275 back so like I said nothing close to 50-1!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: erm, sam on November 04, 2020, 01:12:37 pm

Quote
Crikey I hope you're right SM!

It almost doesn't matter though. More people voted for Trump this election than last and Republicans will control the Senate.  There will not be pressure on Republicans to look for a different vision of Republicanism as there would have been if there had been a "blue wave". Senate means Biden will be able to get little of note done, Trumps persecution by the left complex will be given even fuller rein, Don Jr is poised to refresh the brand when needed. A LOT of people like how Trump makes them feel and they are not going to go away.
Biden in charge slows down the train crash but probably wont do much to actually stop it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: sdm on November 04, 2020, 01:20:45 pm
Quote
Really wishing I'd made that emotional hedge bet now at 50-1 odds earlier this week...

I never saw odds as good as that for a Trump win. I put £100 on a Trump win as I had a feeling he might win despite what the polls were saying and I am still not 100% convinced otherwise. I would get £275 back so like I said nothing close to 50-1!
50-1 would have been an easy decision. I didn't realise odds anywhere near that had been on offer.

If nothing else, with how close this election has always been, and with the margins of error, you could have been almost certain of being able to get the odds to hedge at some point to remove your risk.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 04, 2020, 02:14:52 pm

Quote
Crikey I hope you're right SM!

It almost doesn't matter though. More people voted for Trump this election than last and Republicans will control the Senate.  There will not be pressure on Republicans to look for a different vision of Republicanism as there would have been if there had been a "blue wave". Senate means Biden will be able to get little of note done, Trumps persecution by the left complex will be given even fuller rein, Don Jr is poised to refresh the brand when needed. A LOT of people like how Trump makes them feel and they are not going to go away.
Biden in charge slows down the train crash but probably wont do much to actually stop it.

All these are good points but I will take what I can get at this stage!

Biden has just taken the lead in Michigan with more absentee and mail in to come. He should be fine in Arizona, Wisconsin and Michigan now. If he can hang on in Nevada its job done before Pennsylvania gets called.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bonjoy on November 04, 2020, 02:17:56 pm
I saw those odds generally bandied about SM, no idea how credible they were, I've never placed a bet in my life.
For example: https://www.freetips.com/bookie-specials/donald-trump-us-election-betvictor-20201020-0015/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 04, 2020, 02:23:53 pm
I saw those odds generally bandied about SM, no idea how credible they were, I've never placed a bet in my life.
For example: https://www.freetips.com/bookie-specials/donald-trump-us-election-betvictor-20201020-0015/

Special signup offers with a maximum bet of £1-£5 I suspect. I haven't seen 50/1 for Trump anywhere on an actual market, if I'd seen anything over 3/1 beforehand I'd have been all over it like a rash! JohnM's odds are about the average over the last few days.

For context, Trump is drifting by the minute. Out to spot 4.7 now; about 7/2 in fractional terms. Thats the longest I have seen him on an actual market. Edit: Trump 5.5 now.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 04, 2020, 02:26:12 pm
For a clear win Wisconsin would have had to have gone for Trump. Mitchigan was always looking good for  a small margin Biden win (as county swings were consistently for Biden and it was so close last time). It looks like a Biden win overall now and possibly even a clear win.

Still Will deserves headgear as well for how close it has been.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 04, 2020, 02:37:19 pm
For a clear win Wisconsin would have had to have gone for Trump. Mitchigan was always looking good for  a small margin Biden win (as county swings were consistently for Biden and it was so close last time). It looks like a Biden win overall now and possibly even a clear win.

Still Will deserves headgear as well for how close it (  has been)*.

*is.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 04, 2020, 02:40:04 pm
It looks like a Biden win overall now and possibly even a clear win.
... for how close it has been.

Offwidth just cost Biden the election.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 04, 2020, 03:14:34 pm
I now think a narrow Biden win is marginally more likely, but it's going to be a largely Pyrrhic victory.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 04, 2020, 03:39:13 pm
I now think a narrow Biden win is marginally more likely, but it's going to be a largely Pyrrhic victory.

Even if Biden can do little good, the fact that a Biden win would prevent further harm being done is a cause for relief.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 04, 2020, 03:43:16 pm
I now think a narrow Biden win is marginally more likely, but it's going to be a largely Pyrrhic victory.

Even if Biden can do little good, the fact that a Biden win would prevent further harm being done is a cause for relief.

Another possible upside, and this may be a misreading of how the votes have fallen, could be that a Republican win in the Senate but a loss of the White House provides an indication that the electorate wanted to vote Republican but was put off by Trump. It might help put the brakes on populism and avoid a Trump or someone like them on the ticket next time.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 04, 2020, 03:49:46 pm
Another possible upside, and this may be a misreading of how the votes have fallen, could be that a Republican win in the Senate but a loss of the White House provides an indication that the electorate wanted to vote Republican but was put off by Trump. It might help put the brakes on populism and avoid a Trump or someone like them on the ticket next time.

I'm sorry Will, but this is pure magical thinking. I bet you can get some pretty good odds on Don Jr. in 2024.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 04, 2020, 03:54:37 pm
I now think a narrow Biden win is marginally more likely, but it's going to be a largely Pyrrhic victory.

Even if Biden can do little good, the fact that a Biden win would prevent further harm being done is a cause for relief.

This. Stop or at least stem the rot.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 04, 2020, 04:20:00 pm
Another possible upside, and this may be a misreading of how the votes have fallen, could be that a Republican win in the Senate but a loss of the White House provides an indication that the electorate wanted to vote Republican but was put off by Trump. It might help put the brakes on populism and avoid a Trump or someone like them on the ticket next time.

I'm sorry Will, but this is pure magical thinking. I bet you can get some pretty good odds on Don Jr. in 2024.
A very different prospect, without four years of endless Whitehouse tweeting.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 04, 2020, 04:34:47 pm
Anybody able to explain why NYT have Biden currently on 227 and Sky only 224 EC?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 04, 2020, 04:44:58 pm
Slightly different decisions on what can be called - probably Maine and Nebraska given the difference of three.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 04, 2020, 05:01:50 pm
Guardian has AZ as called. BBC and Sky don’t.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on November 04, 2020, 05:10:18 pm
Is there any way for Biden to win the Senate if he wins the predicted states?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 04, 2020, 05:13:24 pm
No, separate races. The Senate is out of play for the Democrats.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mark20 on November 04, 2020, 05:16:31 pm
After the last few weeks sowing the seeds of doubt around postal votes, Donald Trump is ramping it up on Twitter now
“Last night I was leading, often solidly, in many key States, in almost all instances Democrat run & controlled. Then, one by one, they started to magically disappear as surprise ballot dumps were counted. VERY STRANGE”

“They are working hard to make up 500,000 vote advantage in Pennsylvania disappear — ASAP. Likewise, Michigan and others!”

Really concerning
 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 04, 2020, 05:29:21 pm
He was always going to do that, been sowing those seeds for years.

When I looked at about 3am Biden had a clear lead.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 04, 2020, 05:31:08 pm
Guardian has AZ as called. BBC and Sky don’t.

Google seems to be using live updated of the Associated Press calls, which should be the most accurate?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 04, 2020, 06:09:31 pm
I’ve just seen a FB from the Biden campaign claiming they will win:

 https://www.facebook.com/7860876103/posts/10157676027636104/ (https://www.facebook.com/7860876103/posts/10157676027636104/)

And the Trump PA lead is down to ~400k, with 1.4M vote still to count.
All postal and if the split on the already counted ballots (around 70-80% Biden) continues, Biden will take PA too.

I fear some optimism is creeping into my psychi, given the last 48 hrs of my life, this is somewhat surprising...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 04, 2020, 06:16:26 pm
This page - below the map - has a really useful table of the undecided states with the number of votes left to be counted and the present tallies. Useful! Still 3million to count in PA!

This is now starting to play out just as predicted on C4 news - trump leads early - then as the postal votes get counted he’s reeled in.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on November 04, 2020, 06:31:19 pm
I thought this was the best set of graphic for understanding when votes get counted. 
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/politics/when-votes-counted-tonight-election.html (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/politics/when-votes-counted-tonight-election.html)

PA and NC are still receiving ballots, so there's no way we'll have a final answer until way later. 

Hell, I'm in Alaska, and they won't even start tabuating mail-in votes until the 10th.  So far 150K out of a total of 350-400K votes have been counted.  We really won't know until mid november up here, and while AK is generally considered "safe", the electoral college could turn on 3 votes :)  (i know- wishful thinking)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 04, 2020, 07:51:57 pm
So with WI being called by AP - I recon if he gets Nevada and Michigan (where Biden is ahead by a reasonable margin) then that’s 270!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 04, 2020, 08:15:18 pm
Nevada is tight though, less than 8000 votes difference..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 04, 2020, 08:41:56 pm
Nevada is tight though, less than 8000 votes difference..

But the counties yet to finish reporting are either tiny (in numbers - hundreds of voters) and Vegas - that has hundreds of thousands with a high Biden percentage already...

Fuck knows why they’ve decided to do nothing until Thursday though!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 04, 2020, 08:47:01 pm
Fuck knows why they’ve decided to do nothing until Thursday though!

Same in PA. God knows ...

They knocked off at 4pm where we used to live because they are "burnt out." Very weirdly UnAmerican and suspiciously European - next they'll be demanding siestas, numerous coffee and cigarette breaks, and consuming Pastis on the way to work in the morning.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 04, 2020, 09:18:24 pm
I think Bidens going to get PA...

It was a Trump lead of 460 000 with 80% counted,
Now a Trump lead of 350 000 with 83% counted...
Update Trump lead of 315 000 with 86% counted...

Gonna be close!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 04, 2020, 09:35:25 pm
If so, that should be game over.

Bar the lawsuits.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 04, 2020, 10:31:47 pm
Fuck knows why they’ve decided to do nothing until Thursday though!

Same in PA. God knows ...

They knocked off at 4pm where we used to live because they are "burnt out." Very weirdly UnAmerican and suspiciously European - next they'll be demanding siestas, numerous coffee and cigarette breaks, and consuming Pastis on the way to work in the morning.

So I can stop refreshing every 5 minutes now until tomorrow morning US time?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 04, 2020, 11:30:53 pm
I now think a narrow Biden win is marginally more likely, but it's going to be a largely Pyrrhic victory.

I sure hope so, as there are a lot of Trump decisions that need to go on a bonfire.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 05, 2020, 06:27:05 am
Biden lead in AZ narrowing...

But Georgia now into play with Trumps lead down to 24k....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 05, 2020, 07:12:07 am
Biden lead in AZ narrowing...

AP called Arizona overnight, and the Guardian is including it in its headline figure of 264, but it still looks too close to breathe easy yet. Most importantly in all the still open races as yet uncounted votes come very largely from heavily Democratic areas. I suspect PA will not finish counting today but we could still see a result.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Snoops on November 05, 2020, 07:12:25 am
Biden looks likely winner now.
He’s likely not going to have the senate which means he won’t be able to do much.
Sadly the real story is not if he just scrapes a win but the fact that half the USA seem to think it was okay to have a odious narcissist in charge for another 4 years....that’s really sad for all of us
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Fultonius on November 05, 2020, 07:48:56 am
 Without the senate, can Biden still roll back all of trumps rash executive powers? And... Can he do the same?

I fear the climate plans he has wouldn't get through the senate.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Davo on November 05, 2020, 08:20:16 am
Biden looks likely winner now.
He’s likely not going to have the senate which means he won’t be able to do much.
Sadly the real story is not if he just scrapes a win but the fact that half the USA seem to think it was okay to have a odious narcissist in charge for another 4 years....that’s really sad for all of us

Some would say we have the same issue here!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 05, 2020, 08:37:10 am
Another possible upside, and this may be a misreading of how the votes have fallen, could be that a Republican win in the Senate but a loss of the White House provides an indication that the electorate wanted to vote Republican but was put off by Trump. It might help put the brakes on populism and avoid a Trump or someone like them on the ticket next time.

I'm sorry Will, but this is pure magical thinking. I bet you can get some pretty good odds on Don Jr. in 2024.

Ivanka.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on November 05, 2020, 08:44:10 am
Sadly the real story is...the fact that half the USA seem to think it was okay to have a odious narcissist in charge for another 4 years....that’s really sad for all of us
Some would say we have the same issue here!

I was going to say the same. That’s what’s most depressing to me, that Britain Trump will likely run another successful campaign in 2024.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on November 05, 2020, 08:50:13 am
that should be game over.

Bar the lawsuits.

Anyone know if these are brought by the Republican Party or by Trump himself (i.e. who will be paying for them?)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 05, 2020, 08:59:45 am
Out of interest, what are the legal challenges that they'll make? I heard something on the news this morning about Pennsylvania having different rules on counting late-arriving ballots but I'm not clear on what these rules are and how Trump will seek to challenge or exploit them? Presumably these challenges will come to nothing, even if the court has been bolstered with Trump appointees?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on November 05, 2020, 09:08:50 am
Out of interest, what are the legal challenges that they'll make? I'm not clear on what these rules are and how Trump will seek to challenge or exploit them? Presumably these challenges will come to nothing, even if the court has been bolstered with Trump appointees?
Former top Republican lawyer who was responsible for bringing these exact challenges in previous elections was on Today programme saying there’s no basis at all.

I’m just interested in whose money he’ll be wasting. I expect it’s more about creating the narrative of a ‘stolen election’ among the base rather than expecting a win.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on November 05, 2020, 09:09:44 am
Whilst we are all waiting for the result, I can heartily recommend this interview with a Democrat polling and communications expert. Lots of really good ideas for the British left to take away on messaging, how to appeal to socially conservative voters, etc.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/07/david-shor-cancel-culture-2020-election-theory-polls.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 05, 2020, 09:13:15 am
Out of interest, what are the legal challenges that they'll make? I heard something on the news this morning about Pennsylvania having different rules on counting late-arriving ballots but I'm not clear on what these rules are and how Trump will seek to challenge or exploit them? Presumably these challenges will come to nothing, even if the court has been bolstered with Trump appointees?

Main one I've seen is around being able to monitor the vote counting process. As I understand it, both sides are able to have people watching the count to prevent any irregularities, and the Trump campaign are claiming that they've been denied access to do this in some areas, which I suppose they could then claim might invalidate some results or force a recount if there is evidence of being denied access.

Of course I also saw that in one instance people were protesting outside a counting station, demanding access, despite there already being over 200 people in there monitoring it already!

that should be game over.

Bar the lawsuits.

Anyone know if these are brought by the Republican Party or by Trump himself (i.e. who will be paying for them?)

Republican party, although really they're one and the same atm. Being paid for by donors.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 05, 2020, 09:14:40 am
Biden looks likely winner now.
He’s likely not going to have the senate which means he won’t be able to do much.
Sadly the real story is not if he just scrapes a win but the fact that half the USA seem to think it was okay to have a odious narcissist in charge for another 4 years....that’s really sad for all of us

Not only that, but 4 million more people appear to have voted for him this time than last!  :jaw:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 05, 2020, 09:27:21 am
Out of interest, what are the legal challenges that they'll make? I'm not clear on what these rules are and how Trump will seek to challenge or exploit them? Presumably these challenges will come to nothing, even if the court has been bolstered with Trump appointees?
Former top Republican lawyer who was responsible for bringing these exact challenges in previous elections was on Today programme saying there’s no basis at all.

I’m just interested in whose money he’ll be wasting. I expect it’s more about creating the narrative of a ‘stolen election’ among the base rather than expecting a win.

Bradders has answered much of this. The cases vary depending on which state. In Wisconsin it's a demand for a recount (even former GOP Governor Scott Walker, a confirmed right wing nut, has said the deficit is far too large to be overcome), in Arizona it's to carry on counting, in PA it's to stop counting. PA allows the counting of mail in votes that arrive up to three days after the election so long as they're postmarked on the election day or before. In Michigan it's about providing access for monitors. The Republicans have launched more than 400 suits in 44 states over the few months (very many in PA, which everyone has known would be critical). Many are completely vexatious and few have succeeded and every expert comment I've seen on the post election suits has said they are without basis and will not succeed. It's worth noting that there is no direct appeal to the Supreme Court, that's simply not something he can do. It reached the SCOTUS in 2000 only after going through many lower courts.

So Ali is right that this is entirely about building a narrative. The core of the narrative is that ballots are mysteriously being "found" - they're not being found, they have them, they just haven't finished counting them.

I wonder if the GOP are paying or the campaign?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on November 05, 2020, 09:41:06 am
It sounds like Arizona is now in doubt for Biden. That would be pretty shit...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 05, 2020, 09:56:21 am
It sounds like Arizona is now in doubt for Biden. That would be pretty shit...

Where are you seeing that James?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on November 05, 2020, 10:07:04 am
On the Guardian live feed, postal vote results favouring the tangerine twat and proportions pointing to the result flipping.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 05, 2020, 10:09:07 am
It's all over the live US news election reports. Latest batches in Arizona favoured Trump and closed the gap. In contrast Pennsylvania looked impossible for Biden late on Tuesday night (Trump on 55% and Biden on 44% with a quarter of votes left to count) but as the batches came in over the last 24 hours the gap closed fast... if the trend continues it now looks like a Biden win there.  Biden is the favourite overall but Trump could still squeek in clean.

One thing being rather overlooked in all these incredibly close counts is the Libertarian candidate votes were much more than the gap between Biden and Trump. The world may be thanking her.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on November 05, 2020, 10:10:39 am
https://eu.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/04/latest-batch-trump-gets-share-votes-he-would-need-reclaim-arizona-next-rounds-present-challenges/6169183002/

This is the article that was linked on Graun
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 05, 2020, 10:13:37 am
To quote NYT:
“ Jennifer Medina
Jennifer Medina, in Phoenix 3:06 AM ET
In the latest results, Trump hit the percentage he needed to stay on track to potentially win Arizona, but it may not hold. The next Maricopa release is not expected until Thursday night. ›”

Which is going to be a looonnggg wait.

Also, they’re reporting an armed crowd trying to break into the Maricopa counting station...

Edit:

This is a slightly earlier dispatch, but since they stopped counting at this point, for the night, it should still hold true:


Jennifer Medina, in Phoenix 2:54 AM ET
Maricopa County (Phoenix) just posted its last numbers for the night, and Trump narrowed Biden’s edge in Arizona slightly — to 68,390 votes, or less than three percentage points. ”
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 05, 2020, 10:32:55 am
RE Maricopa: Rough calcs. (some rounding done)

70 000 Biden lead (its 69 but...)
340 000 votes left to count.

That means to win Trump needs > 205 000 votes leaving Biden with  < 135 000 of the 340k remaining.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 05, 2020, 10:33:49 am
Whether Biden holds Arizona or not, he remains on track to overhaul Trump in Pennsylvania which gets the job done.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 05, 2020, 10:36:32 am
Whether Biden holds Arizona or not, he remains on track to overhaul Trump in Pennsylvania which gets the job done.

Just! And Georgia isn't safe Trump yet!!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: luckyjez on November 05, 2020, 10:44:16 am
Wall Street Journal now showing Biden on 264 and Trump remaining on 214.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 05, 2020, 10:47:55 am
Whether Biden holds Arizona or not, he remains on track to overhaul Trump in Pennsylvania which gets the job done.

Just! And Georgia isn't safe Trump yet!!

Yes, just, but the analysis I'm reading doesn't view Pennsylvania as a nailbiter, more a matter of time. Lets hope they are right! Georgia looks to be headed for a recount whichever way it goes and will be tight either way. Arizona; Trump has only just pulled the required margin from the latest block of votes and has to maintain it over a long period of time. I reckon Biden will hold it, but was clearly an early call from Fox and AP. Nevada looks increasingly like job done as the votes to be counted are from the metro Vegas area.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 05, 2020, 10:55:31 am
Friends in PA (Philly and Lehigh Valley) seem to think it will go the right way, in the end.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 05, 2020, 11:04:34 am
When the sun starts to rise, in an hour or so and the morning news cycle starts to be consumed; I fear the chances of violence might be quite acute, with such a close race stalled for many hours yet.

Given the very clear anticipation that this would be the likely scenario for this election, it seems stupid that “relief crews” weren’t put in place to allow the count to continue without a break. Surely that wasn’t beyond the capability of the various state infrastructures?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 05, 2020, 11:10:01 am
Georgia now very close with the votes that just landed. They came in 80% for Biden. He needs 60-62% his way from the 4% of votes outstanding to overhaul Trump according to CNN.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JohnM on November 05, 2020, 11:54:22 am
Another possible upside, and this may be a misreading of how the votes have fallen, could be that a Republican win in the Senate but a loss of the White House provides an indication that the electorate wanted to vote Republican but was put off by Trump. It might help put the brakes on populism and avoid a Trump or someone like them on the ticket next time.

I'm sorry Will, but this is pure magical thinking. I bet you can get some pretty good odds on Don Jr. in 2024.

Ivanka.

I don't want to start a new birther conspiracy but I don't think she was born in the US.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JohnM on November 05, 2020, 11:57:35 am
Another possible upside, and this may be a misreading of how the votes have fallen, could be that a Republican win in the Senate but a loss of the White House provides an indication that the electorate wanted to vote Republican but was put off by Trump. It might help put the brakes on populism and avoid a Trump or someone like them on the ticket next time.

I'm sorry Will, but this is pure magical thinking. I bet you can get some pretty good odds on Don Jr. in 2024.

Ivanka.

I don't want to start a new birther conspiracy but I don't think she was born in the US.

Actually ignore that I was getting confused with the mum.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 05, 2020, 12:00:45 pm
I think that if he loses this election the Trump dynasty will never get into power again. There are a string of actions/investigations/enquiries into Trump - and families finances and business practices that are largely stalled as whilst he is POTUS he can't go to prison!

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JohnM on November 05, 2020, 12:19:58 pm
I think that if he loses this election the Trump dynasty will never get into power again. There are a string of actions/investigations/enquiries into Trump - and families finances and business practices that are largely stalled as whilst he is POTUS he can't go to prison!


I wonder if he will ever end up in court in NY for all the tax stuff. He has changed his residency to Florida now but I don't suppose that would make much difference. Apart from having been (ok we don't know for sure yet) POTUS is there anything that differentiates Trump from any other US citizen when it comes to tax avoidance proceedings? 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on November 05, 2020, 12:26:01 pm
I think that if he loses this election the Trump dynasty will never get into power again. There are a string of actions/investigations/enquiries into Trump - and families finances and business practices that are largely stalled as whilst he is POTUS he can't go to prison!

So something I'm wondering is, how much of a populist vote winner is down to the character of the populist himself, and how much down to structural reasons? Does it take the combination of both to launch a Trump, Johnson, Modi, etc, or are overwhelming structural weaknesses (which I believe we see in the US) enough. In short, could a drier, more boring politician tap into the dark vein that Trump taps into, or does it require the weird personality? And does that personality - or voters believing its there - have a dynastic sheen - like father, like son?

I suspect we shall find out.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 05, 2020, 12:36:57 pm
.
[/quote]

I think that if he loses this election the Trump dynasty will never get into power again. There are a string of actions/investigations/enquiries into Trump - and families finances and business practices that are largely stalled as whilst he is POTUS he can't go to prison!

.


So something I'm wondering is, how much of a populist vote winner is down to the character of the populist himself, and how much down to structural reasons? Does it take the combination of both to launch a Trump, Johnson, Modi, etc, or are overwhelming structural weaknesses (which I believe we see in the US) enough. In short, could a drier, more boring politician tap into the dark vein that Trump taps into, or does it require the weird personality? And does that personality - or voters believing its there - have a dynastic sheen - like father, like son?

I suspect we shall find out

I think it’s the combination.

I think many of his supporters see in him/Johnson a person who voices their inner prejudice, cocks a leg to all those smart arses that have always told them they were wrong and gets away with crimes that they never saw as “real” crimes in the first place.
The lynch mob. Ask them, they’ll swear down that murder is wrong/a sin/the worst crime, but them lynch the first suspect on the flimsiest evidence without a trace of irony
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 05, 2020, 12:51:18 pm
I think that if he loses this election the Trump dynasty will never get into power again. There are a string of actions/investigations/enquiries into Trump - and families finances and business practices that are largely stalled as whilst he is POTUS he can't go to prison!

So something I'm wondering is, how much of a populist vote winner is down to the character of the populist himself, and how much down to structural reasons? Does it take the combination of both to launch a Trump, Johnson, Modi, etc, or are overwhelming structural weaknesses (which I believe we see in the US) enough. In short, could a drier, more boring politician tap into the dark vein that Trump taps into, or does it require the weird personality? And does that personality - or voters believing its there - have a dynastic sheen - like father, like son?

I suspect we shall find out.


I definitely think that the issue is structural rather than personal. Trump is himself not the problem, if you see it / him as a problem, it's a complex range of political, cultural and social issues in which a lot ( about 52% in the UK) feel disaffected and unrepresented.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 05, 2020, 12:58:44 pm
You're all forgetting that he's largely/partly responsible for creating this situation - for his benefit.

He's spent the last 5 years driving division. Stoking hate. Pitching one against another. Black vs White, Rich vs Poor, etc.. etc.. etc.. Because thats the only way he could get elected....

Yes there is now an electorate shaped by this - but that doesnt mean it has to stay in that shape.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on November 05, 2020, 01:02:23 pm

I definitely think that the issue is structural rather than personal. Trump is himself not the problem, if you see it / him as a problem, it's a complex range of political, cultural and social issues in which a lot ( about 52% in the UK) feel disaffected and unrepresented.

Yes, a populist leader is only going to thrive in those circumstances. They are necessary for populism, but are they sufficient? For a leader to get away with the sort of thing Trump gets away with, does it require anything more than just the bad structural issues? I guess I'm wondering how much of Trumpism survives without Trump, or with Trump as just a nominal figurehead.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: galpinos on November 05, 2020, 01:19:27 pm
You're all forgetting that he's largely/partly responsible for creating this situation - for his benefit.

He's spent the last 5 years driving division. Stoking hate. Pitching one against another. Black vs White, Rich vs Poor, etc.. etc.. etc.. Because thats the only way he could get elected....

Yes there is now an electorate shaped by this - but that doesnt mean it has to stay in that shape.

I think you are giving him too much credit. Politics seems a lot more polarised, more partisan than it used to and is very tied to people's identity, and that includes here and over the pond. Brexit anyone? In Trumps case, I think he's often just voicing what people have thought but never dared utter. You can blame him from legitimising the thoughts, but not that people have them.

At least one would hope that the Democrats now know that spending four years telling Trump voters they're thick is not the way to get them to change their vote.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Johnny Brown on November 05, 2020, 01:22:40 pm
Edit: beat me to it.

Brexit seems to have done pretty well as a populist movement without Farage gaining any sort of position, and no doubt will survive Bojo's defenestration. But we'll see. Let's hope this is the start of the supertanker's turn.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 05, 2020, 04:27:12 pm
With it being this close, can we say that we actually have something to be grateful to CV-19 for? I'm sure he lost many votes by handling it so badly. What a strange situation.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 05, 2020, 04:44:39 pm
So something I'm wondering is, how much of a populist vote winner is down to the character of the populist himself, and how much down to structural reasons? Does it take the combination of both to launch a Trump, Johnson, Modi, etc, or are overwhelming structural weaknesses (which I believe we see in the US) enough. In short, could a drier, more boring politician tap into the dark vein that Trump taps into, or does it require the weird personality? And does that personality - or voters believing its there - have a dynastic sheen - like father, like son?

I suspect we shall find out.

I think he is, to some voters, incredibly charismatic. But I suspect there will be cleverer people  who will see where he has successfully played it and think they can do better.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 05, 2020, 05:20:01 pm
Vote counts starting to be updated now.... Bidens narrow lead widens to near 12k in nevada. Gap down to 16k in Georgia (theres going to be only a few hundred in that I bet) and PA is narrowing all the time...

I wanted a thumping Biden victory to shove Trumps nose in it. But actually this is almost better (if it works out) - watching is lead slowly trickle away state by state. Like sand slipping through his (small) fingers...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on November 05, 2020, 05:49:58 pm
So something I'm wondering is, how much of a populist vote winner is down to the character of the populist himself, and how much down to structural reasons? blah blah blah


I think he is, to some voters, incredibly charismatic. But I suspect there will be cleverer people  who will see where he has successfully played it and think they can do better.

I agree, Trump is clearly charismatic to his followers. But how replicable is this?

What got me thinking along these lines was this blog here:
https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2018/september/the-mass-psychology-of-trumpism

"The successful demagogue activates this feeling [of wounded narcissism] by possessing the typical qualities of the individuals who follow him, but in what Adorno, quoting Freud, called a ‘clearly marked and pure form’ that gives the impression ‘of greater force and of more freedom of libido’. In Adorno’s words, ‘the superman has to resemble the follower and appear as his “enlargement”.’ The leader ‘completes’ the follower’s self-image. This helps explain the phenomenon of the ‘great little man’, the ‘Aw shucks’, ‘just folks’ demagogue like Huey Long. He ‘seems to be the enlargement of the subject’s own personality, a collective projection of himself, rather than an image of the father’ – a Trump, in other words, rather than a Washington or Roosevelt."

I have not yet read the piece it's based on (it's easily available, just been busy) and I have no idea if this kind of analysis - done in the wake of the 1930s - has been superceded or is now considered outdated by those who study such things.

But if it's true, it takes something more than just insight and cunning, and the question then becomes: does one's political system offer easy routes into power for flawed and narcissistic people?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 05, 2020, 06:25:30 pm
Vote counts starting to be updated now.... Bidens narrow lead widens to near 12k in nevada. Gap down to 16k in Georgia (theres going to be only a few hundred in that I bet) and PA is narrowing all the time...

He's contesting both these, be funny if he still holds them!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 05, 2020, 06:42:26 pm
@Sean
I would say two things. Firstly, the leader as an empowered projection of the person the voter wants to be sounds perfectly plausible. People may identify strongly with their leaders. With Trump, there’s a folksy intimacy, enormous self confidence, and a near total absence of detail. He’s the guy next door who’s on your side, feels it the way you do and all without anything annoyingly concrete to impede the fantasy.

I‘d be surprised if the GOP doesn’t find a similar successor. S/he might not be a carbon copy,  but I fear that someone still charismatic and faux-ordinary, but less so than Trump, with more discipline and strategy, could exploit the weaknesses in the US system of governance better than Trump has.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 05, 2020, 08:49:59 pm
Spent 30 min or so looking at the numbers in the unfinished counties in Georgia and PA... I think Trump will win Georgia by a few hundred - maybe a thousand or two (its looking like a stretch too far for Biden there).

But Biden is going to easily do PA I think.. Its a 100k difference, but still 500k votes to go. Some counties like Philadelphia Cty have 80%+ Biden voting split and there’s still 125000 votes to count there..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 05, 2020, 09:05:23 pm
Nevada looks all but certain now and the Associated Press are sticking by their call for Arizona. Still, going to have to go to bed without an answer, a surefire recipe for waking at 3am.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 05, 2020, 09:10:59 pm
Nevada looks all but certain now and the Associated Press are sticking by their call for Arizona. Still, going to have to go to bed without an answer, a surefire recipe for waking at 3am.

Yup. Third night of bad sleep beckons! Yeah Nevada has started to grow (lead) again.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 06, 2020, 12:24:22 am
Trump's lead in Georgia now down to 3600 votes. Still reportedly 5% of votes to count in Atlanta and surroundings. It's happening.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 06, 2020, 05:40:58 am
Latest from cnn

"Georgia's Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger will not provide another update again tonight, according to his press secretary Ari Schaffer.

At last update, the state still had 14,097 votes left to count.

President Trump is currently leading Biden by a mere 1,805 votes."

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-biden-election-results-11-05-20/index.html

Other good news for the Democrats is that one Georgia senate race has gone to a run-off in January and the other may go that way as well. If both seats go to the democrats the senate is 50 50 and the deciding vote will be the new VP.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 06, 2020, 07:44:23 am
Spent 30 min or so looking at the numbers in the unfinished counties in Georgia and PA... I think Trump will win Georgia by a few hundred - maybe a thousand or two (its looking like a stretch too far for Biden there).

But Biden is going to easily do PA I think.. Its a 100k difference, but still 500k votes to go. Some counties like Philadelphia Cty have 80%+ Biden voting split and there’s still 125000 votes to count there..

Please let this be over soon (the pre-legal phase at least). As above PA will be a Biden win now - but think he’ll lose Georgia by a couple of hundred. Surely a recount there whatever happens. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 06, 2020, 07:44:46 am
Watching that Trump address last night was chilling. The last stand of a fascist dictator hopefully.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 06, 2020, 07:56:48 am
Watching that Trump address last night was chilling. The last stand of a fascist dictator hopefully.

Remarkable that three of the major news channels quickly cut him off and began checking off his lies.

I'm exhausted at this point.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 06, 2020, 09:04:28 am
The associated press figures are showing a Trump lead of 463 votes in Georgia. But not entirely sure how many more to count or how many will be military ballots.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Dac on November 06, 2020, 09:24:07 am
Here’s a nice little website if you want to see the numbers as they change:

https://alex.github.io/nyt-2020-election-scraper/battleground-state-changes.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on November 06, 2020, 09:39:29 am
Here’s a nice little website if you want to see the numbers as they change:

https://alex.github.io/nyt-2020-election-scraper/battleground-state-changes.html

Really interesting page, thanks. Looking very good for Biden!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: sheavi on November 06, 2020, 09:44:49 am
https://results.decisiondeskhq.com/

Live figures for quick glance updates
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 06, 2020, 09:55:04 am
Biden takes a lead of nearly 1000 in Georgia.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 06, 2020, 09:58:07 am
Biden takes a lead of nearly 1000 in Georgia.

This is nuts.
Absolutely nothing can be called yet.

Even NC is still in play, with Trump only holding a 1.4 % lead and >4% of the vote to count.

Bit stressful, really.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 06, 2020, 10:39:23 am
Watching that Trump address last night was chilling. The last stand of a fascist dictator hopefully.

I really think it's incorrect to call him a fascist. He panders to white supremacy, is certainly a racist, misogynistic, crass, illiterate and a wannabe autocrat, but I think that the most dangerous thing about his attacks on the electoral process are the licence that they give to far more unpleasant and dangerous rulers to ignore election results, and use any means they can get to hold onto power.
I really dislike Trump, but he's no Orban, Erdoghan or Putin. He hasn't actually imprisoned journalists, or assassinated political opponents. He is ultimately a reality TV star with a huge ego.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Duma on November 06, 2020, 10:49:18 am
Had a few thoughts on this yesterday morning when I decided to switch off from the news for a while, nothing much changed since then apart from more hope in Georgia.
In order of confidence:
Alaska should be in trumps column already, lots of votes to count or no.
Nevada is safe, outstanding votes are urban and will break Biden.
N Carolina will stay with trump, it was always the biggest ask and outstanding votes are less favourable to the democrats than others.
Pennsylvania should end up blue, but is going to be worryingly close.
Arizona was called way too early by AP and Fox, still concerned by it.
Georgia i thought would stay red, in a race where Biden is only scraping home it seemed unlikely, especially with florida going to trump, but now who knows?

So any one of AZ, PA, or GA get Biden over the line. Think only the supreme Court can get trump in now
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 06, 2020, 10:51:20 am
Watching that Trump address last night was chilling. The last stand of a fascist dictator hopefully.

I really think it's incorrect to call him a fascist. He panders to white supremacy, is certainly a racist, misogynistic, crass, illiterate and a wannabe autocrat, but I think that the most dangerous thing about his attacks on the electoral process are the licence that they give to far more unpleasant and dangerous rulers to ignore election results, and use any means they can get to hold onto power.
I really dislike Trump, but he's no Orban, Erdoghan or Putin. He hasn't actually imprisoned journalists, or assassinated political opponents. He is ultimately a reality TV star with a huge ego.

To that last paragraph.
Only because he was a first term president in a long established “system” that prevented him from doing so. Given a weaker system of checks and balances at the start, or four more years of erosion of those systems; I feel he would do all of those things, without hesitation.
He is like those people, the system prevents him acting like it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 06, 2020, 11:04:36 am

I really think it's incorrect to call him a fascist. He panders to white supremacy, is certainly a racist, misogynistic, crass, illiterate and a wannabe autocrat, but I think that the most dangerous thing about his attacks on the electoral process are the licence that they give to far more unpleasant and dangerous rulers to ignore election results, and use any means they can get to hold onto power.
I really dislike Trump, but he's no Orban, Erdoghan or Putin. He hasn't actually imprisoned journalists, or assassinated political opponents. He is ultimately a reality TV star with a huge ego.

Thats totally wrong as far as I'm concerned and emblematic of the entire problem. How much more white supremacy, racism, misogyny, autocracy, denial and subversion of the electoral process and democracy do you want to see before you start calling it fascist? You need to see journalists imprisoned and political opponents assassinated before you call him what he is? He is openly racist, and if you watch his speech/ramble from last night in full he relentlessly undermines democracy for 15 minutes. The only votes that count in his view are the ones for him. This sort of dancing around the facts has been a problem the last 4 years. He told us exactly what he was at the start. When people tell us what they are, we should listen.

In addition: what Matt said. You can quibble about what stage of fascism it is, early stage or whatever, but that is where this type of politics leads.

https://twitter.com/JYSexton/status/1324491495903285250
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 06, 2020, 11:08:21 am
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/550046337547665409?s=20
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: remus on November 06, 2020, 11:30:15 am
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/550046337547665409?s=20

 :lol:

More classics here https://www.reddit.com/r/TrumpCriticizesTrump/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on November 06, 2020, 01:41:58 pm
I really think it's incorrect to call him a fascist. I really dislike Trump, but he's no Orban, Erdoghan or Putin. He hasn't actually imprisoned journalists, or assassinated political opponents.

Given a weaker system of checks and balances at the start, or four more years of erosion of those systems; I feel he would do all of those things, without hesitation. He is like those people, the system prevents him acting like it.
^^THIS

...if you watch his speech/ramble from last night in full he relentlessly undermines democracy for 15 minutes. The only votes that count in his view are the ones for him.
^^AND THIS

Trump respects and admires people like Putin because they have what he craves. Completely unrestrained power.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 06, 2020, 01:56:55 pm
Biden takes a lead of 5500 in PA. This is all but done. I don't believe there is any chance Trump will concede.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 06, 2020, 02:06:19 pm
And that's all she wrote, folks.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 06, 2020, 02:13:11 pm
At last. There’ll probably be recounts in Georgia, WI and maybe PA that will rumble on for a bit. But most commentators can’t see WI changing and if he gets a similar or greater lead in PA likewise. And of course NE and AZ to be confirmed.

It’s been stressful - though a welcome break to watch this happening rather than the Covid news in the UK.

Mind you - that’s a bit like taking some crack instead of smack.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Duma on November 06, 2020, 02:40:45 pm
ABC have called it. Not AP yet though it seems.

Very interesting how the runoff in Georgia for the senate play out!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 06, 2020, 02:42:49 pm
The lead in PA is only going to keep growing and I just heard a hint it may well exceed the votes received since the election (but postmarked no later than the election and thus legal) blowing a hole in the Trump legal strategy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 06, 2020, 03:23:50 pm
I was going to make some idle, throw away, crack about about it being all over barring the “wailing and gnashing of teeth”.

Then I realised I wasn’t 100% sure on the origin of the phrase.

It’s actually “weeping” not wailing, biblical (which is what I thought) New Testament and refers to the lamentations of the unjust when retribution/judgment arrives and (get this) derives from the hypothetical “Q source”!
A Q that somewhat predates the currently in vogue “source”.
Does anyone know if there is a connection, before I start off down another rabbit hole?

Ain’t Lockdown fun...

Oh, and that site Decision Desk? They called it:

(https://i.ibb.co/WcS1LBv/AD9-DBC39-4938-4045-A9-CF-3-FF07-BA7-BAEA.png)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on November 06, 2020, 03:44:03 pm
I’m simultaneously elated but also petrified at what he may do in the next 2 months while he’s still in power. And what his supporters might do in the next few weeks.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Anti on November 06, 2020, 03:46:00 pm
This is interesting and only a minor victory for common sense - ultimately the closeness of this whole affair shows how divided America is and how deeply rooted their problems are. It seems that 50% of Americans are happy to overlook (if not endorse) undemocratic, sexist and dangerously racist behaviour.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 06, 2020, 03:49:54 pm

I really think it's incorrect to call him a fascist. He panders to white supremacy, is certainly a racist, misogynistic, crass, illiterate and a wannabe autocrat, but I think that the most dangerous thing about his attacks on the electoral process are the licence that they give to far more unpleasant and dangerous rulers to ignore election results, and use any means they can get to hold onto power.
I really dislike Trump, but he's no Orban, Erdoghan or Putin. He hasn't actually imprisoned journalists, or assassinated political opponents. He is ultimately a reality TV star with a huge ego.

Thats totally wrong as far as I'm concerned and emblematic of the entire problem. How much more white supremacy, racism, misogyny, autocracy, denial and subversion of the electoral process and democracy do you want to see before you start calling it fascist? You need to see journalists imprisoned and political opponents assassinated before you call him what he is? He is openly racist, and if you watch his speech/ramble from last night in full he relentlessly undermines democracy for 15 minutes. The only votes that count in his view are the ones for him. This sort of dancing around the facts has been a problem the last 4 years. He told us exactly what he was at the start. When people tell us what they are, we should listen.

In addition: what Matt said. You can quibble about what stage of fascism it is, early stage or whatever, but that is where this type of politics leads.

https://twitter.com/JYSexton/status/1324491495903285250

It's not a bad arguments but I think that the dismissal of Trump as a facist too easily avoids engagement with the reasons why millions of people love him, and voted for him. They are certainly not all racists, misguided or stupid. When you look at the last 4 years a lot of his big talk is just that. No action. He's certainly dangerous, but he is not a dictator.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 06, 2020, 04:05:26 pm

It's not a bad arguments but I think that the dismissal of Trump as a facist too easily avoids engagement with the reasons why millions of people love him, and voted for him. They are certainly not all racists, misguided or stupid. When you look at the last 4 years a lot of his big talk is just that. No action. He's certainly dangerous, but he is not a dictator.

You are conflating two completely different arguments. Not everyone who votes for a fascist is a fascist themselves. That is obvious. He has not been able to act like a dictator because of the structures in place that, thank god, prevent him from doing so. Do you really think he wouldn't be a dictator if he could? See Matts post.

With regard to why people voted for him, I have as much clue as anyone else; ie none. Starting from the premise that Trump voters are not stupid is great, but if you do that you have to give them agency and credit, and conclude that they knew what they were voting  for; which as we have previously discussed is a white supremacist, a racist, a misogynist and an autocrat. None of these things are hidden; they've been in plain sight for four years.

Either we conclude that his base is brainwashed, a bit dim, and voting along narrow personal interest lines (low tax, traditional values etc) ignorant of the wider consequences, or we conclude that his base are as smart as most and they are perfectly aware of what they are voting for; namely, a racist demagogue. I conclude the latter at this stage and hold them accountable as I would anyone else.

There has been some good commentary recently in centrist news sources (will post some links later if people are interested) about how whatever the result of an election, its the left that apparently has to do the soul searching. Perhaps this time the Republican Party and the Trump base ought to do some soul searching, seeing as this is on track to be an extremely solid win and a shut out in the popular vote. Republicans haven't won a popular vote since 2004. Its not a close election, its a slow one.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Yossarian on November 06, 2020, 04:11:01 pm

I really think it's incorrect to call him a fascist. He panders to white supremacy, is certainly a racist, misogynistic, crass, illiterate and a wannabe autocrat, but I think that the most dangerous thing about his attacks on the electoral process are the licence that they give to far more unpleasant and dangerous rulers to ignore election results, and use any means they can get to hold onto power.
I really dislike Trump, but he's no Orban, Erdoghan or Putin. He hasn't actually imprisoned journalists, or assassinated political opponents. He is ultimately a reality TV star with a huge ego.

Thats totally wrong as far as I'm concerned and emblematic of the entire problem. How much more white supremacy, racism, misogyny, autocracy, denial and subversion of the electoral process and democracy do you want to see before you start calling it fascist? You need to see journalists imprisoned and political opponents assassinated before you call him what he is? He is openly racist, and if you watch his speech/ramble from last night in full he relentlessly undermines democracy for 15 minutes. The only votes that count in his view are the ones for him. This sort of dancing around the facts has been a problem the last 4 years. He told us exactly what he was at the start. When people tell us what they are, we should listen.

In addition: what Matt said. You can quibble about what stage of fascism it is, early stage or whatever, but that is where this type of politics leads.

https://twitter.com/JYSexton/status/1324491495903285250

It's not a bad arguments but I think that the dismissal of Trump as a facist too easily avoids engagement with the reasons why millions of people love him, and voted for him. They are certainly not all racists, misguided or stupid. When you look at the last 4 years a lot of his big talk is just that. No action. He's certainly dangerous, but he is not a dictator.

It's no action because he has a infinitesimal attention span and absolutely no interest in anything requiring any sort of compound thought process. I'm not sure if anyone has read the Michael Wolff biographies, but the overriding impression is that anything resembling conventional work is entirely anathema to him. The Mexico wall is a classic example - he got people to come and explain how to do it, and apparently he zoned out within minutes. The only thing he cares about is whether or not everyone in the room thinks he's the most important person there.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 06, 2020, 05:31:04 pm
I’m not sure I would agree with no action. Just maybe not the headline grabbing stuff he boasts about.
Withdrawal from nuclear accords, appointments within government and the Supreme Court. And the environment.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/climate/trump-environment-rollbacks-list.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 06, 2020, 06:33:17 pm
Philly is partying!

https://twitter.com/HelenGymAtLarge/status/1324756446022639617
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 06, 2020, 08:20:01 pm
Just a thought. I'm not sure what the situation is with anything illegal he might have done during his election or presidency, but is anything he's doing now illegal? Could he get sent down for obstructing the peaceful transition of power? If his supporters get violent could he be tried for inciting violence?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: 205Chris on November 06, 2020, 08:33:25 pm
Just a thought. I'm not sure what the situation is with anything illegal he might have done during his election or presidency, but is anything he's doing now illegal? Could he get sent down for obstructing the peaceful transition of power? If his supporters get violent could he be tried for inciting violence?

Whatever happens, you wouldn't rule out Trump stepping down at some point and Mike Pence becoming President. Mike then presidential pardons Donald for all his misdemeanours.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 06, 2020, 09:29:06 pm
I've not paid a huge amount of attention to Pence so not sure whether he might be implicated in anything criminal.
Would they be concerned that issuing a pardon is an admission of guilt?
With Trump being political dead wood, Pence might just drop him in hopes of retaining some credibility into the future?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 06, 2020, 09:45:24 pm
With Trump being political dead wood

Hold on, I think you're getting a bit ahead of yourself there! Nearly 70m people have just voted for him in the biggest turn out in decades. I'd say he's far from being dead wood, and you can see that in some of the comments coming out about 2024. There's a strong likelihood that the Republican nominee in 2024 (unless it's Trump himself) will need his backing.

I genuinely can't see it going another way. If the Democrats try to charge him for anything criminal it's likely to only incite those who voted for him, as opposed to convincing them he actually is criminal - unless the evidence is completely incontrovertible. Even then it won't convince many; I think we in the UK completely underestimate just how much his base love him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 06, 2020, 09:57:26 pm
LET ME DREAM!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 06, 2020, 10:36:07 pm
Ha sorry, got to face it, the Republican nominee in 2024 will be either Trump himself, one of his children or someone explicitly endorsed by him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Scouse D on November 06, 2020, 10:54:54 pm
Ha sorry, got to face it, the Republican nominee in 2024 will be either Trump himself, one of his children or someone explicitly endorsed by him.

Or not.

Just because something seems plausible in the heat of the moment doesn't mean it is going to happen. Then again I've never been a fan of armchair punditry.
There are many many possible paths that could be taken in America. Let us just revel in the removal from office of this imbecile.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 06, 2020, 11:02:45 pm

Either we conclude that his base is brainwashed, a bit dim, and voting along narrow personal interest lines (low tax, traditional values etc) ignorant of the wider consequences, or we conclude that his base are as smart as most and they are perfectly aware of what they are voting for; namely, a racist demagogue. I conclude the latter at this stage and hold them accountable as I would anyone else.


... and that is why populists will continue to win. When the liberal left look down their noses at people who regard themselves as ordinary (and they are) they get pissed off very understandably,  and vote with a middle finger. 
People who voted trump did so for a thousand different reasons,  some reasonable,  face it. Its perfectly possible to vote for a politician while  disliking them because you agree with some of their policies,  that does not make you a bad person or culpable for their actions.  It's not just some base of deranged activists, though they certainly exist,  its millions of normal American people. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Scouse D on November 06, 2020, 11:17:02 pm


... and that is why populists will continue to win. 

Or not

Another very definite assertation there and a total dismissal of the notion that, you know, maybe populists wont continue to win.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 06, 2020, 11:53:29 pm

Either we conclude that his base is brainwashed, a bit dim, and voting along narrow personal interest lines (low tax, traditional values etc) ignorant of the wider consequences, or we conclude that his base are as smart as most and they are perfectly aware of what they are voting for; namely, a racist demagogue. I conclude the latter at this stage and hold them accountable as I would anyone else.


... and that is why populists will continue to win. When the liberal left look down their noses at people who regard themselves as ordinary (and they are) they get pissed off very understandably,  and vote with a middle finger. 
People who voted trump did so for a thousand different reasons,  some reasonable,  face it. Its perfectly possible to vote for a politician while  disliking them because you agree with some of their policies,  that does not make you a bad person or culpable for their actions.  It's not just some base of deranged activists, though they certainly exist,  its millions of normal American people.

The populists have literally just lost. They've just lost and somehow it's already about what the moderates, who lest we forget have just won, handily, need to think about.

There is not a single piece out there loftily opining that the populist right need to think about whether they are being too racist/sexist /fascist to ever win the popular vote again. No doubt you will read Gerard Baker in The Times tomorrow, where for the third day running he will bitterly argue that actually Trump won the argument. When Corbyn made that laughable claim last year no doubt you rightly laughed him out of town.

This isn't meant to be aimed at you specifically but it is increasingly winding me up how this is somehow turning into a post mortem for the Democrats when they have successfully prised an autocratic leader from the white House. No mean feat.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on November 07, 2020, 06:56:17 am
All very good points Jim. I think Biden has recognised the threat of riling up Trump’s base and also the more moderate Trump supporters, and is pitching his speeches accordingly.

You can imagine the sort of things Trump would have been saying at this point to rub a victory into the Democrats faces if it had gone the other way.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 07, 2020, 08:32:51 am


... and that is why populists will continue to win. 

Or not

Another very definite assertation there and a total dismissal of the notion that, you know, maybe populists wont continue to win.

I wish I had your optimism. I want him to fuck off and leave us all in peace, but that's just not going to happen.

That said, the way he's going could reduce his influence if he ends up destroying his credibility. It's interesting that all the Rupert Murdoch owned press are now starting to imply that he needs to do the decent thing and concede. Best case scenario now is that Biden wins all of Arizona, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Georgia, whilst Trump explodes in a whirlwind of lies and fabrications, thus undermining his potential future authority.

Also, love this

Quote
Newt Gingrich, the former Republican Speaker, said: "I'm the angriest I have been in six decades. You have a group of corrupt people who have contempt for the American people trying to steal the presidency."[/qoute]

Yeah, they're called the Trumps!

populists have literally just lost. They've just lost and somehow it's already about what the moderates, who lest we forget have just won, handily, need to think about.

There is not a single piece out there loftily opining that the populist right need to think about whether they are being too racist/sexist /fascist to ever win the popular vote again.


I sort of agree Jim, the problem though is a) how completely the left underestimated the level of Trump's support, and b) their complete inability to understand why those people vote for him (and in fact, how many of their policies actually push people towards the right). Yes they've won this time, but by a far tighter margin than expected and, again, 70m people voted for Trump in spite of everything that's happened. If that doesn't deserve some introspection then I don't know what would.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on November 07, 2020, 08:42:24 am
I think Jim’s point is that Trump’s rhetoric has done the exact same thing in reverse and that Republicans/populists should now be doing some introspection.

It can’t be overstated how rare it is for the incumbent not to win a second term (I think 3? presidents in the history of the US).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: sdm on November 07, 2020, 09:22:15 am
That said, the way he's going could reduce his influence if he ends up destroying his credibility.
He could only destroy his credibility in the eyes of someone who has been living under a rock for at least the past 4 years.

Quote
It's interesting that all the Rupert Murdoch owned press are now starting to imply that he needs to do the decent thing and concede.
He's no longer useful to Murdoch so it's time to stick the knife in and distance themselves.

The way the right wing press suddenly switched tone on him as soon as it became clear he was going to lose shows how self serving they have been. Suddenly it isn't ok any more to broadcast his lies unchallenged.

I don't know what will happen next. Maybe the republicans will have had enough of flirting with fascism and will return to a more moderate candidate. Or maybe he'll be replaced by a Trump 2.0 with similar ideas, goals and (lack of) morals to Trump but with more intelligence and competency.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: danm on November 07, 2020, 10:05:16 am
Sorry to piss on everyone's chips, but Trump has fulfilled his purpose for the right - he's successfully helped polarised the US to a degree not seen since the civil war, whilst packing the legislature at every level with right wing leaning judges. If the demographics aren't looking like they are moving in your favour, and for the GOP they weren't, this is a great strategy really. Not a good one for democracy though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Scouse D on November 07, 2020, 10:11:10 am
I get what you're saying Dan but he is no longer the president and that is a whole lot better than the Republicans  having trump in power for four more years.

I think we all get that trump has irreversibly changed the political landscape but I cant see how this is anything other than a seismic win the Democrats and also for the world. Yes, America is a bit fucked, but not as fucked as it would've been.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 07, 2020, 11:41:52 am
I think Jim’s point is that Trump’s rhetoric has done the exact same thing in reverse and that Republicans/populists should now be doing some introspection.

It can’t be overstated how rare it is for the incumbent not to win a second term (I think 3? presidents in the history of the US).

Precisely. This thread is useful in that regard. https://twitter.com/seth_j_hill/status/1324733142091984902?s=19

I accept the margin is tighter than some polls expected but not as much as people perceive. When these votes are counted he will have equalled Trumps electoral college win in 2016,which was universally described as a big win. If that was true then, then it is true now.

Regarding why people are voting for Trump, clearly there are lessons to learn here, but my point is more why this is top of the news agenda and not Republicans learning from some moderation, which would make a nice change. Also, in a two horse race its to be expected that there will be a relatively even distribution of votes so I'm not convinced there is a huge amount to learn from the fact that over 40% of people in the US voted republican. This is historic and unlikely to change in the short term. The relevant issue as I see it is the drift of the republican party from right wing neoliberalism in the 1980s all the way to neo fascism right now. That it what needs thinking about and hopefully addressing (god knows how!).

I tend to agree with Scouse D, things are still shit in America but this can only be a win. Hopefully the Republicans will come to their senses in the next 4 years but in the absence of that we must continue to call out extremism where we see it and not accept the slide of the left to accepting the barbarism that the republican party currently represent.

I appreciate these are provocative words to use but the signs of the slide of the American right have been there for a long time and if the Democrats and the wider liberal left don't push back progressivism is fucked.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Somebody's Fool on November 07, 2020, 12:09:24 pm
But large swathes of USA, are not going to be jumping for joy like British liberals are. They know from bitter experience what Biden’s politics are. He will forget about them and not improve their material circumstances or job prospects. 

While Trump is clearly a liar and a charlatan, at least he could be bothered to speak to these people and give them some hope that things might change. Even if he had no inclination of making good on his promises.

Populism tends to flourish when representative democracy is failing. And while both parties prop up neoliberalism while it lurches from one crisis to another, I can’t see the appetite for populism diminishing to any significant degree.

I’m still of the opinion that ultimately people will vote in economic self interest. Not for who has the best manners.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: 205Chris on November 07, 2020, 12:12:29 pm
http://youtu.be/2gr0B16rFzI
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: sdm on November 07, 2020, 02:08:17 pm


Precisely. This thread is useful in that regard. https://twitter.com/seth_j_hill/status/1324733142091984902?s=19
The gist of the thread seems to be that incumbents never lose. Except during crises such as severe recessions or wars.

It then downplays the fact that we are in the middle of the most severe health and economic crisis in living memory and that the health crisis has been handled worse in America than almost every country in the world.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Scouse D on November 07, 2020, 02:11:13 pm
, at least he could be bothered to speak to these people and give them some hope that things might change. Even if he had no inclination of making good on his promises.


Your wording suggests that he had anything but malevolence in his intentions. Speaking to the people should not be conflated with speaking for the people. This was a concerted effort to take down western democracy using right wing ideologies with the overt backing of Putin, Farage et al, Bolsanaro and the oh so fucked up Steve Bannon.
(I get that liberalism aint the panacea, but for me the priority is the survival of the human race on this planet and that requires a global approach particularly towards climate change - if extreme political views can just fucking hang fire for a couple of decades that would be tip top for me)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Somebody's Fool on November 07, 2020, 03:27:26 pm
Don’t get me wrong, I’m no Trump apologist and couldn’t agree more re climate.

I guess the point I was trying to make is that if the Republicans thought the ground was fertile enough to use populism as an electoral strategy post Obama/Biden, then it’s not just the Republicans who should be examining their politics in order to stop it happening again.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 07, 2020, 04:37:33 pm
Biden has won PA. Joe Biden is the next President of the USA.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on November 07, 2020, 04:41:15 pm
And Trump will hear the news while he’s on the golf course...

Slice.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 07, 2020, 04:44:36 pm
Trump’s next press conference was scheduled at 11.30 am in Philadelphia. Handily, that’s right now.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 07, 2020, 06:04:49 pm
But large swathes of USA, are not going to be jumping for joy like British liberals are. They know from bitter experience what Biden’s politics are. He will forget about them and not improve their material circumstances or job prospects. 

While Trump is clearly a liar and a charlatan, at least he could be bothered to speak to these people and give them some hope that things might change. Even if he had no inclination of making good on his promises.

Populism tends to flourish when representative democracy is failing. And while both parties prop up neoliberalism while it lurches from one crisis to another, I can’t see the appetite for populism diminishing to any significant degree.

I’m still of the opinion that ultimately people will vote in economic self interest. Not for who has the best manners.

That's all considerably understating Trump's risks and overstating Biden's problems.  On pandemic response, on climate change and environmental issues, on US healthcare, in working with other western democracies and essential international organisations (especially WHO), on helping the working american rather than bullshitting about doing so, in reducing dangerous political nepotism,  this election will make a massive difference.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 08, 2020, 12:16:12 am
Trump put out a tweet earlier saying "Big press conference at the Four Seasons, Philadelphia - 11.30am".

Then one of his staff called the Four Seasons hotel and they didn't want him anywhere near them. So, rather than change the venue to another hotel or conference centre (and thus admit to a minor clerical error), they googled Four Seasons Philadelphia and held the press conference in the parking lot of...

Four Seasons Total Landscaping, Philadelphia. A small company on a back street in the outskirts of Philly opposite a crematorium and two doors down from the Fantasy Island pr0n shop, which offers adult DVDs, lotions and novelty gifts.

I'm reeling from this. Can you imagine being the owner and picking up the phone to that?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 08, 2020, 08:16:35 am
I actually know that corner of the city because there's US Citizen and Immigration Services centre there that I've had to visit several times. No insult to the residents, but it's a particularly obscure and godforsaken place, miles from the city centre. Also, for some reason, brick and mortar pr0n shops are still an actual thing in the US.

Incidentally, Fours Seasons Landscaping is minority and female owned. I'm not convinced they explicitly signed on for this.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 08, 2020, 09:27:11 am
The Trump voter fraud reporting hotline might be my favourite thing about all this. Of course, Democrats are doing the decent thing:

https://twitter.com/herosnvrdie69/status/1324599463378329601?s=19
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 08, 2020, 10:27:10 am
Four seasons of comedy gold in a day

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/08/the-other-four-seasons-trump-team-holds-press-conference-at-suburban-garden-centre
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on November 08, 2020, 10:51:09 am
The truly amazing thing is that they decided it was better to go ahead rather than try and come up with some excuse.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on November 08, 2020, 01:28:30 pm
The Trump voter fraud reporting hotline might be my favourite thing about all this. Of course, Democrats are doing the decent thing:

https://twitter.com/herosnvrdie69/status/1324599463378329601?s=19

The email address she gives is genius  ;D
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 08, 2020, 03:33:47 pm
But large swathes of USA, are not going to be jumping for joy like British liberals are. They know from bitter experience what Biden’s politics are. ...

I’m still of the opinion that ultimately people will vote in economic self interest. Not for who has the best manners.

I largely agree with this. Younger people tend to be more idealistic, but pretty much everyone becomes pragmatic to some extent as they get older. I'd give Biden a chance, but the 'right' way for politics to go certainly isn't to lurch to the left in reaction to populism. If that happens, whether to the Democrats or the British Labour party, they'll lose.
By and large, people will vote for competence over lofty ideals.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 08, 2020, 03:43:24 pm
[ No doubt you will read Gerard Baker in The Times tomorrow, where for the third day running he will bitterly argue that actually Trump won the argument. When Corbyn made that laughable claim last year no doubt you rightly laughed him out of town.

This isn't meant to be aimed at you specifically but it is increasingly winding me up how this is somehow turning into a post mortem for the Democrats when they have successfully prised an autocratic leader from the white House. No mean feat.

Well, I agree with your opinion on Baker, he clearly has figured out that he can get paid by writing the same article 3 times a week, and it isn't even very good. In fact I think a majority of the times columnists are a bit crap.
You're right about Corbyn as well, but I think that the democrats do need to have a serious think if they're to stay in office for more than 4 years. They defeated a populist who alienated many voters by saying lots of incredibly stupid things. A more astute, controlled and calculated populist (like Ivanka?) might not make such errors, and do a lot better. I'm just saying that they need to be a lot more than just 'not Trump' next time.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on November 08, 2020, 06:13:43 pm
But large swathes of USA, are not going to be jumping for joy like British liberals are. They know from bitter experience what Biden’s politics are. ...

I’m still of the opinion that ultimately people will vote in economic self interest. Not for who has the best manners.
I disagree.  They have largely been conned into believing that republican and Trumps tax and economic plans are to their benefit.  So they are voting in what they have been conned into believing is in their self interest.  Nuanced difference, but still very different.  For example, Trump's tax cuts were supposed to benefit small business.  As a small business owner, they increased my taxes by about 5%.  When you look at the numbers, you see this over and over.  Those making over 400K disproportionately benefited from his tax cuts. 

One problem we have at the moment is that neither side represents small business or lower/middle class workers.  They both say they do, but their actions tell otherwise.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Somebody's Fool on November 08, 2020, 06:51:04 pm
Yes, I didn’t mean it objectively.

Just what the voters themselves will believe to be economic self interest based on information and experience they have.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on November 08, 2020, 07:44:29 pm
4 years ago, I remember my main feeling after hearing that he had won, was one of dismay that I'd have to spend the next 4 years hearing from him and about him. My big hope now is that the media will not give him a platform for all the shit he's bound to keep on spouting, and just let him fade into obscurity. I realise this is a big ask.

In the name of doing our bit to make that happen, any chance this thread title can be changed to something like "US politics", so that it doesn't focus around him, without removing the interesting conversation about the general state of things over there.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 08, 2020, 07:48:22 pm
I found this an interesting read. When understanding Trump's appeal to his voters it's useful to characterise him not only as a populist but as a nationalist.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/his-wild-swing-missed-but-donald-trump-has-beaten-america-into-his-image-32s7gpcmz?shareToken=9a4f7b8d11a4a167aeb0d4d6cd37c47e


I'm not sure I really followed some of the discussion above. Although I'm delighted to see Trump beaten it does feel like a very fragile victory. The article linked above points out that Trump did differently to most politicians in that once he took power he did nothing to build an alliance of voters around him, instead choosing to insult and antagonise anybody who didn't adore him. Hence a huge turnout to vote against him. If Biden's presidency is going to be lacklustre and a different, more politically astute nationalist is on the ballot next time we could easily see Biden beaten. Trump's supporters currently feel as we did the morning after the Brexit vote. They'll still be hurting in 4 years time.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Wood FT on November 08, 2020, 08:38:50 pm
4 years ago, I remember my main feeling after hearing that he had won, was one of dismay that I'd have to spend the next 4 years hearing from him and about him. My big hope now is that the media will not give him a platform for all the shit he's bound to keep on spouting, and just let him fade into obscurity. I realise this is a big ask.

In the name of doing our bit to make that happen, any chance this thread title can be changed to something like "US politics", so that it doesn't focus around him, without removing the interesting conversation about the general state of things over there.

+1

No having to hear about the shower that is the Trump family is the light at the end of the tunnel for me. Fat chance like.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on November 08, 2020, 09:02:09 pm
+2

I was thinking of starting a "Biden" thread, but makes a lot more sense to just have a general US politics one.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 08, 2020, 10:15:50 pm
Could just change the thread title to ‘Cunt’. Keeps it relevant.
So very pleased he’s beaten, plus the bonus that he’s making himself look more embarrassing and pathetic with each day he continues his whining.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 09, 2020, 10:37:06 am
Seems apt, strike him from the record. One thread for US Politics, alone for UK politics.

I'm wondering at what point he will throw in the towel? I have visions of him losing the plot completely and them having to build a model of the Oval office in one of his hotels so he can happily sit there for the rest of his days, furiously tweeting into a disconnected mobile and writing out increasingly deranged executive orders in crayon on pieces of kitchen roll, which one of his children dutifully collects once a week when they have to visit him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 09, 2020, 10:54:38 am
I found this an interesting read. When understanding Trump's appeal to his voters it's useful to characterise him not only as a populist but as a nationalist.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/his-wild-swing-missed-but-donald-trump-has-beaten-america-into-his-image-32s7gpcmz?shareToken=9a4f7b8d11a4a167aeb0d4d6cd37c47e


I'm not sure I really followed some of the discussion above. Although I'm delighted to see Trump beaten it does feel like a very fragile victory. The article linked above points out that Trump did differently to most politicians in that once he took power he did nothing to build an alliance of voters around him, instead choosing to insult and antagonise anybody who didn't adore him. Hence a huge turnout to vote against him. If Biden's presidency is going to be lacklustre and a different, more politically astute nationalist is on the ballot next time we could easily see Biden beaten. Trump's supporters currently feel as we did the morning after the Brexit vote. They'll still be hurting in 4 years time.

I'm not convinced about those arguments. I think Trump has changed Republican politics but he also rode a change that was happening anyway with the Tea Party and Neo Cons. I think he was a well known personality who effectively understood the shift to people accessing political opinion more from social media than TV news and that populism works with the less well educated who are struggling.

However, many people who voted for him will soon realise Biden is not bringing in socialism or stealing their rights (ie is not a genuine bogeyman for many ordinary conservative americans) and hopefully will bring them tangible benefits larger than a $200 tax cut. Trump's duped white poor massively outnumber his gun toting hick fans but I suspect the next popularist might struggle to get them to the polling station...I can't think of anyone with his public prominence who could do what he did (do not underestimate the success of Trump in increasing in numbers voting for him this time). US demographics are shifting to a better educated more diverse population so favour the Democrats. Covid is still to play out in more horror until January, further damaging Republican denialism of covid risk.  Obama shifted democrat campaigning to more smaller donations and a more local focus and the logical continuation of that in Georgia has already made a major change there and might even win the Democrats the Senate in January (odds are against this but are still significant) in which case real change can happen.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on November 09, 2020, 11:47:13 am
Four seasons of comedy gold in a day

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/08/the-other-four-seasons-trump-team-holds-press-conference-at-suburban-garden-centre

Check it out on google earth https://www.google.com/maps/place/Four+Seasons+Total+Landscaping/@40.0263236,-75.0304894,66m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89c6b44c3cd2507b:0xf7a6fd9e9365a3be!8m2!3d40.0263236!4d-75.0302158
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 09, 2020, 11:59:23 am
Very unhelpful as its currently closed ;)

Being serious again for a moment.... more on Georgia as I think it is important.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/09/stacey-abrams-georgia-senate-run-off-election
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 09, 2020, 01:16:18 pm
Agree with the call to rename the thread US Politics.

As he usually does, Gary Younge does a great job in this podcast of synthesising lots of points into a great argument. I never listen to him or read one of his pieces without learning something. Well worth a listen.

https://www.newstatesman.com/us-election-2020/2020/11/world-review-podcast-america-goes-joe
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on November 09, 2020, 06:38:23 pm
Could just change the thread title to ‘Cunt’. Keeps it relevant.
So very pleased he’s beaten, plus the bonus that he’s making himself look more embarrassing and pathetic with each day he continues his whining.

Yes, he is.
In the well chosen words of the mayor of Philadelphia, he needs to put his big boy pants on.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on November 09, 2020, 06:45:00 pm
It will be interesting to see how the party politics plays out.  I get the impression that most people are kinda sick of both parties.  Hence trump's popularity. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 09, 2020, 07:10:07 pm
I was wondering about all the “legal” challenges and his “legal fund”.

His campaign is massively in debt, isn’t it?
However his legal fund is just for his run of the mill supporters to chuck their stimulus cheques and hard earned wages into; not “real” sponsors in a position to demand quid-pro-quo. So, if most of his ~70M voters chucked a $10 at him, he’ll soon clear his campaign debt.

Bets on “legal challenges” evaporating once campaign debt is covered?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on November 09, 2020, 09:17:27 pm
I get the impression that most people are kinda sick of both parties.  Hence trump's popularity.

See also "Brexit".

I was a bit shocked though, to see record turnout only being 66.9%? Is that of the voting population, or of registered voters?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: James Malloch on November 10, 2020, 09:35:30 am
I was wondering about all the “legal” challenges and his “legal fund”.

His campaign is massively in debt, isn’t it?
However his legal fund is just for his run of the mill supporters to chuck their stimulus cheques and hard earned wages into; not “real” sponsors in a position to demand quid-pro-quo. So, if most of his ~70M voters chucked a $10 at him, he’ll soon clear his campaign debt.

Bets on “legal challenges” evaporating once campaign debt is covered?

I read somewhere that the small print says that up to 50% of any donation could be used to pay off campaign debt. I can very much imagine it stopping once that’s gone...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 10, 2020, 10:07:49 am
Except the extra drama plays into better book, TV and speaking deals.

I just spotted the perfect illustration of why stop the count tactic was so crazy given the system. Alaska right now has only reported 58% of the registered count. California only 90%.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on November 10, 2020, 10:47:50 am
So, here's the 'evidence' that the vote count was fraudulent..

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/it-defies-logic-scientist-finds-telltale-signs-election-fraud-after-analyzing-mail-ballot
 ::)

.. seems to boil down to 'anonymous data scientist thinks that Republican and Democrat voters should be equally represented in mail-in ballots, the fact they weren't proves it was rigged'..

Seems to be the definition of begging the question and circular reasoning:
The premise: 'Republicans didn't win, therefore it must be rigged'
assumes the desired truth: 'Republicans will win, if they lose it must be rigged'.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 12, 2020, 11:05:57 pm
Quite.

All these circular arguments are also an attempt to influence public perception and what people will accept. So the question remains. He couldn’t, could he...?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 20, 2020, 02:21:31 pm
Nevermind Trump, he is a known loon, this is the official Republican party output on the election. Incredibly scary stuff:

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1329771592440836104?s=20
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on November 20, 2020, 03:03:54 pm
Nevermind Trump, he is a known loon, this is the official Republican party output on the election. Incredibly scary stuff:

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1329771592440836104?s=20

Back to an earlier thought. At what point is one of these people going to do something criminal? I presume there must be laws against obstructing lawful elections or the peaceful transition of power? At what point does the line get crossed?

I'm not expecting anybody hear to know unless it happens to be a well known area of the law, but if anybody reads anything about it then please do link it here.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on November 20, 2020, 03:22:39 pm
Opinion, however, he makes a point about the vulnerability of the Electors and the Electoral College:
 https://eand.co/trump-cant-be-president-so-he-s-burning-down-american-democracy-ea7dbcb32f86 (https://eand.co/trump-cant-be-president-so-he-s-burning-down-american-democracy-ea7dbcb32f86)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on November 26, 2020, 02:55:21 am
"It is my Great Honor to announce that General Michael T. Flynn has been granted a Full Pardon. Congratulations to @GenFlynn and his wonderful family, I know you will now have a truly fantastic Thanksgiving!"

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 25, 2020

.. something about that set of initials ..

Donald Trump has pardoned his former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI during an investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

David J Thomas.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 29, 2020, 06:50:42 pm
A bit of end of the week entertainment. Trump's election fraud investigation group gets sued by a doner for shit performance

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/28/trump-donor-election-fraud-sues-money-back
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dunnyg on November 29, 2020, 08:17:26 pm
Sounds like they are in deep shwarma
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on November 30, 2020, 08:31:24 am
Some exit poll demographics

https://www.brookings.edu/research/2020-exit-polls-show-a-scrambling-of-democrats-and-republicans-traditional-bases/

For those who think Trump supporters are mostly a bit dim, he retained a (reduced) majority in white male college graduates.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on December 07, 2020, 12:53:23 pm
The election count is amazingly still unfinished but Biden's margin in the popular vote is increasing...  more than 7 million now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election

The two Senate seat run-offs in Georgia are almost as surreal as the main contest. If the Democrats win both they will control the Senate and can make real change.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/07/georgia-runoff-debate-dominated-by-trumps-baseless-claims-of-election

The Republicans are favourite on betting odds but the gap is closing.

https://bookies.com/news/senate-races-odds-tracker

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 18, 2020, 04:22:11 pm
Ooph...

Taking bets on a Coup.

I wonder if he might actually order Biden’s arrest?

 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/biden-trump-transition-pentagon-b1776204.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3a-kL9sMkwBJ5kJLME27SDIesA5vTahbzTXwEw6Z-egwKOUuwspaaFSRE#Echobox=1608303891 (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/biden-trump-transition-pentagon-b1776204.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3a-kL9sMkwBJ5kJLME27SDIesA5vTahbzTXwEw6Z-egwKOUuwspaaFSRE#Echobox=1608303891)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on December 18, 2020, 06:04:33 pm
The following short essays are sort of peripheral to Trump, or maybe Trump is just the high end political expression of the things these essays talk about. Perhaps we should just have an "Aggghh, America!" thread instead...

The importance of bro-culture:

https://patrickwyman.substack.com/p/bro-culture-fitness-chivalry-and

The American gentry:

https://patrickwyman.substack.com/p/american-gentry


One billion Americans (this is just a book review):
https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/book-review-one-billion-americans




Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 18, 2020, 07:12:02 pm
Cheers. Not convinced by his rather reductive analysis of chivalry, but the rest of the bro culture thing was worth a read.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: moose on December 18, 2020, 08:19:36 pm
The bro culture piece reminds me of one  of the more enjoyable books I've recently read, Muscle Confessions of an Unlikely Body Builder by Samuel Fussell. 

An Ivy leaguer (his father is supposedly rather eminent) develops a terror of muggers and after seeing a photo of Arnie decides that being large would be a good deterrent.  He then abruptly gives up academia and spends his inheritance to become a full-time bodybuilder.  It's fairly old (1991) but the characters and scenes on the gyms he goes to are very "bro" - cartoonish but disturbingly intense.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/510493.Muscle (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/510493.Muscle)

http://brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/493/Muscle%3A%20Conf.htm (http://brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/493/Muscle%3A%20Conf.htm)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 18, 2020, 10:02:01 pm
I recognise myself in many aspects of “Bro culture”.
I recognise many of my friends, in particular amongst the “formers” in that group.
But, very few of them are politically right leaning. A few, for sure, and even a couple that now live on “restricted” on FB, are only still “friends” out of a (somewhat hard to explain) loyalty (I think twice about joining the annual(ish) reunion type stuff, if I know they’ll be attending).

I’d have to put this forum onto that spectrum too...

Certainly ticks a few of the boxes.

Perhaps it’s more that the “Bro Culture” he describes is a rather more extreme thing, than he actually suggests and a little more niche, too.

I recognise the Total fucking dickhead more extreme version, certainly from my military days, but as an oddity and outlier, rather than the norm.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 19, 2020, 06:06:32 am
The American Gentry piece is absolutely spot on, at least for contemporary America (I find the historical comparisons interesting but some of them are probably necessary a little stretched). I encountered this class up close and was kind of fascinated and appalled. I think the author's right that they've been sociologically overlooked.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on December 19, 2020, 09:09:49 am
I recognise myself in many aspects of “Bro culture”.
I recognise many of my friends, in particular amongst the “formers” in that group.
But, very few of them are politically right leaning.

Yeah I ticked pretty much every box on the bro culture list, which was a bit weird before I realised that it's really much more than being pigeon holed by a handful of aspects of your overall identity.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on December 19, 2020, 02:55:18 pm

Yeah I ticked pretty much every box on the bro culture list, which was a bit weird before I realised that it's really much more than being pigeon holed by a handful of aspects of your overall identity.

I’m surprised that I’ve managed to absorb so many different bits of bro culture and somehow avoided becoming a right wing gun nut!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on December 19, 2020, 03:54:24 pm
I encountered this class up close and was kind of fascinated and appalled.

I would enjoy reading more about this, if you can be bothered.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Yossarian on December 19, 2020, 04:01:26 pm
The bro culture piece reminds me of one  of the more enjoyable books I've recently read, Muscle Confessions of an Unlikely Body Builder by Samuel Fussell. 

An Ivy leaguer (his father is supposedly rather eminent) develops a terror of muggers and after seeing a photo of Arnie decides that being large would be a good deterrent.  He then abruptly gives up academia and spends his inheritance to become a full-time bodybuilder.  It's fairly old (1991) but the characters and scenes on the gyms he goes to are very "bro" - cartoonish but disturbingly intense.


I remember this being one of Houdini’s recommended reads. I thought it was brilliant. Quite a bizarre rabbit hole to get sucked down...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 19, 2020, 07:51:40 pm
I encountered this class up close and was kind of fascinated and appalled.

I would enjoy reading more about this, if you can be bothered.

Sure, I'll try and write something tomorrow.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 22, 2020, 04:52:10 pm
I encountered this class up close and was kind of fascinated and appalled.

I would enjoy reading more about this, if you can be bothered.

Sure, I'll try and write something tomorrow.

Hmm, I'd forgotten about this.

In the meantime, here's a great piece of long form journalism on the US in the age of Corona (not directly Trump related, but very worthwhile):

https://features.propublica.org/waterloo-meatpacking/as-covid-19-ravaged-this-iowa-city-officials-discovered-meatpacking-executives-were-the-ones-in-charge/?fbclid=IwAR1smWM7Qet8fJhoVxRzToojzoxx7sK3WWHM1k-O2KOqbZV0Wb8MlDkUABo
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on December 22, 2020, 05:10:51 pm
Interesting read.

This one happened less than 5 miles from me

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-55078782

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 22, 2020, 05:19:50 pm
I encountered this class up close and was kind of fascinated and appalled.

I would enjoy reading more about this, if you can be bothered.

Sure, I'll try and write something tomorrow.

Hmm, I'd forgotten about this.

In the meantime, here's a great piece of long form journalism on the US in the age of Corona (not directly Trump related, but very worthwhile):

https://features.propublica.org/waterloo-meatpacking/as-covid-19-ravaged-this-iowa-city-officials-discovered-meatpacking-executives-were-the-ones-in-charge/?fbclid=IwAR1smWM7Qet8fJhoVxRzToojzoxx7sK3WWHM1k-O2KOqbZV0Wb8MlDkUABo

Certainly an interesting read. Some nice selective journalism on that site too.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 22, 2020, 05:24:18 pm

Some nice selective journalism on that site too.

Interesting. Specifically what, and why?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 22, 2020, 05:25:18 pm
Unbalanced. For example I could find no mention of the Biden corruption scandal

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HSGAC_Finance_Report_FINAL.pdf
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 22, 2020, 05:30:38 pm
Propublica does not claim to be a neutral news source. I'm sure you have the ability to parse whatever biases the article contains.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 22, 2020, 05:58:24 pm
Award winning independent journalism financed by Golden West Bank etc. I’d write off the whole site. That article really went for the jugular with the emotional lead in to the main text.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 22, 2020, 06:39:37 pm
And again...

Either, somebody is incapable of learning, or reading past posts.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: cheque on December 22, 2020, 06:41:21 pm
Or simply the latest Dan Cheetham troll account.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on December 22, 2020, 06:42:07 pm
Or simply the latest Dan Cheetham troll account.

That would be “ incapable of learning”.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on December 22, 2020, 06:57:08 pm
I’d write off the whole site.

That's your prerogative, of course.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: A.Greenhorne on December 22, 2020, 06:58:17 pm
Did I miss a past post? Just responding to the article and site. Nowt else
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 06:13:19 am
Woke in the early hours, inevitably triggered by my brain wondering what is happening in Georgia. Increasingly - and incredibly - it looks like the Democrats are going to win both of GA's senate seats. It's hard to overestimate how historic these victories will be, and how important in the present moment. No matter how insane the last four years have got, the last few days, and the next few, have reached a new intensity, with the open sedition of Trump and much of the GOP in calling for rejection of today's certification process, the fracturing of McConnell's iron rule over the party, and then the release of Trump's shocking phone call on Sunday, making Watergate look like small change. Today will be very ugly, in and outside Congress. The GOP will indulge in huge depths of cynicism and corruption on the floor, while Trump's mob will cause god knows what mayhem on the streets (there has already been violence between police and "Proud" Boys in DC overnight). Biden will be President, however, in two weeks time.

None of this is anywhere near over though. Trump and the cult will become completely dug in. The GOP and many of their voters have reached a point where they literally don't believe in the possibility of any legitimate Democrat victory. As one small indicator Republicans in the PA State Senate flat out refused to swear in a legitimate, certified Democratic Senator-elect. God knows what the next few years will bring.

But for now, I will gladly take two wins in Georgia (should they both come to pass) and Trump's certain humiliation in Congress later this afternoon.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 06, 2021, 06:51:00 am
Sorry to disappoint you Andy..

"They're shredding votes, I tell ya. It's happening.. It's so illegal.."  :lol:

Very well worth a listen:

https://news.sky.com/story/extraordinary-audio-recording-reveals-worrying-insight-into-trumps-state-of-mind-12178758
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 06, 2021, 07:58:07 am
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-scotland-55553493

This amused me. We don't want him here, avoiding the inauguration!

Surely if he does use military aircraft to get here, he can't use it afterwards to get home? Ex-presidents should get a regular flight.

The telephone call is nothing less than horrifying. He's got to go down for it? Is he at the nothing to lose stage??
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 06, 2021, 09:00:13 am
Come on Georgia you can do it, be a great start for Biden.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 09:27:48 am
Come on Georgia you can do it, be a great start for Biden.

Ossoff now crept ahead in the other race....

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/05/georgia-senate-runoff-elections-live-results
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 09:47:59 am
Ossoff at 16,000 now - Twitter has been very confident he will win for some hours. He just needs to get to +0.5% to avoid compulsory recount: he's currently at 0.4%. This must be completely frying Trump's brains.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 06, 2021, 09:51:27 am
Is Trump going to fly in to resolve this?

Would the Devil rode down to Georgia be too appropriate?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 09:56:17 am
Ossoff at 16,000 now - Twitter has been very confident he will win for some hours. He just needs to get to +0.5% to avoid compulsory recount: he's currently at 0.4%. This must be completely frying Trump's brains.

I wonder at what point the GOP will pivot on Trump? I know he's thoroughly embedded at the moment - but if this carries on it will surely happen at some point?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 09:57:01 am
Is Trump going to fly in to resolve this?

He's going to be rallying his stormtroopers in DC, starting at 11am.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 10:01:50 am
Good question Tom. Hawley and Cruz, who both have clear personal ambitions for 2024, have clearly bet on the party remaining Trumpian in vowing to oppose certification today. Tom Cotton, another 2024 contender, who is also ultra conservative has previously been uber loyal, has publicly said he will not oppose today and is clearly betting that Trump's influence will fade quickly. So, the jury is out.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 10:06:54 am
Good question Tom. Hawley and Cruz, who both have clear personal ambitions for 2024, have clearly bet on the party remaining Trumpian in vowing to oppose certification today. Tom Cotton, another 2024 contender, who is also ultra conservative has previously been uber loyal, has publicly said he will not oppose today and is clearly betting that Trump's influence will fade quickly. So, the jury is out.

Yes - especially if both georgia seats go Dem, then that sends the message that Trumps tactics are not going down well with many GOP supporters. Many will have a tin ear I suspect..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 06, 2021, 10:10:58 am
Sorry to disappoint you Andy..

"They're shredding votes, I tell ya. It's happening.. It's so illegal.."  :lol:

Very well worth a listen:

https://news.sky.com/story/extraordinary-audio-recording-reveals-worrying-insight-into-trumps-state-of-mind-12178758
Just anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance to go then.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 10:14:09 am
Good question Tom. Hawley and Cruz, who both have clear personal ambitions for 2024, have clearly bet on the party remaining Trumpian in vowing to oppose certification today. Tom Cotton, another 2024 contender, who is also ultra conservative has previously been uber loyal, has publicly said he will not oppose today and is clearly betting that Trump's influence will fade quickly. So, the jury is out.

My guess would be, Hawley and Cruz cast around to see how much party backing they might get for their own ambitions; realised they were screwed and have leapt on the Trump train again as a last ditch action. I actually think the whole “objection” act is a desperate “Hail Mary” by Trump’s “team” as their last, remote, hope of retaining any power post Trump. I’d put money on all those who object, losing out at the first Primary that comes their way and Trump loyalists and Q nut jobs, being weeded out over the next four years. The establishment GOP, ultimately tamed and partially neutered the Tea Party, but I think they underestimated the Trump threat in 2016. Something they will be working on correcting.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: IanP on January 06, 2021, 10:38:54 am
Good question Tom. Hawley and Cruz, who both have clear personal ambitions for 2024, have clearly bet on the party remaining Trumpian in vowing to oppose certification today. Tom Cotton, another 2024 contender, who is also ultra conservative has previously been uber loyal, has publicly said he will not oppose today and is clearly betting that Trump's influence will fade quickly. So, the jury is out.

My guess would be, Hawley and Cruz cast around to see how much party backing they might get for their own ambitions; realised they were screwed and have leapt on the Trump train again as a last ditch action. I actually think the whole “objection” act is a desperate “Hail Mary” by Trump’s “team” as their last, remote, hope of retaining any power post Trump. I’d put money on all those who object, losing out at the first Primary that comes their way and Trump loyalists and Q nut jobs, being weeded out over the next four years. The establishment GOP, ultimately tamed and partially neutered the Tea Party, but I think they underestimated the Trump threat in 2016. Something they will be working on correcting.

Have a to feel this might be a bit too much to hope for but you never know. 

Got to says the slow unravelling of it all into a complete disaster for Trump is a real pleasure in a period when are short of good news.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Duma on January 06, 2021, 10:57:05 am
Think the loss of these run offs for the Rep lies squarely with Trump undermining their voters faith in the process, and so suppressing republican turnout. So hopefully should result in further quashing of Trumps personal influence. That said Trumpism (populist, racist, etc) is here to stay in the Rep party IMO, it's basically the only way they have to power.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 11:46:03 am
Think the loss of these run offs for the Rep lies squarely with Trump undermining their voters faith in the process, and so suppressing republican turnout.

Agreed, but this doesn't necessarily mean Trump's appeal and power are waning. The real lesson from today is that Democrat's won through massive, sustained efforts on the ground, over many years, led by Stacey Abrams. The Dems owe both these seats and the Presidency to Black Americans. As you say Duma, Trumpism is here to stay. It has to be beaten rather than simply hoping it will whither.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 03:26:38 pm
Assuming Warnock and Ossoff are both seated the Senate will be split 50/50. The Democrats will represent 41,549,808 more people than the Republicans.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 03:53:16 pm
Ossoffs count suspended until 8:30am Georgia time so the counters could rest.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Duma on January 06, 2021, 03:58:14 pm
?

old news - they're counting again now.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 03:58:43 pm
?

old news - they're counting again now.

Yup. Sorry time zone cock up by me!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on January 06, 2021, 04:25:31 pm
Assuming Warnock and Ossoff are both seated the Senate will be split 50/50. The Democrats will represent 41,549,808 more people than the Republicans.

Interesting stat, thanks. Makes a mockery of the two senators per state rule in my opinion!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 04:33:25 pm
That crowd in DC is alarmingly large.
Not to mention, refusing to seat the elected rep in PA, coupled with expelling the LtGov from the state house...
Nuts. Dangerous and crazy. Somebody will die before the day is out and quite a large number in that crowd will be dead in a month.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on January 06, 2021, 05:37:24 pm
Trump really is throwing Pence to the wolves, claiming he can overturn the result. Classic Trump / gangster president, setting someone up to take the heat.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: IanP on January 06, 2021, 06:50:28 pm
Pence has released a letter saying he will not stop Biden's electoral votes being counted.

And Mitch McConnell emphatically not supporting Trump:

“This election was actually not unusually close,”
“We cannot declare ourselves a national board of elections on steroids,”

Galen Druke on FiveThirtyEight blog

"McConnell is essentially making a speech arguing that America should be a democratic republic. And that position is dividing his party."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 07:28:00 pm
The Capitol has been breached and rioters are inside.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on January 06, 2021, 07:29:53 pm
Given the obviousness of Trump supporters being c*nts, it seems weird that they've now managed to get into the Captiol building (judging by guardian live updates). You'd have thought the authorities would have this shit on lock? Or are the police backing off because they're all Trump supporters?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 07:33:35 pm
The Capitol has been breached and rioters are inside.

Watching Twitter updates now. Bonkers. CNN calling it an attempted coup...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 07:34:01 pm
White supremacy (reply to Abarro).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 07:39:04 pm
It’s not an attempted coup, it is a coup in progress.
An illegal army was gathered and marched to the Capitol, where they stormed the building.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on January 06, 2021, 07:39:55 pm
Pretty weird watching people in camo with guns as part of a group breaking into the building where they're doing the formalities of putting in a new president. I guess if it were the other way around there'd have been a firefight already...
https://twitter.com/HadiNili/status/1346869048785698818

In fact, if it were a different (oil rich) country America probably would be planning an invasion by now  :lol:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 07:45:28 pm
Pretty weird watching people in camo with guns as part of a group breaking into the building where they're doing the formalities of putting in a new president. I guess if it were the other way around there'd have been a firefight already...
https://twitter.com/HadiNili/status/1346869048785698818

In fact, if it were a different (oil rich) country America probably would be planning an invasion by now  :lol:

This is the Georgia state capitol, but yes. DC has really strict gun laws but we're going to see guns on the streets there tonight.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 07:49:18 pm
Inside the US Capitol now: https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1346902776538750976
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on January 06, 2021, 07:54:45 pm
This is the Georgia state capitol, but yes. DC has really strict gun laws but we're going to see guns on the streets there tonight.

Ha, that'll teach me to skim the caption and just watch the video  :slap:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 08:13:46 pm
Person shot inside the Capitol.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 08:31:05 pm
Multiple gunshots being reported.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 08:32:45 pm
What a mess (a preventable mess). Defence sec refusing to sanction national guard.

Meanwhile

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErEvddbVQAA8z9e?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on January 06, 2021, 08:35:03 pm
Pretty embarrassing for the USA. Bet China, Iran etc are finding it all funny as f.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 08:38:42 pm
What a mess (a preventable mess). Defence sec refusing to sanction national guard.

Meanwhile

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErEvddbVQAA8z9e?format=jpg&name=large)

DOD refusing to change tasking for DC guard, is an act of sedition.
Is this going all the way? However ceremonial todays session was supposed to be, I’m pretty sure Biden is not president until it’s completed. Does anyone think that’s going to happen soon?

Edit:
VA Governor is sending the VA Guard, my retired US Army Col friend, thinks at the moment, he has done so without DOD nod.
I believe there is some cross over in DOD and State’s control of the Guard, pretty much for just such an occasion. DOD is under Trump control, a political appointee.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 06, 2021, 08:46:20 pm
Given the obviousness of Trump supporters being c*nts, it seems weird that they've now managed to get into the Captiol building (judging by guardian live updates). You'd have thought the authorities would have this shit on lock? Or are the police backing off because they're all Trump supporters?

I suspect the law enforcement strategy is to underplay the (extreme!) seriousness of the situation for as long as possible and treat Trump protestors as softly as possible for as long as possible, for fear of inciting violent reaction. Law enforcement violence against protestors now could rapidly snowball into a gunfight inside Capitol and the public mood descending into nationwide violence etc. etc. etc. Give the morons their day/s in the limelight, taking selfies in Capitol, and try not to light the touch paper that could lead to mass civil disorder. The congress lawmakers will do what they're going do despite what protestors and Trump want. Some belated sanity at least by Trump with him sending messages for no violence. A glimpse that even he probably understands past his delusions what the consequences might be for him if he's seen to be responsible for an attempted coup
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 08:47:14 pm
Trumps called in the national guard.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 09:01:40 pm
Trumps called in the national guard.

No.

His spokes person tweeted that a full half hour after the VA Governor dispatched the guard. It’s just the orange one trying to take credit again.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 09:02:53 pm
I'm sorry Pete, but that is complete bullshit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 09:04:09 pm
Given the obviousness of Trump supporters being c*nts, it seems weird that they've now managed to get into the Captiol building (judging by guardian live updates). You'd have thought the authorities would have this shit on lock? Or are the police backing off because they're all Trump supporters?

I suspect the law enforcement strategy is to underplay the (extreme!) seriousness of the situation for as long as possible and treat Trump protestors as softly as possible for as long as possible, for fear of inciting violent reaction. Law enforcement violence against protestors now could rapidly snowball into a gunfight inside Capitol and the public mood descending into nationwide violence etc. etc. etc. Give the morons their day/s in the limelight, taking selfies in Capitol, and try not to light the touch paper that could lead to mass civil disorder. The congress lawmakers will do what they're going do despite what protestors and Trump want. Some belated sanity at least by Trump with him sending messages for no violence. A glimpse that even he probably understands past his delusions what the consequences might be for him if he's seen to be responsible for an attempted coup

I hope he’s shitting his pants, realising that this is exactly what he told the crowd to do, on camera, a few minutes earlier.

I hope, that he really hadn’t thought it through and that there’s no bigger plan in play here. The missing DC guard is worrying.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 09:07:44 pm
I'm sorry Pete, but that is complete bullshit.

It’s not and de-escalation is very likely the key approach.
The lack of guard, the fact that they (apparently) weren’t ready to stop exactly this, are the very odd aspects.
If the VA Guard deploy, are they going to find themselves opposing the DC guard?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 09:16:16 pm
The Networks started calling for Ossoff around five minutes ago.
NBC is reporting IED’s found in the Capitol and Biden has called it “Insurrection, not protest”.

So.

That’s nice.

Oh, and Georgia state Capitol is surrounded, apparently.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 09:20:46 pm
It’s impossible to get anything like full context from the Tv on my armchair - but it’s looking now more like a few hundred wondering what to do rather than thousands of well organised revolutionaries...

Sky just called Ossoff.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 06, 2021, 09:27:08 pm
I'm sorry Pete, but that is complete bullshit.

?
Explain..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 09:32:18 pm
Don’t sweat it Pete, I’d put money on you two talking at cross purposes in the heat etc.

It is apparently odd, that the FBI seem to have taken over the Capitol operation and not the Secret Service. Very heavily armed FBI HRT and SWAT agents are on scene. Considering how many top SS agents have been given the heave, before Biden arrives (some replacements apparently brought out of retirement), there must be some institutional distrust of the SS at play. They have their own SWAT and heavy units.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 09:34:04 pm
https://twitter.com/DustinGiebel/status/1346928694833545216/photo/1
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 09:37:36 pm
One poor Sod. On his tod.
How the fuck is that “prepared” (despite the fact he looks like a serious unit).
Bloke deserves a medal.

 https://twitter.com/igorbobic/status/1346911809274478594?s=21 (https://twitter.com/igorbobic/status/1346911809274478594?s=21)

Some of his oppos, on the other hand...
Still, do they look prepared to you?

 https://twitter.com/phil_lewis_/status/1346932851229519884?s=21 (https://twitter.com/phil_lewis_/status/1346932851229519884?s=21)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on January 06, 2021, 09:42:55 pm
https://twitter.com/DustinGiebel/status/1346928694833545216/photo/1

American Taliban
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 06, 2021, 09:56:03 pm
https://twitter.com/DustinGiebel/status/1346928694833545216/photo/1

If your point is how appalling the symbology of a confederate flag-carrying mob inside Capitol is then I'd fully agree with you. But no symbology is worth lighting the touch paper for, which is what a violent response and violent counter-response could do. If they're still there in 3 days they'll eventually be removed.  As TT says most of them looks like cultists and disaster tourists, not genuine revolutionaries. I hope Trump is having the consequences to him (because that's all he cares about) made very clear by adults in various security services.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 06, 2021, 10:00:15 pm

It’s not and de-escalation is very likely the key approach.
The lack of guard, the fact that they (apparently) weren’t ready to stop exactly this, are the very odd aspects.
If the VA Guard deploy, are they going to find themselves opposing the DC guard?

Ah so the BLM protesters were not dangerous enough so they got treated like shit, but if you are actually dangerous you get the kid gloves?

Hope every one of their phones gets confiscated and everyone in all the vids they’re taking identified and charged.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 06, 2021, 10:09:53 pm
Explaining kid gloves for violent White Supremacist insurrectionists as "tactics."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 06, 2021, 10:15:40 pm

It’s not and de-escalation is very likely the key approach.
The lack of guard, the fact that they (apparently) weren’t ready to stop exactly this, are the very odd aspects.
If the VA Guard deploy, are they going to find themselves opposing the DC guard?

Ah so the BLM protesters were not dangerous enough so they got treated like shit, but if you are actually dangerous you get the kid gloves?


It's 'wrong' but yes exactly this, welcome to the world.
It isn't fair, but you'd be a lunatic to want a massive armed counter-reaction to some heavy-handed enforcement of what looks to amount to an ill-thought through mob breaking into Capitol, when you could have more simple damage limitation instead.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 10:18:20 pm
So, VA is sending both guard and State Troopers.
Maryland has just committed the same.
That’s the point at which Trump agreed (not his call) for the DC guard to be deployed. There has been some credible-ish intimation that the 25th was threatened, possibly by Pence and the Tortoise together. Nice rumour, hope it’s true.

The DOD thing is more complicated, if the DOD mobilise a State’s guard, it effectively nationalises the guard making them active duty troops, or regular army. There are laws against active duty troops operating on US soil and some nasty implications.
The States may deploy their guard, without crossing that Rubicon.
Something has gone on behind the scenes.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 06, 2021, 10:25:58 pm
It's 'wrong' but yes exactly this, welcome to the world.
It isn't fair, but you'd be a lunatic to want a massive armed counter-reaction to some heavy-handed enforcement of what looks to amount to an ill-thought through mob breaking into Capitol, when you could have more simple damage limitation instead.

Cool, it’s a good learning point for BLM and other protest groups: get more people with guns on your side and you will be treated better by the police and other law enforcement.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 10:31:44 pm
Explaining kid gloves for violent White Supremacist insurrectionists as "tactics."

Yes.

There might be more to it, they (Capitol Police, Metro ) might be complicit, time will tell.
However, yes, if you are overwhelmed, it is exactly what what you would have been trained to do.
Delay, stall the advance, evacuate the principles, cede the property, save the lives.
If there was no complicity, then the lack of effective barriers (and that has multiple meanings) is going to be questioned.
Large and heavily armed/kitted riot squads are as much a provocation as a deterrent. It is possible that a low key outer ring was intentional, but then I would have expect defence in depth, out of sight, behind the front lines.
I am gobsmacked to see a single officer trying to hold back a mob already inside.
I know the riot control training we got in the Navy is limited and a long time ago (the RN is tasked with just that in disaster relief operations, and I did the course as a PO (Seargent) as a stick commander). Even I can see this is off.
Talking to military friends, Yanks, over there or in Saudi at the moment, they’re screaming foul.

Still, what happened, was not implausible.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 06, 2021, 10:34:33 pm
I can see OMM’s logic but I think the police fucked up for tonight. Pure and simple. Whether that was bad intelligence - or deliberate is a different saga - that I bet is being investigated now.

What amazed me - is that for a big angry crowd etc... no one trashed the place... sure they took a few selfies in the speakers chair etc... but no ripping things off the walls or (no apparent) taking of souvenirs. Weird. Not saying that in a positive or negatvie way - just seemed weird.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on January 06, 2021, 10:35:11 pm
Next time you protest just remember to get all your mates to post Twitter photos of their AKs and you're golden ;)

Looks like enforcement are now using tear gas and flashbangs so I'm not sure I buy Pete's suggestion. More like the local cops were either trump supporters or thought they were too outgunned and somehow hadn't planned for it so were better to wait.. So either dubious/complict or embarrassing.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 06, 2021, 10:39:16 pm
Cool, it’s a good learning point for BLM and other protest groups: get more people with guns on your side and you will be treated better by the police and other law enforcement.

 ::) I highly doubt they don't already know it, and are far less naïve than you're appearing to be by thinking the world works fairly in matters like this.

BLM protestors didn't have the overt backing of the country's president inciting them to violent action. Nor were BLM trying to retain governance of the US by foul means. Yet the BLM protests still led to mass violence across the country, between BLM and opposing groups of white supremacists and other nut jobs. This is potentially far more damaging.

edit, to add I also do think it's weird how lacking the defences of Capitol were, especially given they knew in advance about the protest. But once it kicked off you can't respond with lethal violence to that mob in that context without risking civil war.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 10:41:45 pm
Next time you protest just remember to get all your mates to post Twitter photos of their AKs and you're golden ;)

Looks like enforcement are now using tear gas and flashbangs so I'm not sure I buy Pete's suggestion. More like the local cops were either trump supporters or thought they were too outgunned and somehow hadn't planned for it so were better to wait.. So either dubious/complict or embarrassing.

You might gather that I’m ploughing through vids at a rate of knots, to get a handle on exactly that. There is certainly some difficult to explain footage out there:
 https://twitter.com/jpegjoshua/status/1346920941301981184?s=21 (https://twitter.com/jpegjoshua/status/1346920941301981184?s=21)

I’m definitely not ruling out complicity from Capitol police and I suspect that’s why the FBI came in. I think it is the FBI using gas and flash bangs, not Cap or Metro.
I’ve asked, but it’s a case of people asking other people, closer too and then getting Chinese whispers back.
But the drums are beating around the jungle tonight. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 06, 2021, 10:44:48 pm
thought they were too outgunned and somehow hadn't planned for it

Bizarre in view of the fact he said earlier in the day they were all 'going to march down Pennsylvania Ave' to help the senators 'be bold'. Inflammatory stuff.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on January 06, 2021, 10:46:46 pm
I could certainly believe complicity from the local crew now being overruled by FBI or whoever. Even if the complicity were just "accidentally" understaffing the situation so that appeasement becomes the best solution
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 06, 2021, 11:00:31 pm
They’ve known this was coming for ages, it’s not like it was a surprise gathering! Worth comparing with pics of the National Guard out in force in DC before the BLM protests even got started, not attempting to close the stable door once the horse was out.

Guardian live feed also makes it sound like protesters used pepper spray on the police to gain access to the Capitol!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 06, 2021, 11:01:10 pm
I really think Miller and Trump had their hand forced with the guard. There was no requirement for federal release or approval for deployment, the matter rests with the District (or State) officials.
The military reporting is worth reading:

 https://taskandpurpose.com/news/national-guard-activated-pro-trump-mob/?fbclid=IwAR0gRwEXwWdH03xrRf8Qs2bYTZnYkX-cAqVzbnMYbwiXz5wUj3iKmj955KU (https://taskandpurpose.com/news/national-guard-activated-pro-trump-mob/?fbclid=IwAR0gRwEXwWdH03xrRf8Qs2bYTZnYkX-cAqVzbnMYbwiXz5wUj3iKmj955KU)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 06, 2021, 11:24:15 pm
Anyone willing to say Trump isn't a fascist now? Toby? It isn't like nobody told us what he was.

Now I've got that off my chest, it is simultaneously true that the police fucked up massively letting it get that far but once it did, a softly softly approach was the only way out. However, if that was a BLM protest there would be bodies all over the steps. Pretty hard to avoid the comparison.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 06, 2021, 11:46:46 pm
He's the epitome of the phrase 'banality of evil'. A banal man creating toxicity all around him.

Interesting that reports are emerging that vice president Pence was responsible for activating the DC national guard to support Capitol police. Not Trump, as he claimed (surprise surprise..).

Impeachment never looked closer.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 12:11:50 am
These CP’s didn’t exactly let them in, there is a fair amount of resistance, but look at the numbers!

 https://twitter.com/elijahschaffer/status/1346966514990149639?s=21 (https://twitter.com/elijahschaffer/status/1346966514990149639?s=21)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 07, 2021, 07:55:00 am
Explaining kid gloves for violent White Supremacist insurrectionists as "tactics."

Yes.

There might be more to it, they (Capitol Police, Metro ) might be complicit, time will tell.
However, yes, if you are overwhelmed, it is exactly what what you would have been trained to do.
Delay, stall the advance, evacuate the principles, cede the property, save the lives.

With all due respect - and I mean that, you and Pete know far more about the realities on the ground than I do - but this is to make the same mistake.

Sure, in the immediate circumstances, the tactics may have made sense. I don't condemn individual officers placed in those positions (well, I do condemn those seen opening barriers or filmed sharing high fives and selfies with rioters inside the Capitol building). But to focus on tactics serves to obscure the much bigger picture.

None of this was difficult to predict. After years of general incitement Trump had been specifically inciting these events for the last couple of weeks. He then literally urged the crowd to march on the Capitol. And yet zero preparation. The authorities had no compunction in using massive, heavily militarized law enforcement against BLM protests in the summer, including just yards from where this took place. Law enforcement that often deliberately provoked and initiated violence against peaceful protests  - protests that were not actually attempting to prevent Congress from fufilling its duty to complete a Presidential election, as yesterday's rioters succeeded in doing for several hours. No worries back then about provoking counter reactions or wider civil unrest. No worries then about damage limitation. We don't need conspiracy theories about police being stood down in advance to plainly see in yesterday's events that America does not see it's black and white citizens as equal. There has been far too much tolerance of Trump and his follower's lawlessness, tolerance that culminated in yesterday's events. Whether by design or instinct yesterday was an object lesson in the authorities' tolerance for white grievance and terrorism.

So that is why I called bullshit (I could have been politer, I admit) on Pete's focus on tactics. Focusing on tactics tends to lead us away from asking the much bigger questions that really need to be asked.

I was also calling bullshit on the idea that Trump was beginning to come to his senses and was calling for peace. His two pathetic tweets and subsequent video (all now deleted) in fact all continued his utter recklessness and irresponsibility.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 07, 2021, 07:58:06 am
Thé way I see it, there are two separate coup attempts in the US capital right now.

Thé mob inside the house chambers has been dealt with now.

The other is still ongoing with lawmakers who, having failed to overturn the election in the courts, are attempting to vote down the democratic result at certification.


Posts crossed... yes to the above Andy. Some of the CP were really put in harm’s way when refusing entry, horrible. The irony is that with all the nonsense about Deep State, here is something institutional which is genuinely concerning.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 08:18:37 am
Andy, you are conflating strategy with tactical response. The tactics employed, under the circumstances, make sense.
The circumstances that required that tactical response, are highly questionable. The differing level of response between officers, some quite passive, some highly aggressive; would seem to suggest there was no coordinated effort to be compliant with the mob. I’m suspicious of, but not wholly convinced by, the “high five/selfie” footage, because, frankly, if I’d been in uniform, surrounded by an armed, crazed, mob, in a distinctive uniform, I would probably play nice too.
(Actually, I wouldn’t, I’m not that smart, nor that self controlled. I would, however, probably be dead or rather badly beaten, so you can make up your own mind about the “righteousness” of compliance).

MrJr, the second coup has failed and I think the 7 names that supported it are probably looking at rather bleak futures.

Andy, it’s highly probable that Pence and the Tortoise took control of government last night. Both Twitter and Facebook have disabled/locked Trump out, I don’t believe that would happen iwithout some high level intervention, there are clear laws about the sitting president’s right to address the people, if that has been interfered with, he is not the sitting president.
For the sake of two weeks, the disgrace of actually deposing him, is probably not worth it, but I’ll bet he is effectively gone already. A mad old coot, locked up in the Oval office, shouting at the ceiling.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 07, 2021, 08:33:07 am
Andy, you are conflating strategy with tactical response.

No, I get that. In some ways, that's my point. Tactics are important ... for those who need to learn the lessons when they don't work. For us they are a distraction from much bigger questions. The circumstances are what we should be focused on.

I do think he should be removed immediately. To leave him in place normalises or minimizes what took place yesterday. And although a lame duck he still has a lot of power to wreak havoc, including the power of pardon.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 08:45:50 am
Andy, you are conflating strategy with tactical response.

No, I get that. In some ways, that's my point. Tactics are important ... for those who need to learn the lessons when they don't work. For us they are a distraction from much bigger questions. The circumstances are what we should be focused on.

I do think he should be removed immediately. To leave him in place normalises or minimizes what took place yesterday. And although a lame duck he still has a lot of power to wreak havoc, including the power of pardon.

He’s banned anybody from Pence’s staff from entering the White House, apparently.
The word is, there will be quite a few resignations today and tomorrow. Secret Service as well as Civilian.
As well as “minions”, many senior politicians and in particular Republicans, were put in harms way yesterday.
I don’t think they will forget that in a hurry.
The coup failed. The enablers will be seeking a way out. There will be no more attempts, I’m pretty sure. They shot their bolt, they won’t be given the opportunity to re-cock the bow.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: gollum on January 07, 2021, 08:54:37 am
Result has been certified and Trump has issued a statement that’s a close to a concession as we are ever going to hear, although does describe his presidency as the greatest first term in history...........
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 07, 2021, 08:57:57 am
I'm sure we're very largely on the same page Matt.

It did fail and he is done. But there have to be consequences. We will see what today brings.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 07, 2021, 09:26:16 am
I've been reflecting on what I watched last night - and I find it hard to think of it being an organised coup. "Insurrection" yes, but there didnt seem to be much organisation last night. Whilst there may have been an aim to 'take' the Capitol building (I'm assuming there was - I don't know) beyond that there was little apparent through or method. A staffer snaffled the vote bundles out of the chamber (surely a target?) and everyone was spirited away to alternative / safe places. No message  - or list of demands - or the like was read out in the chamber etc.. instead a dude wearing antlers was pictured in the chair! The guy carrying the confederate flag (widely pictured - and rightly a hugely offensive symbol esp in the context of the building) looked more like a hapless / witless protester rather than a revolutionary.

Put it this way (and OMM MUST know more about this than me :D ) but if I wanted to stage a coup - I might have used this protest and the building invasion as cover or a method - but I'd have - err - done a bit more coup err... stuff?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 09:31:40 am
And there we go. It begins:

 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-officials-resign-white-house-b1783622.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1ByK3VQVF7TZjUFiXblfJOpngsIbezoqxXQgMpewFhHYXKvBBi4YBulBY#Echobox=1609987625 (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-officials-resign-white-house-b1783622.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1ByK3VQVF7TZjUFiXblfJOpngsIbezoqxXQgMpewFhHYXKvBBi4YBulBY#Echobox=1609987625)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 07, 2021, 09:33:35 am
One thing is that they are going to have to have a big bonfire of all the IT equipment in the whole building, loads of pics of the protesters at desks with the computers still unlocked (apparently reading govt email is a crime in itself).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 07, 2021, 09:35:18 am
That is a fundamental misread of what constitutes a coup as far as I'm concerned. By definition they are not organised events. Violent takeovers start in precisely this manner and there is historical precedent everywhere for it; in a 'less strong' state with fewer 'checks and balances' or with a wider sense of grievance it is totally plausible to imagine a scenario where a police force/ section of the military joins with the protestors and before you know it, they're in control. Timothy Snyder, Anne Applebaum et al are well worth reading on this.

So yes, you're right that it wasn't organised, but its totally irrelevant to the seriousness of what took place, because all such events are disorganised. The effect of what you're saying is to diminish it, and whilst I know that isnt what you personally are doing, just watch for the Spectator columnists/ Spiked contributors/ right wing pundits to make a similar argument over the next few days.

This comes across as having a go (sorry!) ; I've seen a few of these takes already this morning and I find them really frustrating!



Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 09:51:03 am
I've been reflecting on what I watched last night - and I find it hard to think of it being an organised coup. "Insurrection" yes, but there didnt seem to be much organisation last night. Whilst there may have been an aim to 'take' the Capitol building (I'm assuming there was - I don't know) beyond that there was little apparent through or method. A staffer snaffled the vote bundles out of the chamber (surely a target?) and everyone was spirited away to alternative / safe places. No message  - or list of demands - or the like was read out in the chamber etc.. instead a dude wearing antlers was pictured in the chair! The guy carrying the confederate flag (widely pictured - and rightly a hugely offensive symbol esp in the context of the building) looked more like a hapless / witless protester rather than a revolutionary.

Put it this way (and OMM MUST know more about this than me :D ) but if I wanted to stage a coup - I might have used this protest and the building invasion as cover or a method - but I'd have - err - done a bit more coup err... stuff?

I’m mainly regurgitating other, better informed, opinion. With a peppering of my own musings (it’s not as if I’ve ever held those back, is it).
I’ve been largely waiting for a particular friend to “pronounce” his take. I have a former CO, a retired Col US Army, and I’ve been very close to her for a couple of decades. Her partner also became a friend. He’s a former USN Commander and Destroyer Captain, who went into the intelligence community (a company man, no less) and now in his late sixties is CEO of “Dark Skies Mitigation” (so if you’re really bothered, you can dig him up, even on Linkedin. Real life isn’t a Bond movie, you are not automatically assassinated for retiring and you probably had a career pushing paper and not people off cliffs).
Anyway, he’s in Saudi at the moment and wasn’t able to tap in instantly. In fact he was in bed when it kicked off. He genuinely did not expect it to go this far.
I trust his/their take, in particular. He has a way of finding and sharing information, rapidly, that is astonishing, frankly and his candour is also remarkable. He’s a registered Democrat and I know he’s part of a group of former intelligence agency types that are quite seriously pushing for sedition trials and have been since the Russian report/investigation.
Of course, given his background, it might be as much disinformation as a Trump tweet, but I’d like to think not.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 07, 2021, 09:56:10 am
One thing is that they are going to have to have a big bonfire of all the IT equipment in the whole building, loads of pics of the protesters at desks with the computers still unlocked (apparently reading govt email is a crime in itself).

FFS... if they've not already been breached by the widespread Russian hack....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Muenchener on January 07, 2021, 09:57:25 am
And there we go. It begins:

 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-officials-resign-white-house-b1783622.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1ByK3VQVF7TZjUFiXblfJOpngsIbezoqxXQgMpewFhHYXKvBBi4YBulBY#Echobox=1609987625 (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-officials-resign-white-house-b1783622.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1ByK3VQVF7TZjUFiXblfJOpngsIbezoqxXQgMpewFhHYXKvBBi4YBulBY#Echobox=1609987625)

Is National Security Adviser a cabinet post? And could sufficient cabinet resignations make a 25th Amendment quorum impossible?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ru on January 07, 2021, 10:09:52 am
Trumps political talent has always been spotting popular movements and then nudging them and either taking advantage of the fallout or pretending he had nothing to do with it if it goes wrong. Rumblings of demonstrations in Washington on the 6th had been around in the maga (for want of a better word) corners of the internet for a while before Trump started approving them publicly on twitter and calling for people to attend. I don't think this was an organised attempt at a coup on Trump's part, but it does seem likely that he was manoeuvring to gain every inch of advantage he could from a brewing situation before seeing which way the wind was blowing and disavowing it at the last minute. He's culpable for what happened even if he had no proper plan.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 07, 2021, 10:13:12 am
That is a fundamental misread of what constitutes a coup as far as I'm concerned. By definition they are not organised events. Violent takeovers start in precisely this manner and there is historical precedent everywhere for it; in a 'less strong' state with fewer 'checks and balances' or with a wider sense of grievance it is totally plausible to imagine a scenario where a police force/ section of the military joins with the protestors and before you know it, they're in control. Timothy Snyder, Anne Applebaum et al are well worth reading on this.

So yes, you're right that it wasn't organised, but its totally irrelevant to the seriousness of what took place, because all such events are disorganised. The effect of what you're saying is to diminish it, and whilst I know that isnt what you personally are doing, just watch for the Spectator columnists/ Spiked contributors/ right wing pundits to make a similar argument over the next few days.

Fair enough - this comes down to the definition of a coup to a degree...

And I know (Romania in the late 80's is a great example - Arab Spring too) that what turns into a coup (by my internal more revolutionary definition :D ) can start as a upwelling of public feeling/demonstration etc.. (whether considered right or wrong)...

I would argue however - that whether or not it was organised is completely relevant to its seriousness! Organisation implies/means structure, control, aims and a motive - and probably therefore funding. If (for example) someone had funded a group of military trained people to go in there too (mercenaries - whatever) and/or had aided in its organisation, goals and outcomes then that would be a completely different situation! How would this be if Zuckeberg or Musk had sunk a few hundred mill into a militia that stormed in afterwards.... Don't spit your tea out at this point :) remember the Contra's, Bay of Pigs, etc... etc... there is a long history of powers/groups funding takeovers (inc the CIA/US govt).

In many ways - the involvement of Cambridge analytica in the Brexit Ref, and the US election etc.. is far far more serious - they were coups that worked!! -  despite having less TV presence than a man in antlers waving a flag in the Capitol building...

*Devils advocate alert* Therefore - by making it something more than it was - you/me/we/media are in danger of actually turning it into something: instead of possibly treating it as a load of half arsed demonstrators having an illegal day trip around the capitol building.... (please read the devils advocate alert :) )
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 10:19:33 am
I genuinely think he wasn’t expecting it to go so far.
I think he has a tendency to grab the Tiger’s tail without much of a plan for dealing with it’s head, his history is replete with reckless plunges into hairbrained, half baked, doomed enterprise.

I don’t believe for a second Pence was expecting it.

On the otherhand, as idle speculation, was it a set up? Was the lax security an invitation for the MAGA mob to deliver the ultimate embarrassment to the would be dictator?
Will the GOP begin to paint these people as traitors and disavow them? Is this the start of the MAGA purge?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 07, 2021, 10:22:17 am
How Pence is positioning himself is either (a) interesting/tactical (b) completely random and he doesnt know what he's doing.

That I think both of these are viable options says alot about the administration...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 07, 2021, 10:23:00 am
I expect there are many discussion going on about how to play this all over the place right now.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on January 07, 2021, 10:24:24 am
The putsch is a very powerful advertisement for American fascism and will make it a lot easier to recruit. And it is broadly supported by republican voters (45% support, with 43% against, according to YouGov). It was a lot better organised than the famous Beer Hall Putsch I would say.

It is very hard for me to stay optimistic.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 10:30:22 am
I expect there are many discussion going on about how to play this all over the place right now.

Yup.

I like speculating. I do recognise I’ll probably never know the “real” story. I guess, in a couple of decades, somebody will write a book that gets close to the real thing, but even then nobody will actually be sure.

On the preparedness thing. The mob brought breaching equipment, ladders etc and ready made IEDs, this had some intent, in some quarters.

Again, the number of Federal agencies, on scene and the absence of uniformed SS is not normal/expected. I’ve even seen ATF SWAT on site. Pretty sure this sort of thing is not in their remit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 07, 2021, 10:36:46 am
That is a fundamental misread of what constitutes a coup as far as I'm concerned. By definition they are not organised events. Violent takeovers start in precisely this manner and there is historical precedent everywhere for it; in a 'less strong' state with fewer 'checks and balances' or with a wider sense of grievance it is totally plausible to imagine a scenario where a police force/ section of the military joins with the protestors and before you know it, they're in control. Timothy Snyder, Anne Applebaum et al are well worth reading on this.

So yes, you're right that it wasn't organised, but its totally irrelevant to the seriousness of what took place, because all such events are disorganised. The effect of what you're saying is to diminish it, and whilst I know that isnt what you personally are doing, just watch for the Spectator columnists/ Spiked contributors/ right wing pundits to make a similar argument over the next few days.

Fair enough - this comes down to the definition of a coup to a degree...

And I know (Romania in the late 80's is a great example - Arab Spring too) that what turns into a coup (by my internal more revolutionary definition :D ) can start as a upwelling of public feeling/demonstration etc.. (whether considered right or wrong)...

I would argue however - that whether or not it was organised is completely relevant to its seriousness! Organisation implies/means structure, control, aims and a motive - and probably therefore funding. If (for example) someone had funded a group of military trained people to go in there too (mercenaries - whatever) and/or had aided in its organisation, goals and outcomes then that would be a completely different situation! How would this be if Zuckeberg or Musk had sunk a few hundred mill into a militia that stormed in afterwards.... Don't spit your tea out at this point :) remember the Contra's, Bay of Pigs, etc... etc... there is a long history of powers/groups funding takeovers (inc the CIA/US govt).

In many ways - the involvement of Cambridge analytica in the Brexit Ref, and the US election etc.. is far far more serious - they were coups that worked!! -  despite having less TV presence than a man in antlers waving a flag in the Capitol building...

*Devils advocate alert* Therefore - by making it something more than it was - you/me/we/media are in danger of actually turning it into something: instead of possibly treating it as a load of half arsed demonstrators having an illegal day trip around the capitol building.... (please read the devils advocate alert :) )

I don't disagree with the above to any great extent (apologies if original post came across as patronising, not my intention!)

I suppose what constitutes a coup is a sliding scale from 'riot' to 'total installation of leader at head of state,' with this probably lying closer to the riot end of the spectrum. In that sense I agree that this could have been a lot worse (and as jwi says, may yet become so). However I think to treat it as demonstrators having a jolly (devils advocate warning noted!) is to repeat the same mistakes we have made over the last 4 years of his presidency. He has been enabled from the beginning, praised by world leaders, never called out. That, as much as anything Trump has said or done, has allowed fascism to take root in the American right. My worry is that by failing to treat it with the seriousness that is due we leave ourselves vulnerable to the next stage, and the next, until in 4/8/12 years time a full blown fascist takes power, rather than a moron with fascistic tendencies. In many ways, the US and by extension the rest of us are hugely lucky that he isn't more competent.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Johnny Brown on January 07, 2021, 10:41:55 am
Quote
I guess, in a couple of decades, somebody will write a book that gets close to the real thing, but even then nobody will actually be sure.

With the distance of time it is a lot easier to put together a plausible narrative that makes sense in the context of what happens after. We call it history, but I'm far from convinced it does justice to the conflicting truths of the present.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 10:47:11 am
That is a fundamental misread of what constitutes a coup as far as I'm concerned. By definition they are not organised events. Violent takeovers start in precisely this manner and there is historical precedent everywhere for it; in a 'less strong' state with fewer 'checks and balances' or with a wider sense of grievance it is totally plausible to imagine a scenario where a police force/ section of the military joins with the protestors and before you know it, they're in control. Timothy Snyder, Anne Applebaum et al are well worth reading on this.

So yes, you're right that it wasn't organised, but its totally irrelevant to the seriousness of what took place, because all such events are disorganised. The effect of what you're saying is to diminish it, and whilst I know that isnt what you personally are doing, just watch for the Spectator columnists/ Spiked contributors/ right wing pundits to make a similar argument over the next few days.

Fair enough - this comes down to the definition of a coup to a degree...

And I know (Romania in the late 80's is a great example - Arab Spring too) that what turns into a coup (by my internal more revolutionary definition :D ) can start as a upwelling of public feeling/demonstration etc.. (whether considered right or wrong)...

I would argue however - that whether or not it was organised is completely relevant to its seriousness! Organisation implies/means structure, control, aims and a motive - and probably therefore funding. If (for example) someone had funded a group of military trained people to go in there too (mercenaries - whatever) and/or had aided in its organisation, goals and outcomes then that would be a completely different situation! How would this be if Zuckeberg or Musk had sunk a few hundred mill into a militia that stormed in afterwards.... Don't spit your tea out at this point :) remember the Contra's, Bay of Pigs, etc... etc... there is a long history of powers/groups funding takeovers (inc the CIA/US govt).

In many ways - the involvement of Cambridge analytica in the Brexit Ref, and the US election etc.. is far far more serious - they were coups that worked!! -  despite having less TV presence than a man in antlers waving a flag in the Capitol building...

*Devils advocate alert* Therefore - by making it something more than it was - you/me/we/media are in danger of actually turning it into something: instead of possibly treating it as a load of half arsed demonstrators having an illegal day trip around the capitol building.... (please read the devils advocate alert :) )

I don't disagree with the above to any great extent (apologies if original post came across as patronising, not my intention!)

I suppose what constitutes a coup is a sliding scale from 'riot' to 'total installation of leader at head of state,' with this probably lying closer to the riot end of the spectrum. In that sense I agree that this could have been a lot worse (and as jwi says, may yet become so). However I think to treat it as demonstrators having a jolly (devils advocate warning noted!) is to repeat the same mistakes we have made over the last 4 years of his presidency. He has been enabled from the beginning, praised by world leaders, never called out. That, as much as anything Trump has said or done, has allowed fascism to take root in the American right. My worry is that by failing to treat it with the seriousness that is due we leave ourselves vulnerable to the next stage, and the next, until in 4/8/12 years time a full blown fascist takes power, rather than a moron with fascistic tendencies. In many ways, the US and by extension the rest of us are hugely lucky that he isn't more competent.

For context. There was a gallows erected in front of the Capitol steps, it might have been entirely symbolic, but it was entirely functional and elaborate for a “thrown together” protest. There is some evidence emerging of a plan to hold representatives hostages, conduct show trials and executions.

It’s easy to say “well that’s just a bunch of nutters, dreaming up revenge fantasies”, but the only real difference between that an actual, successful, coup, is whether or not the actual carry out their scheme. It’s hard to say that it did not come quite close to fruition. There was a moment where the doors to the floor were barricaded, under assault and the Reps were still inside. A broken hinge or a toppled cabinet and there might well have been dead Reps this morning and the world would be a very different place.
It is in everybody’s interest that the fizzle is emphasised, rather than the potential. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 07, 2021, 10:55:38 am
It is in everybody’s interest that the fizzle is emphasised, rather than the potential.

Yes,
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on January 07, 2021, 10:58:17 am
conflicting truths

 :offtopic: but this seemingly modern-left-wing usage of "truth" really winds me up, whether it's "conflicting truths" or "my truth" or whatever. Surely this makes a mockery of the meaning of the word and is just a thinly veiled attempt to add extra credibility to "experience" or "views" which is a better description. Would love to be convinced otherwise so that FB posts from some people wind me up less  :lol:
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 07, 2021, 11:30:27 am
the only real difference between that an actual, successful, coup, is whether or not the actual carry out their scheme.

Yes, totally. If I take a sparkler into the Houses of Parliament, wave it about and call for an uprising it's an attempted coup, however risible, because it is an illegitimate attempt to seize power.

Let me give you an example. Spain is a democracy because Juan Carlos, despite being groomed for dictatorship by Franco, chose to hold elections in '77,  2 years after becoming king. in 1981 Lt-Colonel Tejero rode into the chamber on a horse, waved (and fired) a handgun about, and effectively held the diputados hostage for the afternoon whilst calling for martial law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1981_Spanish_coup_d%27état_attempt

The army did not take to the streets. We have Juan Carlos to thank for that again. Had he said otherwise,don't doubt martial law would have been imposed.

Loony lone-wolf stuff (with sympathisers, obviously). But it could have had a different outcome.

Attempted coups don't have to be grand affairs to be dangerous, both at the time, and where they lead people to go next.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 07, 2021, 11:35:23 am
My worry is that by failing to treat it with the seriousness that is due we leave ourselves vulnerable to the next stage, and the next,

+1
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on January 07, 2021, 11:39:57 am
The putsch is a very powerful advertisement for American fascism and will make it a lot easier to recruit. And it is broadly supported by republican voters (45% support, with 43% against, according to YouGov). It was a lot better organised than the famous Beer Hall Putsch I would say.

It is very hard for me to stay optimistic.

“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? They're racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic – you name it. And unfortunately, there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.”

Are we going to quibble over 5 percentage points?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ru on January 07, 2021, 11:46:54 am
If you really want a flavour of what Trump's most diehard supporters are thinking and planning have a look at thedonald .win which is the spin-off forum from the banned group on reddit.

A warning: it will rapidly erode your sanity. It's a mixture of unhinged pro-trump statements (where anyone posting anything even slightly realistic, if negative, is banned for being a "doomer"), conspiracy theories, threats to kill "leftists," and "communists" (the definition of which seems to be anyone that's not 100% pro trump), hate speak etc. Reading what the members of site were thinking as they set off/travelled to Washington DC gave a good insight into why things went down as they did, the level of organistion (or lack thereof, although sub groups may have been more organised) and their expectations of what would happen (from supporting Trump at a rally, to starting a civil war).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 12:05:29 pm
If you really want a flavour of what Trump's most diehard supporters are thinking and planning have a look at thedonald .win which is the spin-off forum from the banned group on reddit.

A warning: it will rapidly erode your sanity. It's a mixture of unhinged pro-trump statements (where anyone posting anything even slightly realistic, if negative, is banned for being a "doomer"), conspiracy theories, threats to kill "leftists," and "communists" (the definition of which seems to be anyone that's not 100% pro trump), hate speak etc. Reading what the members of site were thinking as they set off/travelled to Washington DC gave a good insight into why things went down as they did, the level of organistion (or lack thereof) and their expectations of what would happen (from supporting Trump at a rally, to starting a civil war).

The thing is, such events don’t require detailed planning, at that level. Such mobs only require a little geeing up and a shove in the general direction.

It really does seem there might have been a higher level of planning though. The plan fell apart because, no Reps were seized, the Ballots were evacuated, the FBI were clearly ready and stepped in (you can readily find informed opinion about how odd that was, even quite right wing quasi-miltary pundits are pointing that out:  https://www.instagram.com/p/CJuOh8BKsGp/?igshid=vyv5z01ikc5s (https://www.instagram.com/p/CJuOh8BKsGp/?igshid=vyv5z01ikc5s) So there’s more to it than has been acknowledged, officially).
The VA and Maryland Governors, acted so swiftly, it’s hard to see it as unexpected on their part and given their actions, they almost certainly saw it as a very serious coup attempt.
Just as the lack of action by the DC guard, is weird.

Nah, this was chess, not a crap shoot. Trump (or more probably his backers) were out manoeuvred. Possibly by luck, but not entirely.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Johnny Brown on January 07, 2021, 12:25:12 pm
conflicting truths

 :offtopic: but this seemingly modern-left-wing usage of "truth" really winds me up, whether it's "conflicting truths" or "my truth" or whatever. Surely this makes a mockery of the meaning of the word and is just a thinly veiled attempt to add extra credibility to "experience" or "views" which is a better description. Would love to be convinced otherwise so that FB posts from some people wind me up less  :lol:

No, it's an adult appreciation of the fact that in big, complex situations all you have are interpretations. There's no arguing with certain facts, but deciding what caused what is completely different.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 07, 2021, 12:26:00 pm
conflicting truths

 :offtopic: but this seemingly modern-left-wing usage of "truth" really winds me up, whether it's "conflicting truths" or "my truth" or whatever. Surely this makes a mockery of the meaning of the word and is just a thinly veiled attempt to add extra credibility to "experience" or "views" which is a better description. Would love to be convinced otherwise so that FB posts from some people wind me up less  :lol:

I understand what you mean about the relatavism of all experiences/truths/opinions being valid. But when it comes to complex historical events - like the one we witnessed yesterday - "truth" is in fact a very difficult concept. There are historical facts - D-Day occured on 6th June 1944 - but they are mostly banal and not very important. But as soon as there is any complexity, the idea that there can be one true historical account becomes a fallacy (accounts can be accurate or inaccurate, but that's not the same thing). To say this isn't necessarily to assign equal validity to all accounts (David Irvings accounts of the Holocaust were both inaccurate and invalid) but we should still be wary of any claim to be giving the true account. People are often not comfortable with this version of history and typically want clear, neat stories (normally the ones they already know) that resemble morality tales. Historians seem to be very unpopular with much of the public at the moment - see the recent National Trust and slavery furore - because our profession is about messiness and contingency. In response historians get ridiculed as "revisionists." All historians are revisionists and all historical accounts are provisional interpretations. And that will be no different for the eventual accounts of how we got to the events of yesterday.

Of course, there have already been lots of pronouncements about the work future historians will have to do. My Twitter is very largely American historians and the general reaction last night was "Stuff that. We've been trying to tell you for the last four years and we're tired."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 07, 2021, 12:36:07 pm
Cross-posting: what Adam said.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on January 07, 2021, 12:42:06 pm
Yeah, I'm ok with history being a mishmash rather than a truth/set of facts. I just feel like the word has been twisted recently for dubious reasons by the more "woke" progressives I see on FB, and JB's post reminded me of my dislike of it. Ironically the same people pushing "individual truths" would be laughing at "alternative facts". Just suck it up and deal with the fact that experiences and views aren't fact or truth! Plenty of other ways to articulate these things in our language.

JB: you seem to have missed my point, which is that there can easily be alternative interpretations and multi-faceted causes, but "conflicting truths" strikes me as an oxymoron or twisting of the meaning of the word. Truth/facts can't be conflicting, and if they appear to be then it probably tells you your models/assumptions are wrong. Open to being convinced on why this is wrong semantically, but right now it winds me up an inexplicable amount
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 07, 2021, 01:13:27 pm
conflicting truths

 :offtopic: but this seemingly modern-left-wing usage of "truth" really winds me up, whether it's "conflicting truths" or "my truth" or whatever. Surely this makes a mockery of the meaning of the word and is just a thinly veiled attempt to add extra credibility to "experience" or "views" which is a better description. Would love to be convinced otherwise so that FB posts from some people wind me up less  :lol:

No, it's an adult appreciation of the fact that in big, complex situations all you have are interpretations. There's no arguing with certain facts, but deciding what caused what is completely different.

Like whether an ascent using knee bars really ‘counts’, that sort of thing? :-\
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 07, 2021, 04:04:31 pm
Andy, there's nothing about what you said about bigger picture/strategy that I disagree with. I've already said I find it odd how 'seemingly' unprepared the Capitol defences were.. I was saying much the same as Matt - that in that moment, to initiate a bloodbath - which is what overwhelmed law enforcement officers would have to do to beat back that mob last night before support arrived, shoot them - would have led to a much worse situation across the US today. By luck or (my suspicion) good judgement by the law enforcement present, the US avoided a worse outcome.

This was potentially much more serious an outcome than BLM rioting. The DC area is a gun-free zone for good reasons, but in gun-carrying states last night there were heavily armed groups of Trump supporters encamped outside government buildings, itching for an excuse to fight. If that had happened we'd be in a very much worse place today. All it may have took was a few more scared law enforcement starting to shoot in the Capitol building. The attempted coup looks like it failed because 1. Trump is lazy, stupid and shit at organising. 2. His supporters are mostly the same. 3. The agencies didn't pour fuel on the flame (including by no-platforming him).

My suspicion is this was a somewhat planned-for outcome by the intelligence community. The dogs on the street know Trump's behaviour and his malevolent narcissism, everybody knew about the protest, and everybody knows how crazy a core of his support are. Doesn't take much intelligence gathering to predict what could unfold. There's no way the US intelligence community didn't foresee this. It smells like political/intelligence judo to me - let your enemy's attack be their downfall. Yesterday Trump was given the rope to hang himself. The politicians now need to have the strength to use it to hang him with. I 100% agree with you that he should be removed right now, and then face charges. Anything else encourages the rot to grow.

Also what Barrows said about truth. 


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 04:59:13 pm
Well fuck me bendy, the Zombie finally acts:

(https://i.ibb.co/TqX524L/9510-B59-F-0821-4-EB1-A5-C5-3-F96-A4947228.jpg)

Bill Barr didn’t mince his words much either. Duplicitous little toad. Quite irritating to agree with him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 07, 2021, 05:50:22 pm
I think he may have missed out the bit after
Quote
Following the certification of the election results by Congress, the priority is

 which reads
 
Quote
.. to ingratiate our organisation with Joe Biden’s administration, the new power in town...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on January 07, 2021, 05:52:37 pm
With two weeks to go it is apparently possible to find a semblance of uprightness even among some of the most spineless.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 07, 2021, 05:55:23 pm
Thanks Pete. I do understand the point you are making in your second paragraph, but I think that in the end we will have to agree to disagree. I do feel that every time they are given any consideration or leeway, they will take a mile, making a real conflagration ultimately more likely. There's a straight line from the attempt to storm the Michigan State Capitol in the summer to yesterday. And I know it deeply pains Black Americans to witness White people being allowed to get aways with this (or to be arrested unharmed after carrying out horrific crimes) whilst a Black person can be killed by a cop whilst sleeping in their bed.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 07, 2021, 06:05:02 pm
Here's a great article about cognitive ease and illusions of truth:

https://byrslf.co/cognitive-ease-and-illusions-of-truth-26e7d1ea18b2?gi=23a5239f7c3b

Very often, we want to support what is familiar to us. That is how Trump manipulates his support.

Often we want to invest "reasons for things"/causes, because it's uncomfortable when events don't support past experience. Uncomfortable, and untrue, aren't of course the same things.

Ref Andy's great post above, and JB's comment on "causes".

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 07, 2021, 06:20:25 pm
Interesting that Dave, would have liked to have read a more developed version. Does irritate when people don’t know the difference between comprise/compose of though!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 07, 2021, 06:46:50 pm
So was that Zuc declaring that Trump is no longer the sitting president? I thought it had been ruled that Trump’s social media formed part of the presidential public record or something.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 06:51:10 pm
So was that Zuc declaring that Trump is no longer the sitting president? I thought it had been ruled that Trump’s social media formed part of the presidential public record or something.

This is what I mentioned yesterday. And was used by Twatter, as a reason to allow continued use around the “Many fine people” era.

I expect, even if they haven’t been given a Vice-presidential nod, Facebook recognise it will take greater than two weeks for Trump to challenge them through the courts.

I still think Trump is, effectively, already removed, or at least muted.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 07:27:18 pm
Here’s a military take on the DC National Guard question. I think some read between lines is required and the object of this article is to point out exactly who is responsible. The 340 DC Guardsmen, deliberately unarmed and stationed a considerable distance from the Capitol, is a pretty big red flag:
 https://taskandpurpose.com/news/national-guard-response-capitol-hill-riots/?fbclid=IwAR3CnQgN9X6HgmKC56Kwp_nWP2jYZyZpZzLY1tEWbjiNRc_p8J1O0E2Itf8 (https://taskandpurpose.com/news/national-guard-response-capitol-hill-riots/?fbclid=IwAR3CnQgN9X6HgmKC56Kwp_nWP2jYZyZpZzLY1tEWbjiNRc_p8J1O0E2Itf8)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 07, 2021, 08:35:31 pm
Just one story from last night 🤯
https://mobile.twitter.com/holmescnn/status/1346987917273608194
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on January 07, 2021, 08:43:25 pm
Just one story from last night 🤯
https://mobile.twitter.com/holmescnn/status/1346987917273608194
According to the posts lower down , she’s got an onion in the towel. So she’s falsely claiming to be maced.
Only in a America.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on January 07, 2021, 09:07:24 pm
It's interesting that this has come round to truth and the deciding of what it is. To me, the thing at the root of this is social media, without which Trump could not do what he has done. If we don't manage to reign in the darker side of social media we'll continue to see this and things like it as more and more people fall under the spell of conspiracy theories and violently polarised debate.

What's not been mentioned on this thread is that each of those people who entered the Capitol believes, earnestly, that Trump won the election but that the vote was rigged. If that were the case, surely direct action is justified?

If you were to try and explain to these people that what they believe is wrong, they would look at you like you were crazy and blind to what is so obviously the truth. They believe it, their friends believe it, their family believes it, their president believes it, the people they speak with online definitely believe it. You'd be a liberal, a communist, a sheeple, antifa. The deeper people sink into the lie, the more that they reinforce each other's views. It's not just happening to the right.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 09:08:08 pm
Just one story from last night 🤯
https://mobile.twitter.com/holmescnn/status/1346987917273608194

Nope.

You don’t even look that healthy coming out of a gas chamber full of CS and CS is absolutely f’all compared to MACE. Shit, that stuff *can* stop a charging Grizzly ffs.

This article from October, is a great little primer in National Guard operation and utilisation, as well as the possibility and legality of a Presidential EO declaring marshal law.

I don’t think they’ve actually thought this through:

 https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/10/23/how-the-president-could-invoke-martial-law/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR3HPUCnMXbP_VeYsG3i8ON4UPhPXZpBt12FZqbij4pgvZoBCsu1cM8U0WY (https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/10/23/how-the-president-could-invoke-martial-law/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR3HPUCnMXbP_VeYsG3i8ON4UPhPXZpBt12FZqbij4pgvZoBCsu1cM8U0WY)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on January 07, 2021, 09:12:55 pm
Apparently Trump spent today awarding the Presidential medal of Honour? to three golfers. Including one who’s dead.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 09:25:38 pm
It's interesting that this has come round to truth and the deciding of what it is. To me, the thing at the root of this is social media, without which Trump could not do what he has done. If we don't manage to reign in the darker side of social media we'll continue to see this and things like it as more and more people fall under the spell of conspiracy theories and violently polarised debate.

What's not been mentioned on this thread is that each of those people who entered the Capitol believes, earnestly, that Trump won the election but that the vote was rigged. If that were the case, surely direct action is justified?

If you were to try and explain to these people that what they believe is wrong, they would look at you like you were crazy and blind to what is so obviously the truth. They believe it, their friends believe it, their family believes it, their president believes it, the people they speak with online definitely believe it. You'd be a liberal, a communist, a sheeple, antifa. The deeper people sink into the lie, the more that they reinforce each other's views. It's not just happening to the right.

Well, yeah, I mean that little “I got MACEd” clip is the perfect example. I’d posit, that even if she has an onion/vinegar/chilli in the towel to induce tears, she has rationalised her story into her internal narrative as *true*; because she believes it should be true.
She’s committed enough to the narrative, that she has traveled across the country to be part of the revolution. Note “revolution”. That’s what they came for.

Furthermore, you’re right, it’s not a “limited to the right” thing, plenty of “protesters” tell stories of “unprovoked” this and that during riots and unruly protests and (surprise surprise) not all of them are telling the truth (or all of it, anyway).

Edit:
Yes, I think you are right about the extended consequences of such mind sets and that it’s a rather large problem.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on January 07, 2021, 09:30:47 pm
re: revolutionary Karen. Apparently there is a myth that onion neutralises the mace/pepper spray/whatever. So she may well have been sprayed with something.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Johnny Brown on January 07, 2021, 09:48:20 pm
Likewise I followed a brief thread showing the guy in the JK hat was an actor who works for both sides. Hard just establishing the facts nowadays but I tend to lean on Occam's razor.

Alex, I think it is semantics. I, and it seems Andy, take truth to have a slightly different meaning to fact. And a quick google suggests this is the generally accepted usage.

A scientific analogy might be the facts of your research results vs the use of them to endorse your hypothesis as true (and yes I know about null hypotheses).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: lagerstarfish on January 07, 2021, 10:04:01 pm
truth to have a slightly different meaning to fact.

Ooof

My epistemological framework may be based on coherence over dogmatic reliance on reality, but I have a hard time splitting truth from fact.



Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 07, 2021, 10:07:47 pm
The deeper people sink into the lie, the more that they reinforce each other's views. It's not just happening to the right.

Can you give some examples of such dangerous rejection of facts on the left? You were doing quite well but I feel like you’ve thrown some false equivalency in at the end there.

JB I don’t believe that guy has stolen JK’s hat and is calling himself a shaman!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 07, 2021, 10:11:16 pm
The deeper people sink into the lie, the more that they reinforce each other's views.

talking about grading...?

again... :D
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 07, 2021, 10:24:26 pm
truth to have a slightly different meaning to fact.

Ooof

My epistemological framework may be based on coherence over dogmatic reliance on reality, but I have a hard time splitting truth from fact.

You are gonna love alternative facts then. But then Trumpism is all about the divine, not the divinable.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 10:35:23 pm
Likewise I followed a brief thread showing the guy in the JK hat was an actor who works for both sides. Hard just establishing the facts nowadays but I tend to lean on Occam's razor.

Alex, I think it is semantics. I, and it seems Andy, take truth to have a slightly different meaning to fact. And a quick google suggests this is the generally accepted usage.

A scientific analogy might be the facts of your research results vs the use of them to endorse your hypothesis as true (and yes I know about null hypotheses).

Yeah saw a similar thread (same?), so dug around:

 https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/jake-angeli-viking-capitol-blm/?utm_source=agorapulse&utm_campaign=1p&fbclid=IwAR1oBNH_rKqlbzIn_JWzaZO9HuH5ZlQL1kCe2rWAA11PnBoo_-ETBjfSEDI (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/jake-angeli-viking-capitol-blm/?utm_source=agorapulse&utm_campaign=1p&fbclid=IwAR1oBNH_rKqlbzIn_JWzaZO9HuH5ZlQL1kCe2rWAA11PnBoo_-ETBjfSEDI)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on January 07, 2021, 10:44:53 pm
The deeper people sink into the lie, the more that they reinforce each other's views. It's not just happening to the right.

Can you give some examples of such dangerous rejection of facts on the left? You were doing quite well but I feel like you’ve thrown some false equivalency in at the end there.

No, you're right, it's not at the same scale. Sorry if it wasn't clear. I'm not saying there's an equivalency, more just sounding a caution that folk on the left shouldn't be complacent and think that we don't also get put in our own echo chambers.

Distortion of facts is not as big an issue, I don't think, but you don't have to look far to find violently divisive rhetoric. It's all part of the same problem.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 07, 2021, 11:00:28 pm
 I know, banging on etc.
However, I think the question of security at the Capitol yesterday is the crucial one. Plenty of military types are pretty baffled and the US military press are doggedly chasing it. Their style is to (somehow) make assertions by pointedly not making the same assertion. This expands again on why the DC guard wasn’t deployed and it casts a shadow on both the Capitol Police and the DOD:
 https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-army/2021/01/07/army-secretary-6200-national-guard-troops-to-be-in-dc-area-by-the-weekend/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&fbclid=IwAR0gxHM9Mo2owgCRcmkbxydlptk_V4ekyFG8PB2k6nthMwtFCN6h6Xoz9Go (https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-army/2021/01/07/army-secretary-6200-national-guard-troops-to-be-in-dc-area-by-the-weekend/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&fbclid=IwAR0gxHM9Mo2owgCRcmkbxydlptk_V4ekyFG8PB2k6nthMwtFCN6h6Xoz9Go)

Edit:
Nope, that smell of rotten fish? Looks more like it’s probably rotten fish, by the hour:
 https://www.snopes.com/ap/2021/01/07/capitol-police-rejected-offers-of-federal-help-to-quell-mob/?fbclid=IwAR2HCsrruOt9G0QaTlapPX7XMS8PdxfqyNkJqL-gakHoTg7KLvvjwv17vH8 (https://www.snopes.com/ap/2021/01/07/capitol-police-rejected-offers-of-federal-help-to-quell-mob/?fbclid=IwAR2HCsrruOt9G0QaTlapPX7XMS8PdxfqyNkJqL-gakHoTg7KLvvjwv17vH8)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 08, 2021, 06:13:36 am
An officer of the Capitol Officer has died after being injured in Wednesday's insurrection.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 08, 2021, 07:22:51 am
There’s another article on the snopes site you linked OMM that quotes in detail from the speech Trump made, captured on video by Bloomberg it says, about marching on the US Capitol. I referenced it earlier but here it is more fully:


Quote
After this, we’re going to walk down — and I’ll be there with you — we’re going to walk down, we’re going to walk down — anyone you want, but I think right here — we’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women. And we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness, you have to show strength, and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing, and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated — lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your votes heard.

Later in the speech

Quote


The best is yet to come. We’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue — I love Pennsylvania Avenue — and we’re going to the Capitol. And we’re going to try and give — the Democrats are hopeless, they never vote for anything, not even one vote — but we’re going to try to give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don’t need any of our help; we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country. So let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-tell-supporters-storm/

The intent to disrupt the certification sounds clear enough to me.



Edit - second quote included
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 08:16:46 am
An officer of the Capitol Officer has died after being injured in Wednesday's insurrection.

Because, the real people that the twunts in power, throw around, manipulate, use and discard like paper plates at a party; always pay a higher price than the people they serve.

I despair for the radicalised army of idiots, that stormed the Capitol, but I don’t blame them; they were made, manufactured. Blame the twunts who made them.

I lament the ease with which the barricades were breached, but I don’t blame the officers manning them. They were clearly overwhelmed, unprepared, undermanned and it’s clear that many still tried (and must have known how hopeless it was) to fight back.
But, it’s already obvious that those officers were set up, by their own leaders, all that remains to be discovered is whether that set up was one of pure incompetence or pure corruption.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 08:33:44 am
I’ve always like Liz, a bit of a polite version of “Tucker”. Every bit as scathing though:

(https://i.ibb.co/JqKrWQs/9-CB87659-9-A27-4-A23-BCE4-5-E3-D7-DA79-C64.jpg)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 08:48:37 am
Sorry, it’s been busy overnight.
I think many Western Governments are about to publicly call this an orchestrated coup attempt.
Given the nature of the people quoted in this article, I believe they have been asked to brief the media anonymously. People in such positions don’t stay there if they like talking to reporters:
 https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-attempted-coup-federal-law-enforcement-capitol-police-2021-1?fbclid=IwAR37j8K8_Uwl8y0fD9mv5FmO-JhBXrioUdMyr-DRh_HmihlGyRwq5scYogI (https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-attempted-coup-federal-law-enforcement-capitol-police-2021-1?fbclid=IwAR37j8K8_Uwl8y0fD9mv5FmO-JhBXrioUdMyr-DRh_HmihlGyRwq5scYogI)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 08, 2021, 08:51:34 am
But, it’s already obvious that those officers were set up, by their own leaders, all that remains to be discovered is whether that set up was one of pure incompetence or pure corruption.

As someone else said yesterday, I always prefer to apply Occam's razor when looking at causes and explanations - which pretty much rules out anything smacking of a conspiracy theory. But this particular fish is beginning to stink to high heaven.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 08:54:52 am
But, it’s already obvious that those officers were set up, by their own leaders, all that remains to be discovered is whether that set up was one of pure incompetence or pure corruption.

As someone else said yesterday, I always prefer to apply Occam's razor when looking at causes and explanations - which pretty much rules out anything smacking of a conspiracy theory. But this particular fish is beginning to stink to high heaven.

Being a diagnosed paranoid, does not preclude the possibility that they are following you.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 09:47:32 am
No Sean.
You are wrong.
I’ve lived with some of these people East and West Coast. California (where I lived with a Deputy Sheriff and his 911 dispatcher wife and attended Middle school in San Jose),  Georgia (Savannah/Thunderbolt where I was a project manager in Universal shipyard). I was stationed first in Rosy Roads (Puerto Ricco) and later in Port Canaveral for a year. Lived in New England, running vessels between there and Halifax and Greenland and so on.

These people are raised in these (underlying) beliefs, from early childhood. They are no more (and no less) deluded than a devout Catholic, Muslim or Hindu. Just as many of those “more obvious” groups are prone to radicalism, so too are these “American patriots and Christians” (most of them think they are engaged in a holy, Christian, endeavour (Shaman not withstanding)).

It’s a cult.

Shit, any religion, any “national identity” is a cult (except yours, dear reader, obviously yours is the only true way; you being the only “true” people. I’m talking about the others).

Of course there is individual choice in play.
Are you surprised at the choices they made?
Bollocks.
They made they only choice they could, or at least, the only choices they were able to see, because they’re whole lives lead them to that conclusion. The people they were raised to trust, told them the “others” were lying, showed them “evidence” they had not been equipped to question. Told them the very foundations of their existence were being destroyed. Fed them literature and 24hr “news” channels that “proved” it. Bombarded them to the extent that there was no space, no time, no “in”, for any other reality.

I dunno, read some of the stuff from people who “woke up” from the Nazi rabbit hole mind set. Or Opus Dei. Or Scientology. Or the IRA. Or even just bog standard Christian Preachers/Ministers, who lost their faith and suddenly awoke to the misogynistic, homophobic, elitist crap they’d learned to spew.

Yes, being a Nazi is a choice, but it’s usually Hobson's; it’s just the people making it don’t realise they’ve been manoeuvred there.

If you want blame someone, look at who benefits from the system that created those people.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 08, 2021, 09:53:48 am
Sean who?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 10:02:08 am
Nope. That’s not enough.

Look at this picture, even ignore the sarcastic (but accurate) comment attached:

 (https://i.ibb.co/0cHsWJr/B7-AFC655-BB46-4583-B4-A9-0-D1-E9538287-D.jpg)

See the guy on the right? In the hoody? Look at the lanyard around his neck.
That’s his work id badge.
He’s already been fired and his bosses have passed all of his details to the FBI.
These people do not think they are doing anything even remotely questionable, they honestly believe they are doing the “right” thing and that they are making their parents, community and leaders proud. They believe they are good citizens, serving their country and it’s people and that the “others” are not. Not part of that community, not part of the country, not “true” citizens, not fellow countrymen and women.
Because that’s all they’ve even been told, by everybody they’ve ever trusted.

That dude, is sat at home (or in a bar) blubbing into the alcohol of his choice, wondering how everything he believed in, betrayed him. He doesn’t understand why he’s paying, quite a lot, for doing what he was told was right.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 10:02:57 am
Sean who?

Sorry, Seankenny.
For some reason he thinks I like Nazis.
Tit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 08, 2021, 10:38:57 am
I don't know if that's remotely fair, Matt.

I understand your argument but at what point does societal blame stop and personal responsibility/agency begin? I appreciate that this is a group of people who have been lied to for many years, systematically underfunded, fed bullshit by Fox etc. But they still have agency don't they? They are still responsible for their own actions.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on January 08, 2021, 10:42:50 am
That’s not what I think in the slightest. But your analysis is quite wrong, in my view. I simply haven’t got the time right now to explain why in detail, but should later.

I will say that whatever environment you’re born into, the decision to openly support death camps and pogroms remains a choice, one that clearly not everyone from this background makes. Yes, systemic factors are super important. But everyone, everywhere, in every situation, has a choice about how they support, accommodate, or oppose such evil acts. Some times and places (1930s USSR, or 1990s central Africa, for instance) place people into nearly impossible situations in which the range of moral acts open to them is limited and brings appalling consequences. I don’t think 21st century America is great, but it’s not the worst either.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 08, 2021, 11:10:59 am
But, it’s already obvious that those officers were set up, by their own leaders, all that remains to be discovered is whether that set up was one of pure incompetence or pure corruption.

As someone else said yesterday, I always prefer to apply Occam's razor when looking at causes and explanations - which pretty much rules out anything smacking of a conspiracy theory. But this particular fish is beginning to stink to high heaven.


As I mentioned yesterday it smells to me like a third option, even though it's the most complicated, so seemingly the least likely. Which is that yes, the storming of Capitol was anticipated by the intelligence services, yes it was tacitly enabled by federal authorities, but it was enabled in order to destroy Trump and his family's legacy by their own actions, not to keep him in power. 'Hoist by his own petard' will be his legacy.

Look how utterly pathetic he's been made to look. He's a weaker more pathetic figure now than at any time in his political career and parts of his party are disowning him where previously they hadn't the nerve. Foreign leaders did the same the day after. They'll likely have been briefed on their intelligence services' view of the situation. As Matt alludes to, the protestors were just morons not focussed revolutionaries with a plan. Also looks to have been little orchestration in other areas of the US, just a potential tinder box of similar morons awaiting a spark which never came.

edit: also, it would have been relatively easy (relative to many other parts of the US that is) to control the carriage of firearms among that protest group in DC. Intelligence services could therefore risk assess the potential loss of life from that mob storming Capitol, and conclude that - providing law enforcement didn't panic and start shooting - the potential for loss of life would be 'relatively' low and the mob would be easily dispersed once support in numbers arrived.
It seems highly distasteful to suggest that tacitly allowing the trashing Capitol, loss of life, symbolism of white supremacists carrying flags through congress etc. may have been used to destroy Trump, but that's how it looks to me.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 11:11:04 am
I don't know if that's remotely fair, Matt.

I understand your argument but at what point does societal blame stop and personal responsibility/agency begin? I appreciate that this is a group of people who have been lied to for many years, systematically underfunded, fed bullshit by Fox etc. But they still have agency don't they? They are still responsible for their own actions.

They are dumb enough to wear they’re id badge to a riot with their face uncovered and actually pose for photos.

If we insist on focusing on the “programmed” and not the “programmers” or, to put it another way, fail to address the system that created these monsters. There will just be more monsters.
You say you have agency (so do I). Do you recognise when your agency is constrained? When your hand is forced?
Probably, I think (hope) I tend to.
But, and I suspect this applies to any poster on this forum, for a variety of reasons, we have learned, developed and discovered the tools that allow us to question our internal narrative and that of those around us.
I see the “they were lied to” and “they didn’t know what they were voting for” arguments advanced, repeatedly, by Brexit opponents. The insistence that people were fooled into their position and their vote manipulated. This is a commonly accepted view in many quarters, along with the accompanying ethos of “not blaming the voters”, of “blame the leaders”. Somehow, though, the same people advancing such arguments, simultaneously delineate (magically) between the “deceived”  and the “Dyed in the woad, xenophobic, racist, nationalists” that, like that fucking physicists cat, seem to occupy the same phase space.

I think, using those tools I’ve learned and developed, that the “manipulated” and “ lied to” are not mutually exclusive from, to or with “ nationalist” or “ racist” or “ xenophobic”.
That and every position in between.
I don’t think that it takes much effort to show, that a substantial number of people, are prone to manipulation by smarter sections of the population. That their agency is proscribed by both circumstance and their broader “societal” education. They are who they were taught to be.
Both history and fiction is replete with tales of those trapped or even doomed by their adherence to the codes and systems they were raised to believe in.
Jesus, take a total fiction, a story that is a story, because it represents an unusual, unthinkable, break from the accepted norm. Billy Elliot.
People able to break their program, are a minority, not the norm.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 08, 2021, 11:33:54 am
Day 2 of reflection - having read and watched a few things about this process:

The level of belief that the Trump/Supremicist demonstrators had for this protest - that they would not get punished - that they felt that they could do this, it might work, and that they could get away with it is a really scary takeaway for me.

Its indicative of how empowered and legitimised these people now feel under trump - and with retrospect how they were/have been allowed to get away with it! Especially when compared with the BLM protests.

Shocking. And the message thats sent from this too... 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 08, 2021, 11:45:26 am
Totally agree TT.

Two anecdotes. I have a friend in PA who took great pleasure yesterday in firing an employee picture climbing the Capitol walls.

I think you're seriously over-egging your argument Matt. I know lots of very progressive Americans who come from one or more of the following backgrounds: working class/blue collar/Fundamentalist Christian/ultra-conservative/gun rights/"redneck" - literally from an uneducated family living for generations in the same "holler" in Virginia. People do have choies.

@Pete - that third option just seems really implausible. It seems very high risk for something that might well not have worked ... and why bother so close to the end of his term? It doesn't add up to.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 08, 2021, 12:00:46 pm
Implausible and high-risk certainly. The alternatives as mentioned are incompetence, or corruption of Capitol defences by the Trump side. I can also accept either or a combination of those being true.

Just that it looks like the most pathetically feeble coup attempt ever, as if a bunch of dumb animals wanted to storm the building, and when they got there they had nothing to say, no spokesperson and no thought-through agenda. Which is apt given their leader.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on January 08, 2021, 12:01:37 pm
Alex, I think it is semantics. I, and it seems Andy, take truth to have a slightly different meaning to fact. And a quick google suggests this is the generally accepted usage.

It's definitely semantics, but to me it still feels like an appropriation of the word in an attempt to lend extra authority to individual experience. This is what annoys me - for some reason I don't seem to mind it being used where it's clearly an approximation or exaggeration e.g. "the truth of the matter is that BoJo is a knob"

The first thing that I get on google is "in accordance with fact or reality", which would make it very hard to untie truth from fact. Maybe google gives us different results? Beyond the quick definition it looks like it rapidly morphs into a rabbit hole of philosophy. In any case I remain unconvinced that using it in what seems to me to be this "modern liberal" way is useful from the point of view of articulating things clearly, since it muddies the water around facts/"truth" (as I understand it) and opinions/beliefs/experiences. I'm also pretty convinced that it alienates a lot of people with any conservative (small c) leaning. Certainly does for me - if anyone uses truth in a relativist way (e.g. "we should try to understand each others' truths") I just want to kick them in the nuts really hard, and vote for whoever they're not voting for  :lol:.

A scientific analogy might be the facts of your research results vs the use of them to endorse your hypothesis as true (and yes I know about null hypotheses).
This is another rabbit hole, since I'd argue that science is largely just models that help us understand how things work, and it's very hard (impossible?) to really be sure that a hypothesis is "true", rather than just "true to the best of our knowledge" (i.e. we've not found something that's broken our model yet)

There are other things like this that wind me up, e.g. "findings of fact" in the legal system, where really they just mean "setting reasonable assumptions" ;)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: ali k on January 08, 2021, 12:16:08 pm
They are no more (and no less) deluded than a devout Catholic, Muslim or Hindu. Just as many of those “more obvious” groups are prone to radicalism, so too are these “American patriots and Christians”.

It’s a cult.

This is an interesting parallel to me. Why is it that, say, radical Islamism is seen as so much of a threat that there are intervention programs, and any preachers inciting violence can be arrested. Yet for about 6 or 7 years Trump has essentially been able to radicalise his supporters with the assistance of a major TV network, culminating in violence the other night and 5 people dying. Forget the BLM protests - imagine if the people storming the Capitol had been wearing headscarfs and shouting “Allahu Akbar” having just attended a rally with their leader. It didn’t exactly need an undercover surveillance operation to know what was likely to happen the other night.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 08, 2021, 12:22:00 pm
Pete, you are suggesting that people who wanted a 'good' outcome deliberately let a 'bad' one develop because they thought they would control it if it escalated, give or take a few unfortunate lives lost. I think that is improbable.

More probable is a culture of connivance and incompetence on the part of decision makers at Capitol Police. But whatever it was, we agree that Trump is seriously diminished. Whether his base think that is another matter.

TT & andy - exactly, it is why people are arguing strongly for action now, rather than crossing fingers and letting two weeks slide by. Since Charlotteville the culture of impunity for the far right has been overtly condoned from the top, no surprise we are here now.

It is where we go to next that may have surprises.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on January 08, 2021, 12:30:13 pm
They are no more (and no less) deluded than a devout Catholic, Muslim or Hindu. Just as many of those “more obvious” groups are prone to radicalism, so too are these “American patriots and Christians”.

It’s a cult.

This is an interesting parallel to me. Why is it that, say, radical Islamism is seen as so much of a threat that there are intervention programs, and any preachers inciting violence can be arrested. Yet for about 6 or 7 years Trump has essentially been able to radicalise his supporters with the assistance of a major TV network, culminating in violence the other night and 5 people dying. Forget the BLM protests - imagine if the people storming the Capitol had been wearing headscarfs and shouting “Allahu Akbar” having just attended a rally with their leader. It didn’t exactly need an undercover surveillance operation to know what was likely to happen the other night.

Well the difference is simply power, and who holds it. In this instance, the mob were enabled by theoretically the most powerful man on earth.

Imagine if they'd tried to do the same thing in Taliban controlled Afghanistan, for example.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 08, 2021, 12:32:02 pm

They are dumb enough to wear they’re id badge to a riot with their face uncovered and actually pose for photos.

If we insist on focusing on the “programmed” and not the “programmers” or, to put it another way, fail to address the system that created these monsters. There will just be more monsters.

Yes, 100%


People able to break their program, are a minority, not the norm.

I think this is exaggerating the situation. For the comfortable and well educated it's easy enough to question things when you are taught how, agreed. Swimming against the cultural tide can be hard, but there is a range of agency out there, it's not impossible for people to take some responsibility. You risk blurring understanding with excusing.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 08, 2021, 12:37:02 pm

 (https://i.ibb.co/0cHsWJr/B7-AFC655-BB46-4583-B4-A9-0-D1-E9538287-D.jpg)


I like that someone had captioned this along the lines of

" As the acid wore off, Jamiroquai realised the way they were promoting the release of the new album wasn't such a good idea"
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 01:15:11 pm
They are no more (and no less) deluded than a devout Catholic, Muslim or Hindu. Just as many of those “more obvious” groups are prone to radicalism, so too are these “American patriots and Christians”.

It’s a cult.

This is an interesting parallel to me. Why is it that, say, radical Islamism is seen as so much of a threat that there are intervention programs, and any preachers inciting violence can be arrested. Yet for about 6 or 7 years Trump has essentially been able to radicalise his supporters with the assistance of a major TV network, culminating in violence the other night and 5 people dying. Forget the BLM protests - imagine if the people storming the Capitol had been wearing headscarfs and shouting “Allahu Akbar” having just attended a rally with their leader. It didn’t exactly need an undercover surveillance operation to know what was likely to happen the other night.

Exactly, and how many of you that disagree with me, simultaneously recognise the “rescue” of an individual from a given cult, or the “deprograming” of such individuals? The rehabilitation of offenders or addicts?
Anybody had CBT? Did it work? Why?
Who recognises the unconscious bias is a thing? A thing that has to be educated out of yourself, by conscious effort and plagued with slips and relapses into comfortable thought patterns? When did you realise that you have unconscious biases? What made you realise? What made you “choose” them in the first place?
No, sorry, whilst I agree there should be consequences for those people we were originally talking about, and I’m not actually trying to say they are blameless. The mitigation is glaring.
Andy, for every person who escaped that background, how many remain there?
I escaped my background.
I went to chapel, Sunday school. I suppose I always saw it as a chore and ditched as soon as I was allowed to.
But I believed in God and Jesus, I knew it. There wasn’t any point in arguing, because their existence was ineffable to mere mortals, so it didn’t matter that I couldn’t explain it all.
Around the same time I ditched Chapel (13 ish) a girl came to stay with us (actually two, Ruth and Ofra), my age, on exchange (my family was big on exchange programs. Thank fuck). I fell for Ruth big time. She was Jewish, fro, Haifa. I went out to spend a month there. Her family were pretty liberal, they ate “White Beef”, on the quiet, that sizzled in the pan. Went well with eggs. Israel was wonderful, nice people, people of god.
I saw Arabs. I had no idea that Allah and God were the same fella.
On TV, I saw scruffy Arabs, throwing stones and petrol bombs at smartly attired, disciplined ranks of “policemen”. My dad was a policeman. They were throwing petrol bombs at my dad (somebodies dad). I had empathy for the awful tales of holocaust and the relief of homeland. At home, in England, I saw Arabs on TV, often, hijacking airplanes, shooting hostages, blowing things up.
It wasn’t long before I forgot about Ruth. Too far away and there were other, tempting, delights closer to home.
I grew up. I grew old enough for my grandfather to tell me why he hated the Zionists (not the Jews, he was clear about that) and about the things that happened to his mates in British Administered Palestine. I mean, being snatch off the street, castrated and dumped back at the barracks gate with you tackle beside you, can offend a fellow.
I grew up and left the village. I learned, the black and white turned first gray and then a muddy, cloudy, viscous, shit colour.
By the time I returned to Haifa, was deployed to Haifa in a smart blue uniform, in the autumn of 1990; the place and the people looked very different. I no longer believed in god.
I was married, but I looked Ruth up. Met her in a cafe. She was in olive combats, she had a Uzi on one shoulder and a handbag on the other. She was still pretty. Never spoke to her again.
See, I was different, because I learned to be different. I learned to be different because I left my village, my echo chamber, my people.
I can, today, take you to meet the people I was at primary school with, who never left that village, and never learned.
Yes, I know quite a few who left, like me and I’m still friendly with them and they are urbane and sophisticated.
One girl, who never left, fits that description too (artist/photographer).
Nevertheless I can introduce you to many more (note more, not all) who had no reason to leave, and didn’t.
A few years back, long before Brexit, I went home for my grandmother’s funeral. Spent the weekend there, wake, doing the rounds, catching up.
Fuck but I nearly cracked a molar!
I have never ground my teeth so hard or long or choked down a desperate need to tell people to go fuck themselves with porcupine with such difficulty.

I have not gone back.

People are who they are programmed to be. I am who I was programmed to be.
I did not leave the village because I thought there was something wrong with the village. I left because I had romantic notions of travelling the world (I quite literally “ran away to sea” about nine days after my 18th). I had those notions from reading Tom Sawyer and the like. It’s only looking back and the accident of learning after, that I see the idyllic village of my childhood, warped in Royston Vassey.

I hope you can see the analogy in that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 08, 2021, 02:08:41 pm
If I may say Matt, that comes across as pretty patronising. You have to ask what came first - the tendency to open-mindedness and desire to travel and experience diverse cultures? Or the travelling and experiencing diverse cultures? Sure, the second can reinforce the first (or sometimes not!).
 There will be people in your ‘Royston vassey’ village with a spectrum of views, from high to low open-mindedness, more or less accepting of change and diversity. Sure, people who travelled lots and live/work in different areas tend towards more open-mindedness and acceptance of change and diversity. But I believe most people find it a bit tedious to listen to them preaching.
There’s good and bad in people, not in the places they live.
That’s not to completely dismiss the role played by environment.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 03:13:43 pm
If I may say Matt, that comes across as pretty patronising. You have to ask what came first - the tendency to open-mindedness and desire to travel and experience diverse cultures? Or the travelling and experiencing diverse cultures? Sure, the second can reinforce the first (or sometimes not!).
 There will be people in your ‘Royston vassey’ village with a spectrum of views, from high to low open-mindedness, more or less accepting of change and diversity. Sure, people who travelled lots and live/work in different areas tend towards more open-mindedness and acceptance of change and diversity. But I believe most people find it a bit tedious to listen to them preaching.
There’s good and bad in people, not in the places they live.
That’s not to completely dismiss the role played by environment.

Yes Pete.
There are and the village has grown hugely in recent years and a variety of people, from all over, have moved in. The village of my childhood, no longer exists, but that village, that now exists only in the heads of those who were there, is the village that I described as Royston Vassey.
My point is, many of the people, who lived in that long gone village, metaphorically, still do.
You can find them standing by the swings, in the playing field, pushing their Grandchildren and griping about the ladies doing yoga under the willow tree.
When it was me, sat on the swing, being pushed, it was a different set of Grandparents, griping about my mother running her landscape painting class under the same willow and mentally living in a completely different village again, that also had ceased to exist.

If it seemed patronising, it wasn’t intended to be. The fact (are we allowed to say that? I avoided “truth”) is, plenty of of my old friends are utter bigots. Unthinkingly so, no concept of what I mean when I write that. Frankly, nothing shines a laser on my own, ingrained and innate bigotry and biases, than being shown the things I had forgotten I was (and, worse, how much I still am).
But, with all that said, I’m not saying they are bad people, or that the village was bad. It isn’t/wasn’t and they are/weren’t because they were/are just what their environment and experiences made them.
Sometimes, people are just a bit different or (I think more likely) something happens, that creates a question, that starts a search, that leads them off in an unexpected direction.
Out of the metaphorical village.
Some people, for what ever reason, never feel the itch of the question, or get distracted and forget they ever had any questions.

People live in the villages of their minds. The fact ( sorry) that some outsider can see all the flaws and contradictions, and then wonder why the fuck these people haven’t left to join them in the observer’s obviously better village; is irrelevant. The observed simply has no clue that any other village can exist.
Oh they are aware that there’s another village across the valley, but their mental image of that village is, more or less, the same as their own.
They are probably aware, that there is a village, on an island in the South Pacific (or anywhere too far away to be immediate) but that’s so alien, it’s just “other”.

Now, my experience of the US, was one of insular communities, in a lot of places. Even San Jose, which is really just a southern extension of San Francisco. Ok, that was pre-CNN but there was a single, 24 hr, news channel. It was 24 hrs of Bay area news, midday and evening there was 15-20 minutes of State, National and International news. I was 14, Ken, the guy I was on the exchange with, when he’d been in England and at my school (most of the year before, so 13) couldn’t point out Britain on a map.
Yes, the majority of people in the US live in large, cosmopolitan, mental villages; the popular vote is plenty of evidence for that.
However, in a nation the size and population of a continent, there are (always going to be) a large number of people in very small, metaphorical and literal villages, and they don’t realise it.

No, I have no idea where all this is coming from and I’m sure it’s incredibly boring.
Ultimately, it’s wrong to write off that entire crowd or the movement in it’s entirety as “Nazis”. Some of them are, some, probably more, are not. They’re all kinds of different things and each a product of their own environment and education.
That’s where the failings come in. They have been ignored, glossed over, marginalised. Somebody (or several somebodies) spotted that and has been systematically twisting that environment and eduction into the shit you saw yesterday.
A bit like everything leading up to me, for reasons I don’t quite grasp, spewing a mountain of blather here.

   

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: El Mocho on January 08, 2021, 03:53:51 pm
...the village... ...but that village... ...utter bigots... in the village
   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjr11lGEBg4&list=PLHFlIZBBUTXPvig6imFLAaGZdDfxqsbzL&index=8

sorry.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 08, 2021, 03:58:25 pm
Matt, if I were mad enough to look on 8chan and Parler I am sure there would be plenty who would seem totally 'down the rabbit'/ 'programmed'/ in a cult etc.

And their environment plays a huge role in that. But it is not totally deterministic, and there are plenty who make choices they have the agency to make differently. This philosophy has been debated plenty down the centuries, but making due allowance for the bad luck to be born who and where they were does not absolve them of resposnibility.

In any case, like you say, the focus should be systemic, that is where the solutions lie.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 08, 2021, 04:24:58 pm
...the village... ...but that village... ...utter bigots... in the village
   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjr11lGEBg4&list=PLHFlIZBBUTXPvig6imFLAaGZdDfxqsbzL&index=8

sorry.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc7dmu4G8oc
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 04:50:50 pm
...the village... ...but that village... ...utter bigots... in the village
   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjr11lGEBg4&list=PLHFlIZBBUTXPvig6imFLAaGZdDfxqsbzL&index=8

sorry.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc7dmu4G8oc

Ummm...

Yup. Exactly.

Idles are better though.

Total aside, whilst driving back from the supermarket, I was hit by a memory.
I could remember when I stopped believing in god. Because that was when I left the village, long before I actually went.
It wasn’t the reading, I reckon that would have stayed in my head and I would have been happy lost in a book.

I had a map of Cornwall on my bedroom wall.
That’s what did it.

Anybody remember “Threads”?
BBC mini series. Basically dramatising the utter shit storm that life in Britain would be, post nuclear war.

I lived almost exactly six miles from RAF St Mawgan, then NATO North Atlantic command and home to the Vulcan squadron. The sky would go dark, for a surprisingly long time, when they rehearsed their full squadron scramble. I thought it fucking impressive. The roar was gut twisting.

Anyway, after Threads, I picked up a compass and from a Telegraph article, drew some blast radii for various Soviet missile types and yields around St Mawgan.

Apparently I wouldn’t have to worry too much about life after a nuclear stike.

I lost a fair bit of sleep and religion.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 08, 2021, 05:37:22 pm
https://www.revolt.tv/news/2021/1/7/22219433/man-died-at-us-capitol-tasering-himself

Think the tasering bit is true?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 08, 2021, 05:40:32 pm
Just getting up to speed with this.
Some great discussion.

I still think it's remarkably easy to be deceived by the experience, the feeling, of doing the right thing.

I like the concept of "Conceit" in Buddhism:

https://buddhasadvice.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/conceit/

The experience of our "Self" in doing. "I can feel it in my bones" belief.

Andy P, how many of us allow for the contingency of fact you reference in your post about history?

We (the righteous ones - fucking privileged) are deciding that the actions of others - "the mob" - are wrong. Aren't we in the process of attempting to confirm our own prejudices, as much as anyone?

I agree with OMM, and his question of agency - and if I understand your position well enough Matt, also blame (in and of itself). On the latter, it seems you are balancing benefit and accountability, which doesn't seem unreasonable.

The reference to Brexit, the equivalence of the arguments, seems quite clear. The Axis of Evil is the orchestrated development of prejudice against Muslims.

So often we want to protect the experience of our "Self", to defend it from annihilation. We don't realise what we're trying "to make true".

OMM, agree with you about the total conviction, in belief, of the guy with the work ID.

The question of agency is as difficult (or harder) to wrestle with, as the notion that "someone's in charge" - "someone needs to be blamed for things going wrong".

We can set things up, so that there is greater balance between opposing views, but even that is fraught with difficulty (lazy, need to finish this post, copout phrase).

I remember the "Kettling" in Sheffield, at the time of the Lib Dem conference in 2011:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-12722735

For me, that felt as must about silencing a voice, shutting out a belief, as anything.

Do I think of anyone marching into the Capitol building a "moron"? Absolutely not.

I'm inclined Prussia towards Andy's view about the security measures, or lack of - which is why I referenced the above.

That said, consider the importance and symbolism of the occasion, and try to balance that with the numbers "marching". I'll try to check the numbers, if possible, or does anyone have that info/already posted? The (very hard to understand) low key approach to security, could be a reflection of intelligence at the time about the likely scale of protest. Possibly. ?

Seems absurd when compared to the level of policing at protests in the UK - or the resources directed towards a tree felling site in Nether Edge, Sheffield.

Who's to blame? A lot of us probably, for balancing risking what's comfortable, against the risks of doing something to change things for the better.

Sorry if this is a repeat of much of the above.

Edit:

Quote OMM, which I thought:
"However, I think the question of security at the Capitol yesterday is the crucial one." And Andy's stinking fish allusion, which I've referred to.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 08, 2021, 06:07:08 pm

 (https://i.ibb.co/0cHsWJr/B7-AFC655-BB46-4583-B4-A9-0-D1-E9538287-D.jpg)

Looks like Trump booked some redneck Village People tribute for his version M.A.G.A.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 06:23:42 pm

 (https://i.ibb.co/0cHsWJr/B7-AFC655-BB46-4583-B4-A9-0-D1-E9538287-D.jpg)

Looks like Trump booked some redneck Village People tribute for his version M.A.G.A.

Yes.
Though this speaks to my take on their “agency”, I’m not quite as generous as Dave, I think some of the people in that were incapable of agency through education and educational ability. I don’t know how to phrase that. Anyone familiar with the Derek Bentley travesty? Or Styllou Christofi (less travesty of justice, but an interesting take on “what’s normal or right , in the village, isn’t outside the village” angle)?

Anyway, Chris beat me with the Tased nuts story, coz I could find the tweets again quickly enough.
Pure “Naked Gun”. You couldn’t make it up:

(https://i.ibb.co/vwVhfrN/3-F768688-0-DCB-4-D08-B95-B-6598-D6153024.jpg)

I dunno, I guess he has agency, I guess he was “making his own choices” but , I’m not convinced he was equipped for the task.
 

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 08, 2021, 06:29:17 pm
Over-equipped, you might say.

Just read this, on the anger in the bottom half of US society. You may like it:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/08/trump-homegrown-fascism-inequality-poverty
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on January 08, 2021, 07:02:12 pm
What about a 4th Option Pete?

Flynn/Prince/GRU etc. with a smaller cadre of conspirators (the ex-military guys with plates, guns and cableties) with a clear mission amongst the largely naive Trump driven herd of ‘protestors’.

It looks to me like there were two distinct groups in the ‘mob’ some of whom with clearer intent than the majority.

The fish really stinks.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 07:08:52 pm
What about a 4th Option Pete?

Flynn/Prince/GRU etc. with a smaller cadre of conspirators (the ex-military guys with plates, guns and cableties) with a clear mission amongst the largely naive Trump driven herd of ‘protestors’.

It looks to me like there were two distinct groups in the ‘mob’ some of whom with clearer intent than the majority.

The fish really stinks.

The boxes and the Reps were gone when they got there.

It’s the same with the gallows.

Like I said, if a hinge had failed or one of those cabinets in the barricaded door, had fallen; it’s very likely today would have had a very different flavour.

Also,
Highly unlikely that any serious players would have been waving flags or posing for pictures. Or even out in front. They’ll be (if they’re there) in the background.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mark s on January 08, 2021, 07:10:26 pm
I happened to look on twitter when it all kicked off and was watching a news anchor live in the Capitol building. It was sort of on par with the amazement of what I was seeing on 9/11
It's mind boggling to think what they believe and its mind bending to think it's coming from the man in charge.
I hope a lot of those cops get sacked, complete dereliction of duty.
I've seen a few of the vids of the woman getting one in the neck. At every barrier she passed her confidence grew. Until she got over confident.
Shock the next morning when the likes of Palin was claiming the old enemy of antifa were dressed as trump supporters.
The FBI will be laughing at all the self recorded evidence they provided. It will be an interesting week or 2 seeing how many they round up.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mark s on January 08, 2021, 07:15:48 pm
What about a 4th Option Pete?

Flynn/Prince/GRU etc. with a smaller cadre of conspirators (the ex-military guys with plates, guns and cableties) with a clear mission amongst the largely naive Trump driven herd of ‘protestors’.

It looks to me like there were two distinct groups in the ‘mob’ some of whom with clearer intent than the majority.

The fish really stinks.

There was a lot of military and police types in there. Almost to the point of the officer who died being friendly fire.

I've seen a guy on twitter really going into searching who they are, lots replying. The tactics, clothing cable ties etc. Even naming some high ranking army types.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 07:37:33 pm
What about a 4th Option Pete?

Flynn/Prince/GRU etc. with a smaller cadre of conspirators (the ex-military guys with plates, guns and cableties) with a clear mission amongst the largely naive Trump driven herd of ‘protestors’.

It looks to me like there were two distinct groups in the ‘mob’ some of whom with clearer intent than the majority.

The fish really stinks.

There was a lot of military and police types in there. Almost to the point of the officer who died being friendly fire.

I've seen a guy on twitter really going into searching who they are, lots replying. The tactics, clothing cable ties etc. Even naming some high ranking army types.

Do you have a link?

Some of the people there must surely be ill.
This, apparently is a Doctor (MD). She’s not playing with a full deck:
 https://twitter.com/dremilyportermd/status/1347615820768272390?s=12 (https://twitter.com/dremilyportermd/status/1347615820768272390?s=12)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 08, 2021, 08:10:05 pm
Yes.
Though this speaks to my take on their “agency”, I’m not quite as generous as Dave, I think some of the people in that were incapable of agency through education and educational ability..

It's difficult, isn't it. Agency, intent, criminal action. A balanced consideration of the first doesn't condone the latter. However, "moronic" actions of a minority need to be separated out, rather than being used to indicate the "moronic nature" (which there isn't) of the whole.

And the question of "the whole" is an interesting one, when you direct it towards Trump.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 08:16:08 pm
Oophhh!

I used to carry a pretty hefty PI package (oo er missus) when I was in practice, fucking up a Mega yacht might get a bit “brown trouser” serious in the liability stakes.
Pretty sure it wouldn’t cover this modest claim:
 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/dominion-sues-trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-defamation-seeks-1-3-n1253464?fbclid=IwAR3ToDW9QM4iKnCcITqfCZX83gE57s5qrx0P1HdLEu0VfGBYpzIg5jJP0fA (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/dominion-sues-trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-defamation-seeks-1-3-n1253464?fbclid=IwAR3ToDW9QM4iKnCcITqfCZX83gE57s5qrx0P1HdLEu0VfGBYpzIg5jJP0fA)

Actually, if you prefer, the whole filing is available. 124 pages and not enough jokes. Still funny:

 https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.225699/gov.uscourts.dcd.225699.1.0_3.pdf (https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.225699/gov.uscourts.dcd.225699.1.0_3.pdf)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 08:31:17 pm
Yes.
Though this speaks to my take on their “agency”, I’m not quite as generous as Dave, I think some of the people in that were incapable of agency through education and educational ability..

It's difficult, isn't it. Agency, intent, criminal action. A balanced consideration of the first doesn't condone the latter. However, "moronic" actions of a minority need to be separated out, rather than being used to indicate the "moronic nature" (which there isn't) of the whole.

And the question of "the whole" is an interesting one, when you direct it towards Trump.

Part of my issue, is recognising aspects of myself in these peoples background. Coupled with a sense of loss, bordering on bereavement, that some of my cherished memories of people I met (either in 1980, when we drove from Mexico to Canada over a three month period or my later year in San Jose) is shattered by the thought that some of them might well have been in that crowd. People that I thought were friendly and welcoming, which they were to me, a good, polite, little white boy (if a little olive tinged). I never had cause to see any other side to them. Looking back, I had hardly any interaction with POC in those times, they didn’t live in the areas I was in. Seen, but almost zero interaction beyond ordering a burger.
The most POC interaction I had was a tour of the County Jail, where my host did a couple shifts every week. I had no reason to see that as odd.
I find it too easy to imagine the path that some of these people followed to that Capitol.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 08, 2021, 09:07:30 pm
Matt,

absolutely.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 08, 2021, 09:29:13 pm
Interesting video (among many) about the illusion of success:

https://youtu.be/3LopI4YeC4I

It seems that those who believe they are more responsible for their own success, are likely to get to "the top".

It's interesting to consider who believes they deserve, and can do something about it, compared to those who are more disenfranchised.

Trump's "success" plays on the struggle of the latter of course.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 08, 2021, 10:34:20 pm
This from the Governor of Maryland, is pretty damning.
He all but accuses Trump, via the Pentagon/DOD of trying facilitate the Capitol’s seizure by delaying guard deployment.
It sounds like somebody lost their nerve, eventually, releasing the authorisations needed. Only just in time.
 https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2021/01/08/maryland-governor-describes-delayed-permission-to-send-national-guard/ (https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2021/01/08/maryland-governor-describes-delayed-permission-to-send-national-guard/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mark s on January 08, 2021, 10:52:38 pm
https://extremism.gwu.edu/Capitol-Hill-Cases

Only clicked on 1st case. Detailed for sure.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on January 08, 2021, 11:45:55 pm
Twitter just permanently deleted Trump’s account (along with Flynn’s, Powell’s, Bongino’s and several others). Too little, too late.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 09, 2021, 06:18:38 am
To think, I used to dismiss him because of his hair.

This is pretty good.

https://youtu.be/orad8gIfCiY
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 09, 2021, 08:31:33 am
Twitter just permanently deleted Trump’s account (along with Flynn’s, Powell’s, Bongino’s and several others). Too little, too late.

Google has disabled Parler and Apple are reviewing it.

There has been an attempt to organise a second assault on the 17th and the Cheeto’s statement about not attending the inauguration has been interpreted as permission or encouragement to attack that.

I don’t think he’s going to leave the White house a free man.
I used to think that talk of him being prosecuted for this that and the other, would just fade and he would be swept under the carpet.
I think he crossed a Rubicon though (more Caesar salad than General) and I think they’ve decided he’s too dangerous to be allowed to continue. “They” being a lose coalition of cross party power brokers and oligarchs, almost certainly holding their noses to shake on it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 09, 2021, 08:43:49 am
Twitter just permanently deleted Trump’s account (along with Flynn’s, Powell’s, Bongino’s and several others). Too little, too late.

A lot of spines suddenly growing this week.

Matt I saw 19th for ‘million militia March’  ::) but maybe they are being relatively smart and throwing out some chaff.

I’m sure inaugurations are high security affairs anyway, but this year, holy shit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on January 09, 2021, 09:11:23 am
I don’t think he’s going to leave the White house a free man.

I used to think that maybe his ego would prevent him from pardoning himself, because it would be seen as an admission of guilt. After the latest events I think there's a very strong chance he pardons himself and says he had to do it because the "political swamp" were doing whatever they could to lock him up.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 09, 2021, 09:42:20 am
On a brighter note, the company that printed up the “Revolution 2021” commemorative prison wear, have outdone themselves, with their follow up “morning after” casual wear line:

(https://i.ibb.co/nPf9mC5/F8-D4-FED4-F5-B1-4-BA0-97-C2-9019-B84-F741-E.webp)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 09, 2021, 09:57:00 am
Day 2 of reflection - having read and watched a few things about this process:

The level of belief that the Trump/Supremicist demonstrators had for this protest - that they would not get punished - that they felt that they could do this, it might work, and that they could get away with it is a really scary takeaway for me.

Its indicative of how empowered and legitimised these people now feel under trump - and with retrospect how they were/have been allowed to get away with it! Especially when compared with the BLM protests.

Shocking. And the message thats sent from this too...

More on the impunity / empowerment felt by the Trump/far right -

Have you seen the vids of Mitt Romney being heckled (by many) on the flight - and Lindsey Graham being shouted at - at an airport I think...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 09, 2021, 10:13:17 am
Yes. I think many in that subculture see Wednesday as a success and precursor to worse over coming days and weeks.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 09, 2021, 10:17:14 am
Yes.
Though this speaks to my take on their “agency”, I’m not quite as generous as Dave, I think some of the people in that were incapable of agency through education and educational ability..

It's difficult, isn't it. Agency, intent, criminal action. A balanced consideration of the first doesn't condone the latter. However, "moronic" actions of a minority need to be separated out, rather than being used to indicate the "moronic nature" (which there isn't) of the whole.

And the question of "the whole" is an interesting one, when you direct it towards Trump.

Dave, I appreciate your Buddhist leanings and that you seek to see the positive in people. I share your belief in the potential in people. But no, sometimes it isn't 'difficult' - some people and some circumstances are just toxic and dangerous, and you can look to the history of human life on this planet since written records began for evidence in support.  I had typed a long post involving personal life stories and why people have agency, at least enough agency to choose not to act like this (scroll to the end): https://twitter.com/i/status/1347616155394043904

But in the end I couldn't be bothered explaining why I feel qualified to say 'don't act like a cunt just because you feel life served you a lemon'.


BTW in your linked vid, the next clip in line discusses Bayes' Theorem. As you may know this describes an equation for forming beliefs of the world based on the prior available evidence and then how to alter those beliefs as new evidence emerges. Everything you need to know about truth, evidence and Trump supporters can be summarised in the 15 seconds from the timestamp 6mins40 seconds on this clip. I thought that was ironic :)

And Russell Brand.. give me a break. One attention-seeker talking about another isn't very enlightening. The only way to fight dangerous malevolent narcissists is to not rise to their provocation and to starve them of attention - hence FB, Twitter etc. finally no-platforming Trump and his cronies.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 09, 2021, 10:51:49 am
Personally, I’d have liked to read the long post, Pete.
I know you have interesting experiences to draw on.

I definitely, well sort of, for sure, almost, absolutely, a bit, agree about some people being beyond hope.
When a dog attacks a child, we put it down, because we know the risk of a future attack isn’t worth the possibility of training the aggression out not working.

But, there have been apparently quite hopelessly corrupted people, who have been rehabilitated.

There was, too, a reason I mentioned the Derek Bentley case in an earlier post. Sometimes culpability is not so clear cut.

Take the ‘honour killing” examplle too. Something we’ve had to wrestle with in this country and will continue to have to counter. It is clearly wrong, by any objective measure (to me, that means any secular contemplation of even the vaguest, broadest, definitions of right and wrong, place murder firmly in the “wrong” category. Which is right (or is wrong? Too early on a Saturday, brain hurts).
However, those who carry out such atrocities, firmly believe in their righteousness. As they have been programmed to believe by underlying culture, religion and respected authority figures and texts. Their agency was proscribed. Saying that they were at liberty to choose a different path, is, absolutely, correct; it simply neglects the likelihood that they were programmed to see such options as nonviable.

Non of that, or anything I previously wrote, means I am unaware that individuals can and have broken their programming. I’m just certain that that is harder than it seems, to a group of forum posters, who, by and large, appear to in the category of “program breakers” and nonconformist by nature or nurture.


Haven’t read the Twatter thread yet, I will.

Edit:

The Tweet has been disabled and the thread removed “for inciting violence”. I guess I can imagine it. Scrolling through her tweets has given me a headache.

Has anybody else noticed the massive number of blonde, buxom, Barbie clones, that this section of society seems to venerate so highly? Weird, considering how misogynistic the movement is as a whole. Anybody would think the majority of the “Alpha males” with the big guns (in their hands, probably not their trousers) weren’t getting enough and are disproportionately thirsty. Almost like they’d follow blue eyes and a cleavage into a burning building.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 09, 2021, 11:29:58 am
The twitter vid is still there when I just looked. If you want to erode your faith in humanity.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 09, 2021, 11:57:09 am
One of the guys with the zip cuffs and plate is a retired Air Force Lt Colonel https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/an-air-force-combat-veteran-breached-the-senate
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 09, 2021, 12:43:41 pm
One of the guys with the zip cuffs and plate is a retired Air Force Lt Colonel https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/an-air-force-combat-veteran-breached-the-senate

Yeah. I thought things were quieting down.

You might remember I mentioned an “Intelligence community” and former USN friend, partner of an old CO?

He’s *The* security bod at ADNOC and a senior consultant to the Saudi gov., but he’s taken leave and flown back to the US.

I’ve seen him get quite angry about this stuff on Facebook before, but he’s ratcheting up almost to the same levels as Trumps Troopers.
People such as him and his friends, have resources that are not to be ignored. This is a delicate situation. If he’s making public pronouncements like this, given the risk to his position, the rusty clip, that holds the pin, that keeps the anger in; is failing.

I texted his partner and told her to tie him to a chair and hide his ammo. Frankly, I think she might be helping him load, whilst strapping  on her own plate carrier:

(https://i.ibb.co/XjPftr8/D6-FB09-F0-4-AC5-4895-BBD2-371458736-A2-A.jpg)

Edit:

Actually, the last line of the article you linked, Teestub, is pretty central to all this.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 09, 2021, 01:22:29 pm
Also, too funny.

One thing climbers can learn from the Capitol incident.

Crowd barricades do make good pad substitutes:

 https://www.instagram.com/p/CJythZ8jv5z/?igshid=o50fogpz1gom (https://www.instagram.com/p/CJythZ8jv5z/?igshid=o50fogpz1gom)

*Not. Do not make good substitutes.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 09, 2021, 02:07:23 pm
Rather positive take on the consequences of Tejero’s attempted ‘81 coup in Madrid parliament from the Guardian. Worth a read if you are not familiar with those events. Personally, as a student of Spanish, I remember getting in from school to watch goggle eyed as events unfolded.

Gil Scott Héron was definitely wrong on that occasion.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/09/spaniards-1981-storming-capitol-spain-trumpism
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 09, 2021, 02:31:45 pm
A good point about SecDef’s statement:

 https://twitter.com/billkristol/status/1346941194316754951?s=21 (https://twitter.com/billkristol/status/1346941194316754951?s=21)

He’s locked in his office. The key is on the outside.
Look at how quickly the Tweets were deleted when he got into the POTUS Twitter account (I bet his Nanny got a slap for letting him near a phone).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 09, 2021, 02:32:59 pm
Yes.
Though this speaks to my take on their “agency”, I’m not quite as generous as Dave, I think some of the people in that were incapable of agency through education and educational ability..

It's difficult, isn't it. Agency, intent, criminal action. A balanced consideration of the first doesn't condone the latter. However, "moronic" actions of a minority need to be separated out, rather than being used to indicate the "moronic nature" (which there isn't) of the whole.

And the question of "the whole" is an interesting one, when you direct it towards Trump.

Dave, I appreciate your Buddhist leanings and that you seek to see the positive in people. I share your belief in the potential in people. But no, sometimes it isn't 'difficult' - some people and some circumstances are just toxic and dangerous, and you can look to the history of human life on this planet since written records began for evidence in support.  I had typed a long post involving personal life stories and why people have agency, at least enough agency to choose not to act like this (scroll to the end): https://twitter.com/i/status/1347616155394043904

But in the end I couldn't be bothered explaining why I feel qualified to say 'don't act like a cunt just because you feel life served you a lemon'.


BTW in your linked vid, the next clip in line discusses Bayes' Theorem. As you may know this describes an equation for forming beliefs of the world based on the prior available evidence and then how to alter those beliefs as new evidence emerges. Everything you need to know about truth, evidence and Trump supporters can be summarised in the 15 seconds from the timestamp 6mins40 seconds on this clip. I thought that was ironic :)

And Russell Brand.. give me a break. One attention-seeker talking about another isn't very enlightening. The only way to fight dangerous malevolent narcissists is to not rise to their provocation and to starve them of attention - hence FB, Twitter etc. finally no-platforming Trump and his cronies.

Pete.
I agree with you very much about the behaviour of some people - much more than you might realise.

I think you might be misinterpreting the Bayesian trap. And my "Buddhist leanings"   ;)

Regarding Russell Brand, I think I prefer - and this applies to anyone - to consider the content of what they're saying, rather than to dismiss them for having funny hair  ;D

Regarding your "don't act like a c' just because life served you a lemon". There's no need to explain, other than that you're appealing to insight that just won't be there.

I can certainly understand the strength of reaction emotionally. Absolutely. However, apportioning blame fails to address the complexity of the situation as a whole. There's nothing especially Buddhist about that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 09, 2021, 04:26:34 pm
Here's a great little video that might help explain how people get confused about Bayesian statistics:

https://youtu.be/GEFxFVESQXc

Go to @3.53 and think Trump  ;)

ie. It's not a different way of getting to a "hard truth" about a situation, but how we might update our beliefs.

The herbal tea bag packet I walked past last night still looked like a fiver when I first saw it. I couldn't believe that was the second time it had fooled me, in a week (seriously)! Maybe I need to update my conclusion that it's a tea bag packet, and go back to check, and pick it up, for better data.

Mind you, it's probably been shredded now, so we'll never be able to prove it. It's so illegal, I mean so illegal.. and I gotta remind you that you're letting it happen.

Sorry, I got carried away there.

You could just shoot him, but that would just reinforce his belief that life is out to get him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 09, 2021, 05:34:09 pm
Dave.. I'm not misinterpreting it, and I do understand the Bayesian method.

I used it to make the exact point you're trying to make - which is that if someone's prior belief in the probability of 'something' is 100% (or 0% depends on the 'thing') then it's futile to try debating with someone who holds such beliefs by using evidence to change their opinion. Which I pointed out is exactly what was said at 6'40'' on the Bayes Trap clip I mentioned in my last post. I thought it highly apt, as it applies to Trump supporters morons who can't accept any evidence to the contrary of their belief that there is a 100% probability that their side won the election, that there is a 100% probability that if the Republicans lost then the election was rigged, and that there is a 100% probability that anyone who says it aint so is a collaborator in the great hoax.

(and yes in her experiment I instinctively answered as per the Bayesian view)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 09, 2021, 07:02:49 pm
Hi Pete.

I don't disagree with you there; which is why I thought you must have misinterpreted things somewhat - and the points I was making.

However, looking at our own discussion of events in the US, I was trying to highlight our own "motivated reasoning". It's something which I think is very much in evidence in discussions of this sort on the forum, with people on opposite sides wanting their cause to win.

I think this is a great and simple lecture about motivated reasoning.

I'm not sure how helpful it is, to focus on how odious or not Trump may be.. or the lynching of Saddam Hussein.. or etc etc.

https://youtu.be/w4RLfVxTGH4
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 09, 2021, 07:42:14 pm
Pete,

I've just re-read your earlier post, and feel I was justified to question your understanding, and reasoning. The common error being that we very often fail to acknowledge our own "priors" in arguing over how to apply Bayesian inference.

I think it's erroneous to focus on eliminating the "bad" - or for that matter, whether someone is an attention seeking prior celeb.

We also have to look at why, for many, Trump is a "good" - and that isn't because his supporters are idiots.

If Trump is as deluded as I think you imply, then it's unreasonable to also expect him to review the situation and act differently.

We all act with agency, according to our beliefs.

However, do I think Trump is that deluded - for eg about the shredded ballots? I'm not so sure, and I think you may agree with me here. It's the manipulation of events solely for personal advantage. For Trump, the "truth" of things is only measured in terms of personal advantage - whether something helps him "win" - poor use of the word. What is true, is only what causes him less pain/loss. There are many people who operate in that way.
Final edit: I think you'll agree, on "being served up a lemon", it's believing that it's wrong for that to happen, or even that it happened "on purpose". However, I do admit to occasionally uttering "You T..." to the rock, when falling off the last move.

You'll have known that already of course. I'm trying to address how we might better direct the argument.

We also have to consider our own capacity for "Motivated Reasoning", which is why I introduced the Buddhist concept of Conceit, and why I've tried to caution our overt focus on Trump.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 09, 2021, 08:15:10 pm
With reference to earlier conversations, here is a very useful site aggregating the early reactions of historians to the events of this week:

http://www.megankatenelson.com/historians-contextualizing-the-capitol-insurrection-a-roundup/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 09, 2021, 08:27:58 pm
I have to share this.
1/ It’s quite good.
2/ I can’t imagine cramming more Conservative Christian/Trumpster Trash triggers into one short video.

 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wT5kafhG3Qw&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1cR9oxiPTFeoFGIbALiFZO-SChcKfYKQvf75T918VhAcJ9CvrpO0rY9s0 (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wT5kafhG3Qw&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1cR9oxiPTFeoFGIbALiFZO-SChcKfYKQvf75T918VhAcJ9CvrpO0rY9s0)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mark s on January 09, 2021, 09:24:08 pm
Seeing as trumpf has been banned on pretty much all platforms and forums, should ukb be added to the list?  Or could it be his reading while filling the wh shitter
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 09, 2021, 09:32:49 pm
Can you imagine his face, reading this lot?
Anyway, Muscle Crap, or A.Greenpenis or what ever user name he has now, is probably either Trump or Guiliani...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mark s on January 10, 2021, 10:25:29 am
I've got a friend on Facebook I know a few on here are also with. The bull shit he posts is top level conspiracy thick cunt level. Anti vax, aliens, 9/11, covid
Then yesterday he posted some shit about antifa starting the riots in Washington. Andi and I often give him shit to which he has no real answer.  At the moment his convienent reply is the video evidence keeps getting removed. You can't fix some people, so far down the rabbit hole.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 10, 2021, 10:59:26 am
I've got a friend on Facebook I know a few on here are also with. The bull shit he posts is top level conspiracy thick cunt level. Anti vax, aliens, 9/11, covid
Then yesterday he posted some shit about antifa starting the riots in Washington. Andi and I often give him shit to which he has no real answer.  At the moment his convienent reply is the video evidence keeps getting removed. You can't fix some people, so far down the rabbit hole.
Is it a former UKB poster and devout Catholic, frothing anti-abortion nut, who isn’t climbing much these days?
If it is, I think we mutually blocked each other on FB a couple of years ago...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on January 10, 2021, 11:14:11 am
Ha, if you mean Mark he's not really on FB these days. I'm not friends with him but I've seen Fyfe post some full-bullshit dumbness.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mark s on January 10, 2021, 12:33:37 pm
No it's not him, someone from my town who doesn't really climb now
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 10, 2021, 12:41:22 pm
Hi Pete.

I don't disagree with you there; which is why I thought you must have misinterpreted things somewhat - and the points I was making.

However, looking at our own discussion of events in the US, I was trying to highlight our own "motivated reasoning". It's something which I think is very much in evidence in discussions of this sort on the forum, with people on opposite sides wanting their cause to win.

I think this is a great and simple lecture about motivated reasoning.

I'm not sure how helpful it is, to focus on how odious or not Trump may be.. or the lynching of Saddam Hussein.. or etc etc.

https://youtu.be/w4RLfVxTGH4


Dave, I feel it's almost as if you're trying to teach me to suck eggs in this discussion. Why? Because to respond to your video on a very literal level, I spent 10 years in the infantry where I was an NCO in charge of a small reconnaissance team tasked with observing and gathering information. Literal meaning - I have first-hand experience of the presenter's concept of 'soldier mindset' and I know from first-hand experience her concept of 'scout mindset'. I was literally an embodiment of your presenter's 'scout mindset'..
Watching her presentation feels like watching someone telling me how to tie my shoelaces, but I appreciate the sentiment to share different viewpoints. (honestly).

To respond on another level.. if you don't know (I expect you do know), look at one of the models of personality, the five traits model - OCEAN. I've long been interested in brain science, personality, psychology etc. at a layman level. The presenter in your vid is basically talking about the 'O' of the five traits OCEAN model. Every time I've looked into this over the last ten or more years I've scored pretty much max in the 'O'. Try it yourself, see where you are. I don't really feel concerned about my capacity or desire to understand other's viewpoints as it's something I naturally feel an affinity for and like to do. I find people fascinating, couldn't eat a whole one etc.

This is straying off topic now..
The mindset she's talking about changing is the open-mindedness part of OCEAN. It isn't something that's easily changed by watching TEDx videos or reading self-improvement books. Look into the models of brain science understandable to the layman - some of the brain's connections are able to be re-wired while some aren't. Personality traits such as open-mindedness are difficult to change, you don't just decide to become more openminded and your brain follows, although it can be altered to some degree. There's some genetic component and some early years wiring of the brain that won't respond to will-power or self-improvement. I'm sure there are much better qualified people than me on here to comment.

Kind of lost my thread, but the point being I think that it's obvious - to the point of barely being worth discussing in this moment - that Trump and his support are a symptom of underlying causes rather than the cause themselves. I mean, duh, it's blatant!
I find your philosophising now on the nature of agency and inequality, while many of those people are still plotting to march again on the Capitol this time as an armed militia, analogous to standing around watching a tower block burning with people inside it and philosophising about the nature and failings of capitalism that led to buildings being clad with inappropriate materials.
 
To me it's obvious that some things are so toxic that in the immediate moment they just need stamping on hard to prevent further damage. The worst aspects of Trumpism and its enablers need to be destroyed or severely constrained, not nurtured or navel gazed over. Thankfully that's happening with him silenced on all media and at least some politicians acting to impeach. The GOP should find their nerve and do their part to kill off this symptom of the underlying rot.

Following that, people will have time to philosophise all they like about the causes of the toxicity. There'll be endless articles and essays to digest and share discussing the causes, here's the mandatory Guardian one: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/trump-american-carnage-inequality-racism-polarisation
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 10, 2021, 05:09:13 pm
Hi Pete.

If you think I'm teaching someone to suck eggs, I assure you I'm not.

Your response is very strong, on a let's do something now to stamp this thing out level, yes, as though the aggressor is appearing over the hill.

Maybe your approach and reaction here, is more a product of your time in the infantry than you realise. Just a thought.

If I can say, you are very strong in your position. It's already decided.
Are you willing to consider other things, to re-evaluate how you see them? That includes the comments and contributions of attention seeking celebs with funny hair  ;D (and I admit to hiding from my own prejudice when listening to what he says!)

I think you negate "philosophising" to defend your own perspective. You present something of a circular argument.
Let's look at things differently, is always a valid suggestion, is it not?
Who sees who/what as toxic?

This thread is titled "Trump", and I've always felt uneasy about the tendency to put certain figures up there as pariahs; to ridicule and bash.
It's way too easy, and in my view, is as symptomatic of the polarising of opinion, as what we might want to "attack".

How often do groups of people want to find an enemy, in order to establish their own virtue?

There are lots of people who contribute to this thread, who might read it. We all have different perspectives on things - or rather, see different "things". I try to consider this when putting up a reply.

The great thing about an online forum, is that it creates a space, hopefully for something more discursive than a call to arms.

 ;D
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 10, 2021, 06:12:52 pm
This thread is titled "Trump", and I've always felt uneasy about the tendency to put certain figures up there as pariahs; to ridicule and bash.

I'm an enemy of the "great men" view of history, and the forces we're seeing manifest themselves right now run deep and wide, far beyond Trump's orbit and influence. Nonetheless, Trump is undoubtedly an unusually consequential figure, despite all his pathetic inadequacies.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 10, 2021, 07:06:09 pm
This thread is titled "Trump", and I've always felt uneasy about the tendency to put certain figures up there as pariahs; to ridicule and bash.

I'm an enemy of the "great men" view of history, and the forces we're seeing manifest themselves right now run deep and wide, far beyond Trump's orbit and influence. Nonetheless, Trump is undoubtedly an unusually consequential figure, despite all his pathetic inadequacies.

Andy, those forces are always and have always been, there.
Probably Tharg the Mammoth Twatter, thought Trug the Pot Maker (who turned up, one day, from two valleys over) was an airy fairy liberal tosser, stealing his job by “making a cup out of clay” instead of  “carving it out of tusk” like proper valley people do.

They just wax and wane with economies and climates.

It’s the wankers that spot a way to exploit that. The grifters and conmen, who are morally bankrupt enough to whip them up to this extent.

It’s not any different, at base, from any other political rhetoric. It differs only in it’s extent, it’s extreme. That is a function of an individual or (relatively) small group, with no qualms about the cost, in the right (wrong) place at the right time, provoking an extreme reaction, for their own ends.

Otherwise, life meanders along, grumbling and chuntering from both extremes, sometimes louder one way and sometimes the other.
Nothing great about these tits.
Find them early enough, spot them growing, stop them and you’ll stall the revolution.
Because revolutions still require leaders. No leader and it’s undirected anger and frustration. Heads and Snakes and all that.

Edit:

Actually, Hydra.
It’s a pretty constant effort, chasing the next Trump.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 10, 2021, 07:12:49 pm
Trump did not cause all the disaffection and extreme right wing views which feed off it, but he has hugely enabled people of that ilk because the bully pulpit gives his words so much power. They are more confident now.

That, and the fact that he's keen to go to war with Iran, make him a  clear and present danger. He needs standing up to and removing. Appeasement is not sensible.

None of that requires ignoring root causes, that's a sine qua non.

edit - posts crossed. I'd pretty much agree with that summary OMM, but the forces shaping evemnts need looking at better pdq because the next one could be a Cotton, or a Cruz, or maybe even  a- heaven help us- Gove.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 10, 2021, 07:27:16 pm
I actually don't really agree with Matt in this case; we need very specific historical analyses rather than just amorphous stuff about human nature.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 10, 2021, 07:34:14 pm
I will let Matt speak for himself but I read that as disaffection is an ever present well for any demagogue, at any time, to dip into.

Effectively dealing with that disaffection requires the sophistication to see the forces shaping it. That's hard. Especially when the pace of change, the political disconnect top-to-bottom and social fracturing are accelerating. Advancing technology leaves a lot of people behind.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on January 10, 2021, 07:35:36 pm
This is all a bit philosophical for me now. I hope we can at least agree that, quite apart from being a white supremacist/fascist/misogynist/all of the above, he's also one of the world's biggest dickheads.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: duncan on January 10, 2021, 07:37:22 pm
I've got a friend on Facebook I know a few on here are also with. The bull shit he posts is top level conspiracy thick cunt level. Anti vax, aliens, 9/11, covid
Then yesterday he posted some shit about antifa starting the riots in Washington. Andi and I often give him shit to which he has no real answer.  At the moment his convienent reply is the video evidence keeps getting removed. You can't fix some people, so far down the rabbit hole.

I think it's worth considering what you want to achieve. If it's just to score debating points then carry on! However, engaging means the FB or wherever algorithm will direct more traffic that way and arguing with true believers tends to reinforce their beliefs.

With reference to earlier conversations, here is a very useful site aggregating the early reactions of historians to the events of this week:

http://www.megankatenelson.com/historians-contextualizing-the-capitol-insurrection-a-roundup/

Thanks. I made sure the lad and I sat down to watch the news together that evening. So many historical resonances.



This thread is titled "Trump", and I've always felt uneasy about the tendency to put certain figures up there as pariahs; to ridicule and bash.


I've been counting the days til I can wield my moderators power and retitle it. Suggestions welcome!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 10, 2021, 07:40:35 pm
This is all a bit philosophical for me now.

Trump isn't the mob in Congress, he isn't the hard right militia guys, he isn't QAnon loons, and he certainly isn't the 75,000,000 who voted for him.

So whilst he needs dealing with, so do the reasons why they think he's great. And a lot of that is why they think his nasty simple solutions (which don't solve things of course) are the answer to their grievances.


Since that was my quote Duncan, may I humbly propose
'The first president to be impeached and convicted in history'?



Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 10, 2021, 07:53:42 pm
I will let Matt speak for himself but I read that as disaffection is an ever present well for any demagogue, at any time, to dip into.

Effectively dealing with that disaffection requires the sophistication to see the forces shaping it. That's hard. Especially when the pace of change, the political disconnect top-to-bottom and social fracturing are accelerating. Advancing technology leaves a lot of people behind.

This^^^

I kinda assumed people would read that post in conjunction with my lament about people not “ leaving their village” (an analogy that’s going to snap if I stretch it further).
Even that didn’t come over as I meant it to. My point was, we all ignore the villages, write off their denizens as “rubes”, forget how many of them there are and when we do go back and meet with them; struggle to find common ground etc etc.
Ironically, Pete actually reinforced what I was alluding to, when he pointed out how patronising people find it, when somebody comes waltzing back into the village with tales of their sophistication.

Ultimately, I’m closer to Pete than Dave. Root cause needs to be addressed, but you need to stamp on the head first. You want to stop the Elephant stampede? Shoot the Matriarch and make sure you do it well, winging her will make it worse.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Hoseyb on January 10, 2021, 10:17:03 pm
Really good speech by Arnie I thought

https://twitter.com/Schwarzenegger/status/1348249481284874240?s=20 (https://twitter.com/Schwarzenegger/status/1348249481284874240?s=20)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 10, 2021, 10:48:54 pm
Hi Pete.

If you think I'm teaching someone to suck eggs, I assure you I'm not.

Your response is very strong, on a let's do something now to stamp this thing out level, yes, as though the aggressor is appearing over the hill.

Maybe your approach and reaction here, is more a product of your time in the infantry than you realise. Just a thought.

If I can say, you are very strong in your position. It's already decided.
Are you willing to consider other things, to re-evaluate how you see them? That includes the comments and contributions of attention seeking celebs with funny hair  ;D (and I admit to hiding from my own prejudice when listening to what he says!)

I think you negate "philosophising" to defend your own perspective. You present something of a circular argument.
Let's look at things differently, is always a valid suggestion, is it not?
Who sees who/what as toxic?

This thread is titled "Trump", and I've always felt uneasy about the tendency to put certain figures up there as pariahs; to ridicule and bash.
It's way too easy, and in my view, is as symptomatic of the polarising of opinion, as what we might want to "attack".

How often do groups of people want to find an enemy, in order to establish their own virtue?

There are lots of people who contribute to this thread, who might read it. We all have different perspectives on things - or rather, see different "things". I try to consider this when putting up a reply.

The great thing about an online forum, is that it creates a space, hopefully for something more discursive than a call to arms.

 ;D

I give up. I'm not engaging in 'a call to arms'.  I'm afraid your philosophising on this topic leaves me cold. Some people and some events don't require that much introspection in the immediate moment Dave.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Sasquatch on January 11, 2021, 05:45:42 am
Trump did not cause all the disaffection and extreme right wing views which feed off it, but he has hugely enabled people of that ilk because the bully pulpit gives his words so much power. They are more confident now.

yes he did.  Or the republican view that he epitomizes did.  The corporate first America vision has created a massive income inequality which creates a poor base.  They then blame "liberal socialism" for the poorness and create a cycle that repeats itself. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 11, 2021, 08:59:29 am
Well we do agree that mentality has a lot to answer for. This is really going back to Reagan and beyond. What do you make of Lisa Murkowski then?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on January 11, 2021, 09:06:15 am
Still haven’t got the time for a proper reply to the Nazi nurture debate, but I wanted to suggest there is evidence that poverty is perhaps not the biggest driver of Trump (nor Brexit):

“Trump’s voters weren’t overwhelmingly poor. In the general election, like the primary, about two thirds of Trump supporters came from the better-off half of the economy.“


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/06/05/its-time-to-bust-the-myth-most-trump-voters-were-not-working-class/

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 11, 2021, 04:27:49 pm
Thought this may be of interest:

https://onezero.medium.com/claims-antifa-embedded-in-capitol-riots-come-from-a-deeply-unreliable-facial-recognition-company-459603c0d073

In my view here, there is too much investment in "Trump", and mythological "root causes".
It's not "philosophising" to look at the irrationality of our own position - looking at "the problem" to be removed.


I give up. I'm not engaging in 'a call to arms'.  I'm afraid your philosophising on this topic leaves me cold. Some people and some events don't require that much introspection in the immediate moment Dave.

Pete I think this is nonsense, and in my view, your own position begs the question, "what is the situation?"; "what are the events?".

It's absurd to not be able to ask these questions about the complexity of the situation. Simply saying "I give up" doesn't help much  ;)

I actually don't really agree with Matt in this case; we need very specific historical analyses rather than just amorphous stuff about human nature.

.. and neither is it "amorphous stuff about human nature". Sorry Andy.

It is so easy to focus on the naughty child (Trump), as though "dealing with him" will stamp out the badness for good.

That's a mistake. It's irrational.
I think it's times like these, that do require for more introspection. What are we doing, in our own response? I appreciate that may be unpopular.

Investing more urgency in the situation, is just a circular argument, to avoid thinking about it.

And can someone please explain why you can't have several lines of enquiry at the same time?

I really appreciate just how much I'm compromising the efforts of the UKB Mob to deal with the situation, but how much, to what degree, is the strength of conviction here, any different to that of those who marched on the Capitol offices?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 11, 2021, 05:02:37 pm
Really good speech by Arnie I thought

https://twitter.com/Schwarzenegger/status/1348249481284874240?s=20 (https://twitter.com/Schwarzenegger/status/1348249481284874240?s=20)

Sentiment rings true, but came across as a movie monologue in places. And the background music is cringeworthy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 11, 2021, 05:17:20 pm
Still haven’t got the time for a proper reply to the Nazi nurture debate, but I wanted to suggest there is evidence that poverty is perhaps not the biggest driver of Trump (nor Brexit):

“Trump’s voters weren’t overwhelmingly poor. In the general election, like the primary, about two thirds of Trump supporters came from the better-off half of the economy.“


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/06/05/its-time-to-bust-the-myth-most-trump-voters-were-not-working-class/

Sean, I'm inclined to think that we're rather more similar in mindset to Trump's supporters, than we'd want to admit.

It feels to me as though we're looking to define a situation, in order to justify a response, and police things accordingly - *to restore order* as we see it, in just the same way as the mob want to restore the sense of order and justice that they believe they've lost. The poor will know very well, that there was no justice to buy into in the first place.

Again, what "feels right" in our response, probably just reflects the privilege of our position, more than the truth of things.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 11, 2021, 06:47:19 pm
Good, in that case, to look for external and quantifiable yardsticks to guide us. Like numbers of votes cast?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on January 11, 2021, 06:57:12 pm

Again, what "feels right" in our response, probably just reflects the privilege of our position, more than the truth of things.

And just like that, any female, non-white or working class opposition to facism and the far right gets written out.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Hoseyb on January 11, 2021, 07:03:34 pm
Really good speech by Arnie I thought

https://twitter.com/Schwarzenegger/status/1348249481284874240?s=20 (https://twitter.com/Schwarzenegger/status/1348249481284874240?s=20)

Sentiment rings true, but came across as a movie monologue in places. And the background music is cringeworthy.

I never bother with the sound on my phone. Given his age and history, I'd forgive him dropping into a familiar cadence
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 11, 2021, 07:56:36 pm
The Governator is back. Compared to what passes for leadership elsewhere in the GOP these days (Romney aside), it really commands a bit of respect.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 11, 2021, 08:29:27 pm
The official State Dept. website that lists all gov. official’s bio and current position, switched to show Trump’s term ended at 19:39 GMT today, then several other times in a 10 min time frame and is now off line.
His Wikipedia page was updated at the same time, to reflect something similar.

Is it a rogue staffer?
Has the Government been hacked (again)?
Has he resigned?
Been ousted?
Died (🤞)? (Sorry... ish).

Dunno, but it is quite funny.

Ooo! I saw a FB post and tried the site and it was down by then, so didn’t actually see the altered entry.
However, the “main stream media” have started reporting it.
 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/state-department-website-trump-term-mystery-b1785700.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR2yC0L06m_r7_s2jWhCuwxnLK8sjWPOReXu9c9o_etzZHWYsAqxzioyBRY#Echobox=1610396465 (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/state-department-website-trump-term-mystery-b1785700.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR2yC0L06m_r7_s2jWhCuwxnLK8sjWPOReXu9c9o_etzZHWYsAqxzioyBRY#Echobox=1610396465)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 11, 2021, 09:40:14 pm
..
I really appreciate just how much I'm compromising the efforts of the UKB Mob to deal with the situation, but how much, to what degree, is the strength of conviction here, any different to that of those who marched on the Capitol offices?

It follows that having strength in a conviction that legitimate elections should be protected from unlawful mobs who wish to overthrow them, is merely the moral equivalent of having strength in the conviction that fascist principles instilled by violence and intimidation should win out over peaceful democracy.

I feel a strong conviction that dogs shouldn't be kicked to death. Should *that* conviction be questioned, or are they all morally equivalent to you Dave? 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on January 11, 2021, 10:02:27 pm
Somebody give me a nudge when we're back to slagging off the planet's biggest cunt.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 11, 2021, 10:05:55 pm
Well, there should be 15000 Guardsmen swamping Washington within a few days and apparently several thousand there already.
That is an entire army, really. So, to achieve another takeover of the Capitol, the insurgents would need several thousand well armed, well trained and well coordinated “troops”; with masterful leadership.

I would call 15k Guardsmen a “strong conviction” on the part of “the system”, that some things need a good old stomp.

 https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-army/2021/01/11/national-guard-inauguration-deployment-twice-as-large-as-troop-levels-in-afghanistan-and-iraq-combined/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR2HrggSesnbYZ3kwOgEDlwHp8_vFCwP5eYkOp5jKnsRRok4NuLVU9ZGe_M (https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-army/2021/01/11/national-guard-inauguration-deployment-twice-as-large-as-troop-levels-in-afghanistan-and-iraq-combined/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR2HrggSesnbYZ3kwOgEDlwHp8_vFCwP5eYkOp5jKnsRRok4NuLVU9ZGe_M)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 11, 2021, 10:07:00 pm
Somebody give me a nudge when we're back to slagging off the planet's biggest cunt.

I thought Dan had flounced again?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 12, 2021, 06:04:27 pm
..
I really appreciate just how much I'm compromising the efforts of the UKB Mob to deal with the situation, but how much, to what degree, is the strength of conviction here, any different to that of those who marched on the Capitol offices?

It follows that having strength in a conviction that legitimate elections should be protected from unlawful mobs who wish to overthrow them, is merely the moral equivalent of having strength in the conviction that fascist principles instilled by violence and intimidation should win out over peaceful democracy.

I feel a strong conviction that dogs shouldn't be kicked to death. Should *that* conviction be questioned, or are they all morally equivalent to you Dave?

Does anything you've written there, refer to any of the points I've tried to raise and consider? No.

Pete, you're trying to reduce everything to your own position, and how you've already chosen to define things. The Mob. The Unlawful. Etc. That seems irrational to me.

I'm trying to look at wider issues too. It's too simplistic to refer to those marching on the Capitol offices simply as "The Mob". However, you don't want to address any of the other questions that remain, Trump or not.

Your last paragraph is absurd in its allusion, and fails to address what appears to be your own conviction on who/what you decide it is OK to kick - who to blame, etc.

You seem to be mistaken in your view that this is about "moralising". It isn't.
Edit: it's too easy in situations like this, to polarise, and mistake that for morality, when all we are doing, is reducing our arguments to confirm our own position.

Are we too threatened by things, to take a second look at them?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: spidermonkey09 on January 12, 2021, 06:45:04 pm

Are we too threatened by things, to take a second look at them?

I feel like we don't need to take a second look at fascism, no. (yes, I know this is flippant- its a joke!)

I'm currently reading Anne Applebaum's 'Twilight of Democracy.' I am only partway through but the takeaway for me, already, is the absolute imperative to call things what they are. We cannot afford to soft soap this - democracy is not a given and if we make the same mistakes we have with Trump in the future, it will collapse in the US just as it has collapsed elsewhere. So whilst in some ways I admire your inquisitive approach Dave, I see your argument as contrarianism for the sake of it (which I have also accused Pete of on several occasions!) Asking questions about why it happened, in this moment, has the effect of lending it legitimacy. I think that would be a huge error.

If I come across someone kicking a dog to death, I would not stop to ask them detailed questions about their upbringing/politics and why they are kicking the dog to death. Those are questions for further down the line. In the moment, you just stop the dog being kicked to death. Thats the moment we are in now in US democracy in my view.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on January 12, 2021, 07:41:33 pm
I spent 30 years at work discussing with colleagues why people behaved in the way they do. In the end we often came to the conclusion that  some people are just cunts.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 12, 2021, 08:00:48 pm
I spent 30 years at work discussing with colleagues why people behaved in the way they do. In the end we often came to the conclusion that  some people are just cunts.
I spent 30 years at work discussing with colleagues why people behaved in the way they do. In the end we often came to the conclusion that  some people are just cunts.

Yep.
Then add these sweeties:

(https://i.ibb.co/1R9BDgD/733-E08-FA-34-C9-410-C-8-E8-B-5-CCBC6209-EB6.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/8YbBqMx/2838-AA1-F-55-EA-43-B4-A021-3599-DB51-A823.jpg)

And the more money than sense brigade:

How it started:

(https://i.ibb.co/WBgP669/0-D8-DE974-B7-B2-40-C3-9-BEF-999-F80661-A9-F.jpg)

How it’s going:

(https://i.ibb.co/ygtT6ZM/E262-DFB6-4452-43-AF-91-F3-59-B99-AE28-BB5.jpg)

Yes, something has to be done about the root causes, but that’s going to be a long, arduous task.
These people are programmed.
Sorry, said that already, didn’t I.

Anyway, the only practical course of action, right now and for several months, is cutting off heads.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 12, 2021, 09:57:43 pm
I spent 30 years at work discussing with colleagues why people behaved in the way they do. In the end we often came to the conclusion that  some people are just cunts.

That’s priceless Webbo.

Solid life advice there.

I’m going to save that and read it whenever someone has pissed me off at work/cut me up driving/etc.. etc..
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: TobyD on January 13, 2021, 08:52:17 am
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/12/once-trump-leaves-office-senate-cant-hold-an-impeachment-trial/

This is interesting
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tommytwotone on January 13, 2021, 10:29:29 am
This was always the case - the impeachment stuff is really just political theatre / messing with Trump's legacy surely.

Unless this is a backstop against some kinda hail-mary last-minute change that reverses the election result?!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 13, 2021, 10:47:14 am

Are we too threatened by things, to take a second look at them?



Err... No?
 
But nobody else on this thread, including me, is suggesting that. I don't get why you're continuing to bang your head against this wall, like others have said it feels like you're being contrarian for the sport of it.

Basically what spidermonkey said is spot on. And Webbo. Sometimes people do just act like cunts - most of us are guilty of it at some point to a greater or lesser degree, not just one section of society. But most cuntish behaviour most of the time doesn't threaten anything fundamental and vital to a civil society. What's currently under threat from a minority of supporters of Trumpism is far more vital to society than the concept of pausing to understand the reasons why some people might want to use violence to overthrow a legitimate democratic election.

On some occasions such as right now in the US, some people's ideas need to be stood up to with robustness. That doesn't mean they need to be vilified or banished from society or forgotten about etc. I really fail to understand why you seem to have such a problem with this concept.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 13, 2021, 10:54:56 am

Are we too threatened by things, to take a second look at them?



Err... No?
 
But nobody else on this thread, including me, is suggesting that. I don't get why you're continuing to bang your head against this wall, like others have said it feels like you're being contrarian for the sport of it.

Basically what spidermonkey said is spot on. And Webbo. Sometimes people do just act like cunts - most of us are guilty of it at some point to a greater or lesser degree, not just one section of society. But most cuntish behaviour most of the time doesn't threaten anything fundamental and vital to a civil society. What's currently under threat from a minority of supporters of Trumpism is far more vital to society than the concept of pausing to understand the reasons why some people might want to use violence to overthrow a legitimate democratic election.

On some occasions such as right now in the US, some people's ideas need to be stood up to with robustness. That doesn't mean they need to be vilified or banished from society or forgotten about etc. I really fail to understand why you seem to have such a problem with this concept.

Pete, Dave has actually answered himself, within his own question.

No, it’s not that “we’re too threatened” to take a second look; it’s just that dealing with what we saw with the first look, takes the immediate priority.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 13, 2021, 11:55:32 am
This was always the case - the impeachment stuff is really just political theatre / messing with Trump's legacy surely.

Unless this is a backstop against some kinda hail-mary last-minute change that reverses the election result?!

Yes - I wonder if it’s also case of a diversion to take some of Trumps beleaguered legal teams focus from somehow derailing the election result..

But ffs - can a US president really get away with anything they did whilst in power as long as they are not ‘prosecuted’ or impeached whilst in power?

Seems Trump was right when he said he can get away with shooting someone in the street!!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 13, 2021, 12:03:21 pm
This was always the case - the impeachment stuff is really just political theatre / messing with Trump's legacy surely.

There seem to be plenty of legal scholars who do think post-Presidential impeachment is possible. But whatever the outcome, and whenever it occurs, the impeachment is about much more than theatre or Trump's legacy (which is utterly trashed now anyway, at least with wide swathes of society).

It's about accountability. Trump just committed the worst, most egregious crime in US Presidential history (and let's not forget that the Saturday before the insurrection he committed another impeachable offence easily comparable to Watergate). That it's now only a week until the end of his term is no argument for inaction. If he walks away without any attempt to hold him to account for what he's done then it sets an horrific precedent. He will be impeached today and with some bipartisan support, the only President to have been impeached twice. Conviction in the Senate would be even better, but just the mark of second impeachment goes far beyond symbolism or theatre, in my view. It also helps force the GOP, or parts of it, into some kind of reckoning - amazingly there are hints that even McConnell might vote guilty if it comes to the Senate.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 13, 2021, 12:07:49 pm

No, it’s not that “we’re too threatened” to take a second look; it’s just that dealing with what we saw with the first look, takes the immediate priority.

And even after second and third look you still feel the same, then it's confirmed; cunt.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 13, 2021, 12:12:11 pm
Yes - I wonder if it’s also case of a diversion to take some of Trumps beleaguered legal teams focus from somehow derailing the election result..

That's already dead and buried. In fact, he's probably going to struggle to assemble any kind of legal team if there is a trial in the Senate. A number of his most trusted lawyers have already said they won't act for him, and Rudi stands every chance of being disbarred soon.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 13, 2021, 12:23:04 pm
This was always the case - the impeachment stuff is really just political theatre / messing with Trump's legacy surely.

There seem to be plenty of legal scholars who do think post-Presidential impeachment is possible. But whatever the outcome, and whenever it occurs, the impeachment is about much more than theatre or Trump's legacy (which is utterly trashed now anyway, at least with wide swathes of society).

It's about accountability. Trump just committed the worst, most egregious crime in US Presidential history (and let's not forget that the Saturday before the insurrection he committed another impeachable offence easily comparable to Watergate). That it's now only a week until the end of his term is no argument for inaction. If he walks away without any attempt to hold him to account for what he's done then it sets an horrific precedent. He will be impeached today and with some bipartisan support, the only President to have been impeached twice. Conviction in the Senate would be even better, but just the mark of second impeachment goes far beyond symbolism or theatre, in my view. It also helps force the GOP, or parts of it, into some kind of reckoning - amazingly there are hints that even McConnell might vote guilty if it comes to the Senate.

The Impeachment seems likely, conviction, not so much.

Apparently the legal jeopardy hangs around the phrasing of the constitution. It describes impeachment of and enacted against the “incumbent” President. Therefore both impeachment and conviction would need to be completed prior too his leaving office, or any such conviction would likely be overturned in the Supreme Court.
It’s uncharted waters, by all accounts and I have read that the interpretation of the constitution by Congress will carry significant weight, but probably not enough to sway the court as the definition of incumbent is clearly defined already.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 13, 2021, 12:26:44 pm
Surely GOP must now distance themselves from his actions and vote in favour of impeachment this time if they hope to ever stand a chance of winning another election? Is a lightning impeachment a thing?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on January 13, 2021, 12:28:53 pm
(and let's not forget that the Saturday before the insurrection he committed another impeachable offence easily comparable to Watergate)

Presidential misconduct is so ten-a-penny at the moment that I couldn't remember what this was. In case anyone else is trying to remember it was the phone call to election officials in Georgia.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 13, 2021, 12:46:03 pm
Just seen this in the New York Times:

"David Popp, a spokesman for Mr. McConnell, declined to comment on Tuesday."

I would just like to point: no relation.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 13, 2021, 12:49:01 pm
Anja Popp is a reporter for Channel 4 news - I always wonder....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 13, 2021, 01:14:22 pm
Anja Popp is a reporter for Channel 4 news - I always wonder....

Not to my knowledge. There's a Richard Popp in my discipline and we were once put on a panel together - I'm sure purely for the sake of it, because our work isn't really closely related. To make matters weirder for me, my brother is Richard.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 13, 2021, 02:05:17 pm
Anja Popp is a reporter for Channel 4 news - I always wonder....

Not to my knowledge. There's a Richard Popp in my discipline and we were once put on a panel together - I'm sure purely for the sake of it, because our work isn't really closely related. To make matters weirder for me, my brother is Richard.

Are you all Prof Popps?

Sounds like frozen treats for academics...


Anyway.

Those free market (central park) pigeons are coming home to roost, for the Trump Empire.

 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/new-york-trump-contracts-business-b1786660.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3xwy-HLkJ2q_uJ87H0Ekopu1bpvQOC158_kiUgAg4DIS24qjUb_vmI8aQ#Echobox=1610546075[ (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/new-york-trump-contracts-business-b1786660.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3xwy-HLkJ2q_uJ87H0Ekopu1bpvQOC158_kiUgAg4DIS24qjUb_vmI8aQ#Echobox=1610546075[)

I don’t suppose toxic brands are hugely appealing, even to the money laundering industry.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 13, 2021, 05:26:31 pm
Well, if this turns out to be true, any question that it was an “inside job”, will evaporate:

 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/capitol-riots-ayanna-pressley-panic-buttons-b1786678.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1GNsHdn6rOHZijYb3hHcJ5EAR9eL7HCAuPIhg8my7FuB2sTLkaWH1akzs#Echobox=1610555488 (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/capitol-riots-ayanna-pressley-panic-buttons-b1786678.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1GNsHdn6rOHZijYb3hHcJ5EAR9eL7HCAuPIhg8my7FuB2sTLkaWH1akzs#Echobox=1610555488)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: jwi on January 13, 2021, 06:17:56 pm
This is great for my daily dose of schadenfreude:

https://www.reddit.com/r/CapitolConsequences/

It is great that the revolution was televised after all
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Murph on January 13, 2021, 07:19:48 pm
But whatever the outcome, and whenever it occurs, the impeachment is about much more than theatre or Trump's legacy (which is utterly trashed now anyway, at least with wide swathes of society).

I'm continually shocked, not surprised, by how well Trump continues to do. He pulled almost half the votes in the election despite everything that he had done and said in the past 4 years. And *after* the Capitol riots about half of the House Republicans still supported the doomed attempt to overturn the election results. It beggars belief.

His reputation has been trashed yet among wide swathes of American society it seems to be in robust health.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 13, 2021, 09:43:47 pm
I think I need to answer a few points here, very briefly, at the moment.

There is nothing in my perspective here, which is in any way "contrarian". Contrarian to what exactly? The group mentality of this thread?

The point here, is to question what amounts to prejudice, to serve our own biases? And that is a question to direct to ourselves, as much as it is for anyone in any other group.

To "take a second look at things", is to go beyond the instinctual, and to try to ask "what's true here?"; "What can we say is true, and of benefit?".

Simply referring to Trump as a C*** really addresses nothing of very much consequence here.

As something of an analogy - referred to elsewhere - of perhaps greater concern than the outcome of the Brexit vote, was how hard it was to believe that so many would vote to leave. As with Trump - and referenced by Murph in his post above - discrediting Trump, or labelling him a C*** or whatever, does nothing to address the wider issues.

What I have tried to challenge, is what seems much more like a channelling of invective, and group think here, than an attempt to view the situation as a whole.

One of the most deplorable actions in recent history, was the hanging of Saddam Hussein - equalled perhaps only by our own contrived lack of intervention.

How often is it, that our own position - our own judgement - serves our own interests, and our own folly, in placing ourselves on one side of a moral divide?

Referring to the Trump supporters who marched on the Capitol offices merely as The Mob, simply externalises what doesn't seem to accord with our own position and beliefs. In that way, we are the mob too.

There are questions that we need to address and seek dialogue with. The Mob are not the problem, are they? Neither is Trump, in and of himself.

So Trump is impeached for a second time. Yay, we got 'im  :dance1:

Does that address the questions that we need to ask? No it doesn't. It just makes us feel a bit better.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 13, 2021, 10:07:38 pm
That’s the ‘brief’ post?!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Falling Down on January 13, 2021, 10:20:17 pm
Twice - hopefully a trial follows and he loses all the benefits and protections that go with being an ex-president.

Sorry Dave, but Fuck him. He deserves whatever he’s got coming. Plus all the rest of his enablers apologists get a turn in the barrel.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Andy F on January 13, 2021, 10:28:07 pm
All that needs to happen now is 17 Republican Senators find the spine they lost four years ago.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 14, 2021, 04:15:05 am
In case anyone is unfamiliar with it:

https://youtu.be/QRG9Gq-xtr8

.. the obvious and most readily available example being:

https://youtu.be/I4IA6X9atR8

Of course, it applies to all cases of excluding others to define the group.


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 14, 2021, 08:52:47 am
Quite. Pretty keen to exonerate himself there.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SamT on January 14, 2021, 12:45:44 pm
So blatantly reading of a massive card.  I know most of these speeches are pre written by someone else. But just seems so obvious in that vid that someone, off camera, has a rifle trained on his forehead and is saying "Read this, word for word, no deviations, no ifs no buts"
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 14, 2021, 01:07:46 pm
Didn’t he do well, he managed incursion and unequivocally, he’ll get a gold star with his happy meal.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 14, 2021, 01:12:48 pm
I think ‘incursion’ is a word he’d be very familiar with
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: abarro81 on January 14, 2021, 01:21:26 pm
Of course, it applies to all cases of excluding others to define the group.

Apart from the cases where it doesn't apply, obviously.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: cheque on January 14, 2021, 01:44:12 pm
I think ‘incursion’ is a word he’d be very familiar with

Yeah, often seen soloing about at Stanage End.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 14, 2021, 01:53:02 pm
Of course, it applies to all cases of excluding others to define the group.

Apart from the cases where it doesn't apply, obviously.

The amusing part of the “excluding” statement, is not recognising that in by “including” most of us in a “group think” category; he in fact creates a delineation between “Us” and “open minded” (read, in his view, “right minded”) people...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: petejh on January 14, 2021, 02:58:35 pm
''Fuck off!.. I'm from the open-minded front of Judea..''
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 14, 2021, 03:13:03 pm
''Fuck off!.. I'm from the open-minded front of Judea..''

Bloody Splitter.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 15, 2021, 12:41:54 am
Quite. Pretty keen to exonerate himself there.

Quite, too.

Or just to disavow.
If anyone thinks I don't find this incredibly difficult viewing, you're wrong. Thought that was worth saying, but thinking about what we say about it, is a different matter.

I don't believe it is the most helpful sentiment to simply say "F' him" or just to refer to his supporters as a lawless mob - especially those who've acted in good faith, and are then abandoned. Where will that resentment be directed?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 15, 2021, 12:57:11 am
Of course, it applies to all cases of excluding others to define the group.

Apart from the cases where it doesn't apply, obviously.

The amusing part of the “excluding” statement, is not recognising that in by “including” most of us in a “group think” category; he in fact creates a delineation between “Us” and “open minded” (read, in his view, “right minded”) people...

Thanks Matt, and for the third person reference, but I don't think it comes down to right/wrong minded.

That said, I was simply stating what already clearly seemed to be the case, regarding what was popular/"allowed" vs unpopular and defended against/excluded.

Do I think there are ways of looking at this situation more carefully and critically? Yes, absolutely I do.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 15, 2021, 08:38:15 am
Shame HMHB didn't rerelease Trumpton Riots when they had the chance.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 15, 2021, 08:46:38 am

I don't believe it is the most helpful sentiment to simply say "F' him" or just to refer to his supporters as a lawless mob - especially those who've acted in good faith, and are then abandoned. Where will that resentment be directed?

I don’t think anyone is calling all his supporters a lawless mob, just the mob that was at the Capitol breaking a lot of laws.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 15, 2021, 09:03:28 am
Of course, it applies to all cases of excluding others to define the group.

Apart from the cases where it doesn't apply, obviously.

The amusing part of the “excluding” statement, is not recognising that in by “including” most of us in a “group think” category; he in fact creates a delineation between “Us” and “open minded” (read, in his view, “right minded”) people...

Thanks Matt, and for the third person reference, but I don't think it comes down to right/wrong minded.

That said, I was simply stating what already clearly seemed to be the case, regarding what was popular/"allowed" vs unpopular and defended against/excluded.

Do I think there are ways of looking at this situation more carefully and critically? Yes, absolutely I do.

Yes, you’re right, the phrasing was rude.
It was meant to be more amused than to accuse...
My point is, I’ve already expressed something that is disturbingly close (to me) to “sympathy” for the Trumpster’s origin, or, rather, the situation that brought them into being (plenty will be beyond redemption). Many have acknowledged the need to address the issues that created them.

But the situation is one of immediate peril. One that must be stalled by the swiftest possible method. Which will almost certainly be beheading the beast.

Will this create martyrs?

Yup.

Intensify the passions of the faithfull?

Hmmm...

Some of them, for sure. Mostly, in this case, I think it will sort those with (misguided) love of country, from those with a genuine love of authoritarianism or Trump obsession.
Because, realising that a majority of Americans view you as a traitor, is hurting a lot of people right now.
(There are, for instance, numerous examples of families talking to the media about how “Mum”, “Dad”, “Uncle Joe” or  A. N. Other relative, became radicalised and distanced from their own families etc).*

The longer term problem of deprogramming the followers, must must take a back seat to the need to immediately stall the movement, even if the Hydra sprouts a new head (preferably, more than one, if you want to destroy a movement, split the movement).

*I seem to recall hearing that from many Muslim families over the years, though, somehow, don’t recall it being taken so seriously by the “media”....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Offwidth on January 15, 2021, 10:46:11 am
Key to all these problems is some people build unhealthy narratives and move further and further from anything that might contradict those views. Real news become fake and vice versa. These trends and connection of the believers are aided and abbetted by US social media tech corps (shamefully too often including Twitter and Facebook until very recently). Even so, I fully agree fixing potential insurrections comes well before reprogramming and social media regulatory changes.

In the meantime the Trump inner circle infighting continues to help make fixing the immediate problems a bit easier:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/14/trump-refusing-to-pay-rudy-giuliani-legal-fees-after-falling-out
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 15, 2021, 12:24:55 pm
'A mob' vs THE mob'

This is good and well worth reading for anyone tempted to just let him run down his final days.

It lays out clearly what the implications of his lies are and why not fully confronting them is a poor choice.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/15/congressional-republicans-trump-lie-overturn-election-riot
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 15, 2021, 12:41:22 pm
Seems like a good time to recommend to E.P. Thompson's magisterial essay "The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth Century," Past and Present (1971), which begins thus:

"We have been warned in recent years, by George Rudé and others, against the loose employment of the term "mob". I wish in this article to extend the warning to the term "riot", especially where the food riot in eighteenth-century England is concerned.

This simple four-letter word can conceal what may be described as a spasmodic view of popular history. According to this view the common people can scarcely be taken as historical agents before the French Revolution. Before this period they intrude occasionally and spasmodically upon the historical canvas, in periods of sudden social disturbance. These intrusions are compulsive, rather than self-conscious or self-activating: they are simple responses to economic stimuli. It is sufficient to mention a bad harvest or a down-turn in trade, and all requirements of historical explanation are satisfied."

Perhaps someone should inquire into the moral economy of the Trumpian "mob?"
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 15, 2021, 01:46:58 pm
I am wondering what more is in store, for this inauguration.

Note the younger fella in this article is on duty, deployed to DC, with the VA Guard. I hope they at least have him on traffic control, several miles from the Capitol.
I wonder if any of those guns will be pointing the wrong way..?
 http://miltim.es/jSJm0O6?fbclid=IwAR1eDLqmdKqBZ-AjYeLurLGbSX-ajWjxgnI0gunLKMfPPikWunEM6SEiGuw (http://miltim.es/jSJm0O6?fbclid=IwAR1eDLqmdKqBZ-AjYeLurLGbSX-ajWjxgnI0gunLKMfPPikWunEM6SEiGuw)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 15, 2021, 02:39:28 pm
This is a worthwhile read.
A single individual, of course, but an intriguing tale about one man’s dive into the rabbit hole:

 https://www.newyorker.com/news/us-journal/the-georgia-dad-who-said-that-he-wanted-to-kill-nancy-pelosi?utm_brand=tny&mbid=social_facebook&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_social-type=owned&fbclid=IwAR26pLZ5yZnc2gI-Pxs30IChjZWWIoFfN-WCcDvcy1SJMlgtgbhjdGAttdQ (https://www.newyorker.com/news/us-journal/the-georgia-dad-who-said-that-he-wanted-to-kill-nancy-pelosi?utm_brand=tny&mbid=social_facebook&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_social-type=owned&fbclid=IwAR26pLZ5yZnc2gI-Pxs30IChjZWWIoFfN-WCcDvcy1SJMlgtgbhjdGAttdQ)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 15, 2021, 03:50:57 pm
I like this too.
The FBI are not happy and I think their timing is telling and the implications of this re-release are clear. This document was made public in a heavily redacted form, in 2006.
It has just been released unredacted.
Which I think translates as “We’ve been telling you this for fourteen years”.
Again, the FBI were ready to respond to the insurrection. I wonder why.

 https://oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/White_Supremacist_Infiltration_of_Law_Enforcement.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3EIul-KhhP9oYbG5s8bVluFVcwtyeQKETUBTeccMgDm01Z2K8V7KAQPOI (https://oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/White_Supremacist_Infiltration_of_Law_Enforcement.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3EIul-KhhP9oYbG5s8bVluFVcwtyeQKETUBTeccMgDm01Z2K8V7KAQPOI)

Oh, I don’t think I broke any UK laws sharing that.
Maybe.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: webbo on January 15, 2021, 10:35:43 pm
According to a link on Bikeradar. The NRA have filed for bankruptcy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 16, 2021, 02:25:44 am
Of course, it applies to all cases of excluding others to define the group.

Apart from the cases where it doesn't apply, obviously.

The amusing part of the “excluding” statement, is not recognising that in by “including” most of us in a “group think” category; he in fact creates a delineation between “Us” and “open minded” (read, in his view, “right minded”) people...

Thanks Matt, and for the third person reference, but I don't think it comes down to right/wrong minded.

That said, I was simply stating what already clearly seemed to be the case, regarding what was popular/"allowed" vs unpopular and defended against/excluded.

Do I think there are ways of looking at this situation more carefully and critically? Yes, absolutely I do.

Yes, you’re right, the phrasing was rude.
It was meant to be more amused than to accuse...
My point is, I’ve already expressed something that is disturbingly close (to me) to “sympathy” for the Trumpster’s origin, or, rather, the situation that brought them into being (plenty will be beyond redemption). Many have acknowledged the need to address the issues that created them.

But the situation is one of immediate peril. One that must be stalled by the swiftest possible method. Which will almost certainly be beheading the beast.

Will this create martyrs?

Yup.

Intensify the passions of the faithfull?

Hmmm...

Some of them, for sure. Mostly, in this case, I think it will sort those with (misguided) love of country, from those with a genuine love of authoritarianism or Trump obsession.
Because, realising that a majority of Americans view you as a traitor, is hurting a lot of people right now.
(There are, for instance, numerous examples of families talking to the media about how “Mum”, “Dad”, “Uncle Joe” or  A. N. Other relative, became radicalised and distanced from their own families etc).*

The longer term problem of deprogramming the followers, must must take a back seat to the need to immediately stall the movement, even if the Hydra sprouts a new head (preferably, more than one, if you want to destroy a movement, split the movement).

*I seem to recall hearing that from many Muslim families over the years, though, somehow, don’t recall it being taken so seriously by the “media”....

Great measured post Matt. Thanks  :thumbsup:

Yes, I was thinking I should have expressed a bit more humour, but emotions are running high, aren't they.

I wanted to refer to an earlier point of yours, where you suggested I was being generous towards Trump. To a certain extent, probably more than most, yes.
However, I think the reason for that isn't my sentiment per-se (for example, the notion of Trump trying to keep his benefits after office.. words are difficult. Remarkably weak. Might make you vomit.) but trying to be aware of the strength and difference of feeling and opinion, Vs for instance the actual purpose, terms and process of impeachment.
I'm not drawn to a blanket feeling of hatred, and going after Trump to punish him, as an expression of hatred would be a terrible mistake, in my opinion. If there are criminal charges, then they need to be answered, and can be addressed through due legal process afterwards.

He sounds pretty volatile at the moment. As he becomes more isolated, let's hope he doesn't give his mate Kim a call.  :no:

(PS. I had considered changing my avatar to He-man  ;D )
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 16, 2021, 07:18:04 pm
Interesting view.
If only half true, it must bode poorly for the next few days:
 https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/01/donald-trump-after-presidency.html?utm_source=fb&fbclid=IwAR0Vw98Hc87bN2ahibTleF-kCrlw6q8YbkSnVDI71IUB_mgProQ9Nni8XaU (https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/01/donald-trump-after-presidency.html?utm_source=fb&fbclid=IwAR0Vw98Hc87bN2ahibTleF-kCrlw6q8YbkSnVDI71IUB_mgProQ9Nni8XaU)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Murph on January 17, 2021, 10:36:18 am
As with Trump - and referenced by Murph in his post above - discrediting Trump, or labelling him a C*** or whatever, does nothing to address the wider issues.

Bit late replying to this as I didnt understand what you meant. Are you saying I called Trump a C without addressing wider issues?

I didnt realise I had to address wider issues. I was simply saying that Trump has done and said a lot of pretty appalling things - by the standards of Presidents - and yet he still appears pretty popular within GOP Congress members and among the electorate.

Sorry might have misread you Dave but did you think I missed the dartboard with my comment?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 17, 2021, 07:18:23 pm
As with Trump - and referenced by Murph in his post above - discrediting Trump, or labelling him a C*** or whatever, does nothing to address the wider issues.

Bit late replying to this as I didnt understand what you meant. Are you saying I called Trump a C without addressing wider issues?

I didnt realise I had to address wider issues. I was simply saying that Trump has done and said a lot of pretty appalling things - by the standards of Presidents - and yet he still appears pretty popular within GOP Congress members and among the electorate.

Sorry might have misread you Dave but did you think I missed the dartboard with my comment?

Murph, yes, I think you did misread my post.

Perhaps I misread yours, but by *as referenced by Murph* I thought you were making a passing reference to all the other factors, that simply labelling Trump a C*** didn't address.

Your post reads like a bit of a troll, looking to stoke a reaction, and unfortunately doesn't do much to clarify your earlier post.

For what it's worth, I don't think this is a situation with a dartboard to hit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Murph on January 17, 2021, 07:54:42 pm
I promise you I wasn't trolling. I guess I'm just not very good at explaining. I had read your post as if you were saying I had said he was just a C. Obviously got that wrong.

Trump is incredibly popular despite or perhaps versus of all the stuff he has said and done. If it hadn't been for this or that going pretty badly in 2020 he could have been reelected.

Sorry dont have much more to offer to build on my first post - despite everything trump still pulled almost half of the votes in November and a coupleof weeks ago he still had the support of half the House of Congress to overturn the election result in a couple of states. I think this last bit is unprecedented but im no expert. It shows, to me, that 2016 wasn't just an accident that could be corrected by people having a bit of a think and find out a bit more about him.

I was just sharing reflections - sort of following on from another comment that said the Capitol attack means Trump's reputation is finally trashed. And i sort of disagree. Grab 'em by the pussy should have seen his reputation trashed but alas....

Sorry not much more to add than that. Pretty mundane observations really.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: GraemeA on January 18, 2021, 05:23:35 pm
Very scary clip https://www.newyorker.com/news/video-dept/a-reporters-footage-from-inside-the-capitol-siege
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 18, 2021, 05:54:20 pm
That will keep the lawyers busy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 18, 2021, 06:12:27 pm
They are just weird, though.
Buffalo Bird brain, in particular.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 20, 2021, 06:22:09 am
I, for one, will unapologetically be raising a glass in thanks at 6pm (CET) this evening.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 20, 2021, 08:27:30 am
I, for one, will unapologetically be raising a glass in thanks at 6pm (CET) this evening.

Agreed.
But doesn’t it feel like a long time away, right now?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 20, 2021, 08:51:45 am
I don't know, it feels within touching distance to me.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 20, 2021, 08:59:45 am
12 Guardsmen removed from the Capitol in the last 24hrs.

It only takes one.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on January 20, 2021, 09:38:52 am
I'm waiting to hear that he's out of office and hasn't pardoned himself. Then I can be happy.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: J_duds on January 20, 2021, 09:57:33 am
if he pardons himself, doesn't he admit guilt, and then perhaps a civil case against him?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 20, 2021, 09:59:43 am
He's not going to pardon himself (or any of his family or Giuliani).

@Matt, yes, of course.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tomtom on January 20, 2021, 10:26:53 am
He's not going to pardon himself (or any of his family or Giuliani).

@Matt, yes, of course.

Wasnt there the possibility of 'hidden pardons' as in those signed by Trump but not released? (though given how everything has to be recorded not sure how that would happen)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA Chris on January 20, 2021, 10:44:14 am
I, for one, will unapologetically be raising a glass in thanks at 6pm (CET) this evening.

At this point, can this topic be locked and logged?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SamT on January 20, 2021, 11:03:35 am

Probably not, since I don't think we've heard the last! Sadly.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Bradders on January 20, 2021, 11:04:28 am
I, for one, will unapologetically be raising a glass in thanks at 6pm (CET) this evening.

At this point, can this topic be locked and logged?

No chance, we need to keep an eye on progress through impeachment > trial > sentencing > imprisonment (he says, hopefully).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Ged on January 20, 2021, 12:42:17 pm
I'd still be keen for a change of topic title if nothing else. At the very least, him not having a platform is important. There seemed to be a consensus this would be a good thing a while back. Any chance? "American politics"?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 20, 2021, 01:07:06 pm
Debating him under whatever title is fine by me, but I can’t quite see how ukb is giving him a platform? Do you think he’ll post here under a pseudonym or something more direct like THE REALPOTUS?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SamT on January 20, 2021, 01:17:55 pm
He might not post here, but I guess Camp 4 and J Tree will be alive with the call to arms.  Boulderers everywhere donning their red caps and buffalo skin viking horned hats. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: duncan on January 20, 2021, 02:06:34 pm
I'd still be keen for a change of topic title if nothing else. At the very least, him not having a platform is important. There seemed to be a consensus this would be a good thing a while back. Any chance? "American politics"?

I asked for suggestions last week! I’m waiting til 1200 CET but, assuming Trump is no longer in power, I’ll retitle the thread to encourage a more general discussion of US politics. The Californian sparkling white is in the fridge...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Will Hunt on January 20, 2021, 02:17:15 pm
Shall we start a pool on when he gets arrested?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 20, 2021, 02:20:28 pm
Shall we start a pool on when he gets arrested?

What time is he due to step off Marine One?

Belay that.

He’s already transferred to Airforce One. I assume that designation will change shortly.

So he’ll be in Florida when he becomes Ex-President Trump. That’s enemy territory isn’t it, so it might be a while before the Union forces catch up to him.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: teestub on January 20, 2021, 02:26:13 pm
I love that the Mar a Lago neighbours put a planning condition on the development that Trump could only spend a limited amount of time there each year 😂
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 20, 2021, 04:42:49 pm
A Black, Female, Firefighter, leading and Signing the pledge of Allegiance.

Pence must have been dying inside.
I hope.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: andy popp on January 20, 2021, 05:21:26 pm
A Black, Female, Firefighter, leading and Signing the pledge of Allegiance.

Just as important, she was explicitly there as a representative of organized labour.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: seankenny on January 20, 2021, 05:40:23 pm
I'd still be keen for a change of topic title if nothing else. At the very least, him not having a platform is important. There seemed to be a consensus this would be a good thing a while back. Any chance? "American politics"?

I asked for suggestions last week! I’m waiting til 1200 CET but, assuming Trump is no longer in power, I’ll retitle the thread to encourage a more general discussion of US politics. The Californian sparkling white is in the fridge...


“When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.”
George Carlin (American comedian)


McNulty: I gotta ask ya: If every time Snotboogie would grab the money and run away, why'd you even let him in the game?

Man On Stoop: What?

McNulty: If Snotboogie always stole the money, why'd you let him play?

Man On Stoop: Got to. This America, man.

- The Wire

And if you can't get a thread title out of those two quotes, well I shake my head and swear like Clay Davis.

With apologies to our American readers, in case it's not obvious, I love the US. Well, maybe.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: mrjonathanr on January 20, 2021, 05:52:29 pm
Carlin was one of the greats. I don’t get tired of watching Bill Hicks either. I know we get a lot of links to the Grauniad, but the 1st Dog comic strip is great today. And Australian.

Who -honestly- can’t relate to frame #4?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/20/we-made-it-happy-united-states-presidential-inauguration-day-everyone (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/20/we-made-it-happy-united-states-presidential-inauguration-day-everyone)
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on January 20, 2021, 06:33:27 pm
Great new title!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 20, 2021, 10:30:58 pm
The Californian sparkling white is in the fridge...

Is that a reference to the Old Austrian Oak himself, or am I coming at this from the wrong angle?

Regardless, cause for celebration indeed..

I spoke to Andy last night - hope this is going to be OK AP  ;D

He's understandably somewhat bashful, and our resident historian didn't want to appear too self-congratulatory, so I said I'd oblige.

Andy has just been given a commission for what we understand will be intended as "the definitive historical reference". As something of a philanthropic gesture, the patron has asked that they remain anonymous, but let's just say Andy won't have to work again - except on his unfulfilled potential  :punk:

The working title of this fine opus is going to be "The Great World Leaders of the 21st Century. American political history from Obama to Biden".

Raise a glass of sparkling Californian coolness indeed  :2thumbsup: :beer2: (or beer)


fake news.. Hope you don't mind the obvious piss take Andy. You should have accepted the military salute though
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on January 24, 2021, 09:32:12 am
The Vanity Fair article, which is exceptionally candid, about the state of the DOD at the time of the Capitol insurrection, is an eye opener.
 https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/01/embedding-with-pentagon-leadership-in-trumps-chaotic-last-week?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=onsite-share&utm_brand=vanity-fair&utm_social-type=earned (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/01/embedding-with-pentagon-leadership-in-trumps-chaotic-last-week?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=onsite-share&utm_brand=vanity-fair&utm_social-type=earned)
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: seankenny on January 24, 2021, 10:16:03 am
Some American politics from the other end. An assessment of Bernie Sanders:

https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/the-bernie-movement-an-assessment
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on January 26, 2021, 10:05:38 pm
Some points of trivia and further interest.

This thread has gone a bit quiet..

..now that everyone has moved onto post-Brexit trade, and crap problems in la Forêt.

Perhaps we should rename it
"The Muted Trumper" after the route by Andy Harris and Rich Heap (spotted and prepped by yours truly) from 1999 at Stanage?

The Duck and I share the same initials, David James Thomas and Donald John Trump. I'll have words with my mother later..  :whistle:

There's an excellent thread - among many others - at abc.net.au on the progress/outcome etc of impeachment proceedings, as well as the latest on dialogue between Biden and Putin..(the Butin):

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-27/donald-trumps-impeachment-trial-outcomes/13088060
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on January 28, 2021, 08:02:11 am
Although I think it's a good thing Trump is being impeached, it's a bit depressing that there's almost no chance of conviction in the Senate. He really needs to be in prison, but I suspect he'll end up running in 2024
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on January 28, 2021, 08:13:41 am
This loon is an elected  congresswoman!?!?!? It's scary how bad things have got in the US. Trumpism is far from having gone away.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/27/marjorie-taylor-greene-republican-no-action-pelosi-execution
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on January 28, 2021, 08:16:21 am
Ridiculous. If any member of the public made those statements publicly the FBI would be all over them.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on February 01, 2021, 04:20:19 pm
This loon is an elected  congresswoman!?!?!? It's scary how bad things have got in the US. Trumpism is far from having gone away.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/27/marjorie-taylor-greene-republican-no-action-pelosi-execution

She's not only a mental Q believer, and a congresswoman, but on an education committee as well. Perhaps the most frightening story in the states is the increasing mainstreaming of this sort of bullshit, as well as the increasing willingness of a number of politicians to pander to white supremacy, question legitimate democracy, and openly lie to voters, the media and anyone who will listen.
It's interesting reading some pieces by people who've investigated conspiracy theories extensively on the Q phenomenon. It's totally without any reason or original basis in any kind of reality, in the way that one might see that people are scared of things they don't understand, like vaccines or 5G, ridiculous though these might be as well. Its a sort of weird dungeons and dragons esque fantasy mass delusion as far as I can gather, and MTG should be nowhere near public authority of any kind.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Will Hunt on February 01, 2021, 04:43:14 pm
 :agree:
There's also a big nail in the coffin to come when Trump is not convicted in the Senate trial. How much faith can the citizens of western democracies have in the failsafes that protect democracy when it's made so blatant that those with their hands on the lever will back 'their guy' no matter what.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on February 06, 2021, 05:20:50 am
Trump bashers.

I think I've heard enough.
Neither you, nor I are "all bad".

What made you smile today?

https://youtu.be/gJSUun0VERU


 ;D
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on February 06, 2021, 08:59:36 am
MSNBC are having fun at Trump's expense but the fact is all past Presidents are called President. If we want to look at weird etiquette attached to positions of power the UK beats the US hands down. The real issue here is genuine abuse of the US constitution will be covered up for political ends.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on February 06, 2021, 04:16:35 pm
MSNBC are having fun at Trump's expense but the fact is all past Presidents are called President. If we want to look at weird etiquette attached to positions of power the UK beats the US hands down. The real issue here is genuine abuse of the US constitution will be covered up for political ends.

Sorry you didn't find it as amusing as I did Offwidth  ;)
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 11, 2021, 05:56:45 pm
💗 Pilger

https://mobile.twitter.com/johnpilger/status/1359833046862622733
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 12, 2021, 08:55:08 am
https://thegrayzone.com/2020/12/24/pseudo-left-imperialists-healthcare/
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on February 12, 2021, 09:18:04 am
Be interesting to see if Trump’s lawyers come up with anything more useful today, although I guess they don’t really need to as they already know the vote will be in his favour.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on February 13, 2021, 01:04:01 am
Fight club!  :boxing:

https://youtu.be/aj1Rwlztapg

How much work must that have taken? Elizabeth Warren seems especially frightening!

Far too much emotive testimony in this show trial.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 13, 2021, 06:59:03 am
Maybe they should get Hunter Biden in as an expert witness on corruption, nepotism, vice. Uncle joe could then drop him a couple of mil diverted from the health budget to employ him as a moral educator for the nation. Oh hang on a minute

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/02/04/us/hunter-biden-memoir.amp.html%3f0p19G=2103
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on February 13, 2021, 07:36:04 am
But her emails.


Far too much emotive testimony in this show trial.

It’s a bit sad that this is the best they can come up with in defence, but their poor performance isn’t actually going to change the outcome.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 13, 2021, 08:41:07 am
Hey up I don’t think HB was charged? Doesn’t seem to matter when they literally get away with murder for power. Here’s an official looking document on outcomes of his case in the Ukraine. On basic level if they were to go all operation yew tree on the people associated with Epstein no doubt half these guys would be in the dirt. https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HSGAC_Finance_Report_FINAL.pdf
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on February 13, 2021, 09:03:30 am
Seems the best they could come up with was that it was ‘awkward’. Pales into comparison to the Trumps being banned from running charities etc.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 13, 2021, 09:17:29 am
Don’t matter, non of it. All there is left to do is sit back and watch the show.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: seankenny on February 13, 2021, 11:05:50 am
Hey up I don’t think HB was charged? Doesn’t seem to matter when they literally get away with murder for power. Here’s an official looking document on outcomes of his case in the Ukraine. On basic level if they were to go all operation yew tree on the people associated with Epstein no doubt half these guys would be in the dirt. https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HSGAC_Finance_Report_FINAL.pdf

Was that a report from the committee headed by two Trump loyalist senators which rehashed Russian misinformation? The conclusion is full of apparently and no actual hard findings that it’s hard to take it seriously.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/23/us/politics/biden-inquiry-republicans-johnson.html

Posting pro-Trump stuff and John Pilger links on one thread, and anti-lockdown, anti “liberal elite” stuff on another. You so called free thinkers really are the most predictable and tedious men.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Will Hunt on February 13, 2021, 11:16:13 am
I like the poems though.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 13, 2021, 11:25:36 am
Hey up I don’t think HB was charged? Doesn’t seem to matter when they literally get away with murder for power. Here’s an official looking document on outcomes of his case in the Ukraine. On basic level if they were to go all operation yew tree on the people associated with Epstein no doubt half these guys would be in the dirt. https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HSGAC_Finance_Report_FINAL.pdf

Was that a report from the committee headed by two Trump loyalist senators which rehashed Russian misinformation? The conclusion is full of apparently and no actual hard findings that it’s hard to take it seriously.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/23/us/politics/biden-inquiry-republicans-johnson.html

Posting pro-Trump stuff and John Pilger links on one thread, and anti-lockdown, anti “liberal elite” stuff on another. You so called free thinkers really are the most predictable and tedious men.

Dude, you’re missing the point!
If it’s Russian “misinformation” or dubious conjecture from right wing pundits or politicians, it’s “real” as is anything from the other extreme.
If it’s reporting, with citations etc, in something other than headline format, in a publication that doesn’t support his world view, then it’s “programming”.
Evidence that doesn’t support his preferred conjecture, is automatically misinformation, but random unsupported statements or memes that do, are gospels to be worshipped.

It must be overwhelming to feel so out of control, so lost and helpless, that you begin to create alternative realities, where you become the “Elite”. Where  you become one of the enlightened. Part of that small group, who alone know the truth. Suddenly, it’s all black and white.

A bit like buying an electric bike and suddenly believing you’re the worlds greatest cyclist, even as your feet stop moving...
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 13, 2021, 12:07:15 pm
Is John Pilger bad? I thought he made interesting documentaries and was respected for it
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on February 13, 2021, 05:28:25 pm
So the Impeachment trial is not over and they are probably calling witnesses. This tweet showing Trumps indifference to the situation house representatives were in seemed to be crucial to that decision.

https://twitter.com/HerreraBeutler/status/1360419828721401856?s=20


Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on February 13, 2021, 11:59:14 pm
....and then the democrats blink.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on February 14, 2021, 07:50:41 am
....and then the democrats blink.


I think they were right to wrap up and move on, it was obvious that they weren’t going to get the votes no matter how much evidence was presented so they were just wasting time. Any arguments about it needing to form a public record seem moot, it’s all there in many media forms.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: tomtom on February 14, 2021, 08:08:34 am
A zero sum game - that had to be played.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on February 14, 2021, 11:46:23 am
You're probably right but it looked terrible so I struggle to understand why the Democrats called the vote for witnesses in the first place. Some of the fallout is clearly pants.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/13/mitt-romney-impeachment-row-boxers-versus-briefs
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on February 14, 2021, 12:27:32 pm
You're probably right but it looked terrible so I struggle to understand why the Democrats called the vote for witnesses in the first place. Some of the fallout is clearly pants.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/13/mitt-romney-impeachment-row-boxers-versus-briefs

I don’t think the purpose was to convict.
And the Turtle was involved and coordinated with the intent.
That speech that he made, amounted to a  statement of guilt, carefully qualifying it as acquittal on the technicality of jurisdiction, not innocence.
It indicated a lack of support, for Trump, from the party, as he probably faces felony charges in more than one state, and subtly acknowledges that convicted felons cannot hold office.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on February 14, 2021, 01:02:07 pm
You're probably right but it looked terrible so I struggle to understand why the Democrats called the vote for witnesses in the first place. Some of the fallout is clearly pants.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/13/mitt-romney-impeachment-row-boxers-versus-briefs

I don’t think the purpose was to convict.
And the Turtle was involved and coordinated with the intent.
That speech that he made, amounted to a  statement of guilt, carefully qualifying it as acquittal on the technicality of jurisdiction, not innocence.
It indicated a lack of support, for Trump, from the party, as he probably faces felony charges in more than one state, and subtly acknowledges that convicted felons cannot hold office.

I don't think that the democrats were being delusional, chances of conviction were virtually nil, and they must have known it.
I'd imagine that the main purpose is to have tried to sufficiently tarnish the Trump brand as to make him less popular in case he runs again. I have doubts about how successful that might have been; however if it increases chances that Trump will be criminally liable, then that's just as effective.

Impeachment has never been effective against a president; is the bar too high for conviction? Or is it a necessary safeguard against overuse?
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on February 14, 2021, 01:13:02 pm
I agree with all of that. I was talking about why they called a vote on witnesses. Even I felt it looked a mess and I agree with the Democrat line on Trump.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: spidermonkey09 on February 14, 2021, 02:55:19 pm
Is John Pilger bad? I thought he made interesting documentaries and was respected for it

Pilger has made the move from respected investigative journo and filmmaker to crank over the last 20 years or so. Definitely several screws loose these days but I have read and enjoyed his early books and films.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on February 14, 2021, 06:22:56 pm
I wonder what happened? Maybe everyone else’s screws got tightened while his screws remained the same.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 05, 2021, 07:00:49 am
Is there a sweepstake going on when Biden will be deemed unable to continue? I heard September. Apparently he hasn’t been seen in a while.
I enjoyed this left bloggers post on Twitter.

https://mobile.twitter.com/leftiblog/status/1367506736202928131
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on March 05, 2021, 07:57:38 am
Apparently he hasn’t been seen in a while.

That's right! Apart from all the times he has been seen and heard in the last few days.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 05, 2021, 09:02:52 am
Is there a sweepstake going on when Biden will be deemed unable to continue? I heard September. Apparently he hasn’t been seen in a while.
I enjoyed this left bloggers post on Twitter.

https://mobile.twitter.com/leftiblog/status/1367506736202928131

Two minutes (to open the Sky news app and then use the menu to navigate to “US news’) shows me his last public speech was on Tuesday, or two days ago, given time differences.
 COVID-19: US aims to have enough vaccines for all adults 'by end of May', Biden says (http://COVID-19: US aims to have enough vaccines for all adults 'by end of May', Biden says)

Did you just make up your post, in your imagination, or are you following some “Alternative Media” source and not questioning their narrative?
You should do some research. Check out the “Mainstream Media”, they even have this thing called “Evidence” (like actually transmitting a speech live (can you believe that?)). The “Alternative Media” just want you to believe their narrative, if you check, you’ll see they don’t have any evidence to back up their claims.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on March 05, 2021, 09:36:31 am
I believe he also spoke Wednesday and was on calls with agencies etc. Thursday for which readouts are available.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on March 05, 2021, 09:39:34 am
No, that was an animatronic puppet and some things created in a studio. Fake news.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on March 13, 2021, 10:14:51 am
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_accidental_president

I'd watch this if I had Amazon prime,  I listened to an interview with the director and it sounds interesting. 
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 04:49:14 pm
I enjoyed this interview with Christopher Hitchens on the Clintons. Feels like pretty much where they are again now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlrM0Siszq8
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on March 17, 2021, 05:39:36 pm
Pretty happy with ‘not Trump’ rn, the dems needed to make sure they got enough swing and Biden did that for them.

Are you a Sanders fan?
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 07:03:04 pm
I don’t know enough about Saunders. He appeared a kind and gentle man who was never going to gain power.
Biden I find very uncomfortable, he appears to present with prodromal symptoms of dementia. There seems no getting away from that despite reassurances.
Frank Yeomans an analytic psychotherapist and liberal gives an interesting perspective on Trump and malignant narcissism. He talks about the Republican tendency towards a polarised view of the world. How dangerous this can be and how Democrats are paralysed by analysis of the grey. Leading to openings for dangerous characters like Trump to take power. My opinion is that this position has turned on its head yet is largely in acknowledged. AOC being a very public example. Anyway I’ve linked the video by Yeomans, interesting from the perspective of how developmental and psychoanalytic theory create a window of insight into politics, corporations and power. Of note is that the theory has a strong scientific basis in neurodevelopmental studies and in life observation and treatment. Otto Kernberg a leading psychiatrist in the field of Personality Development and Personality Disorders is a strong voice in this field.Clinton also seemed to fall into this category 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xoRuzpsLzTU&list=PL_L7KEOxOeQ_-S7lmY2ZepFle6nM5ti4E&index=8


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5FVtuXZeWAI&list=PL_L7KEOxOeQ_-S7lmY2ZepFle6nM5ti4E&index=10


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LOcMmuoFufU

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-AeWDcJaENc&list=PL_L7KEOxOeQ_-S7lmY2ZepFle6nM5ti4E&index=18


Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on March 17, 2021, 07:52:56 pm
He talks about the Republican tendency towards a polarised view of the world. How dangerous this can be and how Democrats are paralysed by analysis of the grey. Leading to openings for dangerous characters like Trump to take power. My opinion is that this position has turned on its head yet is largely in acknowledged. AOC being a very public example.

You think AOC is a dangerous character or just has a polarised view of the world? It doesn’t seem like the popular republicans are ‘grey’ about anything.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on March 17, 2021, 07:55:40 pm
I don’t know enough about Saunders.

Its Sanders.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 07:58:07 pm
Saunders sanders etc nice one
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 17, 2021, 08:04:08 pm
There’s no way the yanks would have elected someone called Finbarr.

By the way, I find your psychologising very overstated. One YouTube video does not a complete psychoanalysis make.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 08:47:14 pm
He talks about the Republican tendency towards a polarised view of the world. How dangerous this can be and how Democrats are paralysed by analysis of the grey. Leading to openings for dangerous characters like Trump to take power. My opinion is that this position has turned on its head yet is largely in acknowledged. AOC being a very public example.

You think AOC is a dangerous character or just has a polarised view of the world? It doesn’t seem like the popular republicans are ‘grey’ about anything.

Sorry yes should have been clearer. An example of a regression towards simplicity as trump was / is
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2021, 08:51:03 pm
There’s no way the yanks would have elected someone called Finbarr.

By the way, I find your psychologising very overstated. One YouTube video does not a complete psychoanalysis make.

I was a bit “meh” about the “psychoanalysis” of Trump, etc, based on his public appearances. However, that was fairly obviously Trump going off script and rambling, therefore giving an insight into his mental state. Still a long way from serious investigation.
Biden, seems to follow his prepared statements, by and large, so I’m curious how this can be seen as an insight into his mental state or capacity, since he probably hasn’t even drafted the words himself?

I rather feel that is infinitely better. I would like to think, when we hear the president speak, we are hearing the considered words from the “Office of the President”, rather than the individual holding that office.

I’m certain that is more true under Biden, than it ever was under Trump.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2021, 08:59:21 pm
He talks about the Republican tendency towards a polarised view of the world. How dangerous this can be and how Democrats are paralysed by analysis of the grey. Leading to openings for dangerous characters like Trump to take power. My opinion is that this position has turned on its head yet is largely in acknowledged. AOC being a very public example.

You think AOC is a dangerous character or just has a polarised view of the world? It doesn’t seem like the popular republicans are ‘grey’ about anything.

Sorry yes should have been clearer. An example of a regression towards simplicity as trump was / is

Well, that’s bollocks.

“Turned on it’s head”?

Are you suggesting there are no “Extreme” Republicans? That all Democrats are “Extremists”?

Bloody hell, you don’t even begin to grasp that you are the one with the “Black and White” vision and views, do you?

Jesus, every political party, that has ever existed (with the possible exception of the UK Liberal party (which is as grey as grey fox, on a grey concrete path, on a foggy day, at dusk), has and has had extremes within it’s ranks. It is bloody obvious which of the two, Republican or Democrat, has the bigger problem with it’s extremists at this time.
At least, it is to anybody who isn’t inspecting the inside of their own colon.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: gollum on March 17, 2021, 09:20:50 pm
Matt, I really do think he’s just trying to wind you up.

You will have worked with him, I’ve definitely worked with him............
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2021, 09:35:22 pm
Matt, I really do think he’s just trying to wind you up.

You will have worked with him, I’ve definitely worked with him............

Oh he doesn’t wind me up. Pretty sure my 12 yr old son is more politically astute and he thinks Greek mythology is incredibly interesting and Fortnight is a really cool game, for when you’re not playing Minecraft.

No, he makes me laugh, usually. I just don’t believe he should go unchallenged. A bit like my son.

This has backfired on me in the Covid thread, so I shall ignore his “contributions” there.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: gollum on March 17, 2021, 09:38:37 pm
In that case I recommend Stephen Fry’s Mythos, Heroes and Troy, very entertaining versions of mythology
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 09:57:54 pm
It’s an uncomfortable view point that Democrats have become what they most despise in their opposition. The same is true in U.K. politics. Boris is left of Blair who’s in charge of the ministry of peace

This thread died a death with Trumpy Pumpy
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2021, 10:01:38 pm
In that case I recommend Stephen Fry’s Mythos, Heroes and Troy, very entertaining versions of mythology

Xmas 2018.(iirc)

Bought it with a Waterstones token from Grandma.

Bit “Sheldon” that kid.

Bizarre memory. Instantly knows song lyrics, after a single hearing and recalls stuff from when he was 2, stupidly accurately. Not easy. Wanker has a tendency to throw your own words back at you...
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2021, 10:04:39 pm
It’s an uncomfortable view point that Democrats have become what they most despise in their opposition. The same is true in U.K. politics. Boris is left of Blair who’s in charge of the ministry of peace

This thread died a death with Trumpy Pumpy

Partly true. After all it’s difficult to find too much to debate when nothing seems incredibly controversial or unreasonable, except in certain people’s fevered imagination...
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 17, 2021, 10:17:18 pm
An interesting piece on that subject

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/18/opinion/fake-news-media-attention.html
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 17, 2021, 10:28:04 pm
An interesting piece on that subject

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/18/opinion/fake-news-media-attention.html

Not too bad.

You should read it...
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on March 17, 2021, 11:42:41 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-coronavirus-vaccine-pelosi-republicans/2021/03/17/9487e264-85e3-11eb-8a67-f314e5fcf88d_story.html
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 18, 2021, 05:59:14 am
There’s no doubt that Republicans are gun toting swivel eyed loons while the other side seem intent on burning books and policing thought crime. Some nice regression to simplicity there. Anyways a paper owned by one of the worlds biggest grandiose narcissists is good for one thing only. Wiping ones backside with.

I followed the NY times SIFT protocol to come to that conclusion
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on March 18, 2021, 07:58:42 am
There’s no doubt that Republicans are gun toting swivel eyed loons while the other side seem intent on burning books and policing thought crime. Some nice regression to simplicity there. Anyways a paper owned by one of the worlds biggest grandiose narcissists is good for one thing only. Wiping ones backside with.

I followed the NY times SIFT protocol to come to that conclusion

Dan, I'm sure you're still a reasonable human being in the real world, but your post is a total pile of shit, I'm afraid.

Nothing that you've just written has any real basis in truth.
All political parties encompass a variety of opinions, journalists are not robots controlled by the owner. In fact Bezos has nothing to do with any control of the Washington post, according to the Pulitzer prize winning editor.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 08:02:41 am
There’s no doubt that Republicans are gun toting swivel eyed loons while the other side seem intent on burning books and policing thought crime. Some nice regression to simplicity there. Anyways a paper owned by one of the worlds biggest grandiose narcissists is good for one thing only. Wiping ones backside with.

I followed the NY times SIFT protocol to come to that conclusion

Please cite your sources for “book burning” and “policing thought crime” or admit you just made up some fake news.

Which we all know you did, because you haven’t got a leg to stand on to support any of your opinions that you tout as “fact” without resorting to linking to somebody else’s equally unsupported opinion...

Aka, you contribute nothing but vitriol and garbage.

You now have an opportunity to prove the above statement incorrect, go.

Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 18, 2021, 08:22:50 am
Sigh, it was a tongue in cheek post reflective of the sift approach to critical thought as suggested by the NY times. You can go on any Twitter thread where someone is having their thoughts policed. For example someone believing their operating for the greater good delivering abuse, shaming, calling for peoples lives to be ruined by having a different view. I refer back to Chomsky’s ideas with regards the illusion of journalism being anything other than propaganda. Link to Andrew Marr interview below. No doubt the continued intellectual takedown will continue. I’m surprised at you Toby for resorting to a (implied) character attack. Sad times indeed.

I have also shared an interview with Christopher Hitchens above as well as thoughts from the field of psychoanalysis which refers to the idea that basic drives and central being are then built upon with often needless levels of complexity leading to suffering and regression to black and white thinking often adopted by those in control. The first noble truth.  No one has responded with anything resembling discussion apart from to split hairs over a spelling error.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GjENnyQupow

Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: webbo on March 18, 2021, 08:39:43 am
You post all these links to various therapists and the like. Which is very similar to thread I have read on another site where a sports psychologist was doing the same. She did admit that she had no real life experience of anything she linked to. I wonder if it’s the same with you Dan.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 08:40:39 am
Aaaannd...

You cite an opinion to support your opinion, in a rather weak appeal to authority.

Round again.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on March 18, 2021, 09:21:52 am
Dan, I  sure it's not reflective of you as a person, but just posting a barely coherent stream of invective on every thread, just to try to get a response from anyone is just a bit boring. 
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 18, 2021, 10:08:37 am
I don’t know enough about Saunders. He appeared a kind and gentle man who was never going to gain power.
Biden I find very uncomfortable, he appears to present with prodromal symptoms of dementia. There seems no getting away from that despite reassurances.
Frank Yeomans an analytic psychotherapist and liberal gives an interesting perspective on Trump and malignant narcissism. He talks about the Republican tendency towards a polarised view of the world. How dangerous this can be and how Democrats are paralysed by analysis of the grey. Leading to openings for dangerous characters like Trump to take power. My opinion is that this position has turned on its head yet is largely in acknowledged. AOC being a very public example. Anyway I’ve linked the video by Yeomans, interesting from the perspective of how developmental and psychoanalytic theory create a window of insight into politics, corporations and power. Of note is that the theory has a strong scientific basis in neurodevelopmental studies and in life observation and treatment. Otto Kernberg a leading psychiatrist in the field of Personality Development and Personality Disorders is a strong voice in this field.Clinton also seemed to fall into this category 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xoRuzpsLzTU&list=PL_L7KEOxOeQ_-S7lmY2ZepFle6nM5ti4E&index=8


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5FVtuXZeWAI&list=PL_L7KEOxOeQ_-S7lmY2ZepFle6nM5ti4E&index=10


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LOcMmuoFufU

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-AeWDcJaENc&list=PL_L7KEOxOeQ_-S7lmY2ZepFle6nM5ti4E&index=18

Is this invective?
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 18, 2021, 10:10:56 am
He talks about the Republican tendency towards a polarised view of the world. How dangerous this can be and how Democrats are paralysed by analysis of the grey. Leading to openings for dangerous characters like Trump to take power. My opinion is that this position has turned on its head yet is largely in acknowledged. AOC being a very public example.

You think AOC is a dangerous character or just has a polarised view of the world? It doesn’t seem like the popular republicans are ‘grey’ about anything.

Sorry yes should have been clearer. An example of a regression towards simplicity as trump was / is

Well, that’s bollocks.

“Turned on it’s head”?

Are you suggesting there are no “Extreme” Republicans? That all Democrats are “Extremists”?

Bloody hell, you don’t even begin to grasp that you are the one with the “Black and White” vision and views, do you?

Jesus, every political party, that has ever existed (with the possible exception of the UK Liberal party (which is as grey as grey fox, on a grey concrete path, on a foggy day, at dusk), has and has had extremes within it’s ranks. It is bloody obvious which of the two, Republican or Democrat, has the bigger problem with it’s extremists at this time.
At least, it is to anybody who isn’t inspecting the inside of their own colon.

Is this invective?
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 18, 2021, 10:11:49 am


noun: invective
insulting, abusive, or highly critical language.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 10:24:33 am
He talks about the Republican tendency towards a polarised view of the world. How dangerous this can be and how Democrats are paralysed by analysis of the grey. Leading to openings for dangerous characters like Trump to take power. My opinion is that this position has turned on its head yet is largely in acknowledged. AOC being a very public example.

You think AOC is a dangerous character or just has a polarised view of the world? It doesn’t seem like the popular republicans are ‘grey’ about anything.

Sorry yes should have been clearer. An example of a regression towards simplicity as trump was / is

Well, that’s bollocks.

“Turned on it’s head”?

Are you suggesting there are no “Extreme” Republicans? That all Democrats are “Extremists”?

Bloody hell, you don’t even begin to grasp that you are the one with the “Black and White” vision and views, do you?

Jesus, every political party, that has ever existed (with the possible exception of the UK Liberal party (which is as grey as grey fox, on a grey concrete path, on a foggy day, at dusk), has and has had extremes within it’s ranks. It is bloody obvious which of the two, Republican or Democrat, has the bigger problem with it’s extremists at this time.
At least, it is to anybody who isn’t inspecting the inside of their own colon.

Is this invective?
No Dan.
It’s not.
Because the extremists can be easily identified, their actions listed and evidenced. Further,I deliberately did not reference you directly in the “colon” statement (leaving your own paranoia to decide in that).

I see you ducked the request for supporting evidence again.

Quick one, do you understand the difference between an opinion expressed on a public forum, being questioned, challenged or derided and “thought policing?
My impression is you do not.
A “Forum” is not a “Blog” and neither “criticism” nor “derision” constitute “policing”.

Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 18, 2021, 11:52:54 am
3 bits of evidence

Julian Assange
Julian Assange
Julian Assange

Some other interesting stuff unlikely to appear in the mainstream

https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/14/5-former-opcw-officials-join-prominent-voices-to-call-out-syria-cover-up/

https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/16/trump-us-military-peace-agreement-war-afghanistan/

The world is full of book burning and thought policing. Just some don’t like to think they’ve been had


Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on March 18, 2021, 12:03:38 pm
There’s loads on the Afghanistan stuff is mainstream sources, I just had a flick through an article on Al Jazeera which is a similar report but with the spin turned down a few notches.

The Syria stuff has been covered in here quite a few times previously.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 18, 2021, 12:05:17 pm
So
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 18, 2021, 12:16:22 pm
He talks about the Republican tendency towards a polarised view of the world. How dangerous this can be and how Democrats are paralysed by analysis of the grey. Leading to openings for dangerous characters like Trump to take power. My opinion is that this position has turned on its head yet is largely in acknowledged. AOC being a very public example.

You think AOC is a dangerous character or just has a polarised view of the world? It doesn’t seem like the popular republicans are ‘grey’ about anything.

Sorry yes should have been clearer. An example of a regression towards simplicity as trump was / is

Well, that’s bollocks.

“Turned on it’s head”?

Are you suggesting there are no “Extreme” Republicans? That all Democrats are “Extremists”?

Bloody hell, you don’t even begin to grasp that you are the one with the “Black and White” vision and views, do you?

Jesus, every political party, that has ever existed (with the possible exception of the UK Liberal party (which is as grey as grey fox, on a grey concrete path, on a foggy day, at dusk), has and has had extremes within it’s ranks. It is bloody obvious which of the two, Republican or Democrat, has the bigger problem with it’s extremists at this time.
At least, it is to anybody who isn’t inspecting the inside of their own colon.

Is this invective?
No Dan.
It’s not.
Because the extremists can be easily identified, their actions listed and evidenced. Further,I deliberately did not reference you directly in the “colon” statement (leaving your own paranoia to decide in that).

I see you ducked the request for supporting evidence again.

Quick one, do you understand the difference between an opinion expressed on a public forum, being questioned, challenged or derided and “thought policing?
My impression is you do not.
A “Forum” is not a “Blog” and neither “criticism” nor “derision” constitute “policing”.

Does the same stand for abusive pm’s?

Asking for a friend
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 12:29:10 pm
He talks about the Republican tendency towards a polarised view of the world. How dangerous this can be and how Democrats are paralysed by analysis of the grey. Leading to openings for dangerous characters like Trump to take power. My opinion is that this position has turned on its head yet is largely in acknowledged. AOC being a very public example.

You think AOC is a dangerous character or just has a polarised view of the world? It doesn’t seem like the popular republicans are ‘grey’ about anything.

Sorry yes should have been clearer. An example of a regression towards simplicity as trump was / is

Well, that’s bollocks.

“Turned on it’s head”?

Are you suggesting there are no “Extreme” Republicans? That all Democrats are “Extremists”?

Bloody hell, you don’t even begin to grasp that you are the one with the “Black and White” vision and views, do you?

Jesus, every political party, that has ever existed (with the possible exception of the UK Liberal party (which is as grey as grey fox, on a grey concrete path, on a foggy day, at dusk), has and has had extremes within it’s ranks. It is bloody obvious which of the two, Republican or Democrat, has the bigger problem with it’s extremists at this time.
At least, it is to anybody who isn’t inspecting the inside of their own colon.

Is this invective?
No Dan.
It’s not.
Because the extremists can be easily identified, their actions listed and evidenced. Further,I deliberately did not reference you directly in the “colon” statement (leaving your own paranoia to decide in that).

I see you ducked the request for supporting evidence again.

Quick one, do you understand the difference between an opinion expressed on a public forum, being questioned, challenged or derided and “thought policing?
My impression is you do not.
A “Forum” is not a “Blog” and neither “criticism” nor “derision” constitute “policing”.

Does the same stand for abusive pm’s?

Asking for a friend

Dude. You are horribly offensive. I have no qualms about telling you that.
I will respond to you in the same manner you post or respond. When you post and respond with respect and consideration, I respond to you in kind. Of course, the opposite is true.
Where you made personal and offensive attacks, I told you so.
You are a bully, don’t be surprised when you get push back.
I did tell you I would run it past the people you abused, we decided how to respond to you together. They don’t support me trying to reach out to you, they just think you are, well, pointless.

Now, back to your political analysis. Do you have evidence of “book burning” or “thought policing” that is not somebody else’s opinion?

I believe JA was wanted for extradition to his home country for questioning about a serious sexual offence, so not at all sure how that represents evidence to support your earlier assertions. I don’t think writing his name three times is going to conjure it up (for reference, Bloody Mary isn’t real either. If you do decide to stand in front of the mirror and chant “Julian Assange” three times, could you video it? If he appears, I’ll apologise).



Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 12:43:16 pm
I was going to edit the last post. Tone it down.
But actually, I think I’m just done, now. I have pretty much said what I actually feel, as completely as is possible, including my concerns for Dan’s mental health. Obviously, if he is just a troll and out to get a rise, well, more fool me.
I did say that he doesn’t wind me up, but I think that changed in the last couple of days. The unintended fall out and it’s affect on Sean, which I now see as my fault for encouraging continued discourse with Dan.
I also think I’m contributing to ruining discussions for too many other people, so I apologise and will now simply not respond to Dan.

Wow! Cancel culture!
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Loos3-tools on March 18, 2021, 02:47:39 pm
So just to clarify, a group of people who I’d offended got together and decided how you would go about dealing with it. This resulted in a series of mixed up personally abusive messages where on one hand you delivered insults and on the other reached out to me. Pretty much represents this forum, this all stems from me not agreeing with the opinions being pushed on here about lockdown and politics etc. I’m no angel when it comes to speaking my mind and know I’ve delivered a couple of regrettable insults (sorry reeve / Andy) but crikey?! Wtf
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 03:00:38 pm
So just to clarify, a group of people who I’d offended got together and decided how you would go about dealing with it. This resulted in a series of mixed up personally abusive messages where on one hand you delivered insults and on the other reached out to me. Pretty much represents this forum, this all stems from me not agreeing with the opinions being pushed on here about lockdown and politics etc. I’m no angel when it comes to speaking my mind and know I’ve delivered a couple of regrettable insults (sorry reeve / Andy) but crikey?! Wtf

No. This is the last response to you. My family and I got together to talk about your appalling attitude and responded to you.
The only thing you represent is your own twisted mind. If you found the PM “abusive” despite being told why you were offensive, tough, the point is responding to the offence you gave. Give it, get it.
Now, go find someone else to piss off.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on March 18, 2021, 03:23:44 pm
(sorry reeve / Andy)

Apology accepted. I've not always been my best either and I regret that, sorry. During your last incarnation I made a decision not to respond to you at all. I've broken that a couple of times recently, but really should have stuck to it.

Just to be clear I have never spoken to anyone else about your posting or "what to do about it." But I am frustrated. However, that's not because I disagree with you (I probably don't always), but your posting is frustrating: you repeatedly derail or otherwise drag threads off topic, you change positions, you're sometimes so obtuse that I struggle to even know what you're trying to argue, there have been insults, and - frankly - it gets really repetitive. I've found myself visiting less and definitely much more reluctant to contribute, including to threads that I'm genuinely interested in. That's my choice, of course, and you have every bit the same right to be here as I do. There's no hierarchy. But that's how I feel.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: shark on March 18, 2021, 03:45:55 pm
Loos3-tools / Dan’s account deleted at his own request.

Minimum 12 month cooling off period in place before re-registering
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: erm, sam on March 18, 2021, 04:58:35 pm
Thank fuck.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on March 18, 2021, 06:24:52 pm
I don't feel like that. I'm sad it got so bad and sorry we didn't all manage to fina a way to handle it at least a little better - not blaming anyone at all, or absolving Dan. Just a sorry, unpleasant state of affairs.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Plattsy on March 18, 2021, 06:53:52 pm
I don't feel like that. I'm sad it got so bad and sorry we didn't all manage to fina a way to handle it at least a little better - not blaming anyone at all, or absolving Dan. Just a sorry, unpleasant state of affairs.
Agreed. A real shame.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Davo on March 18, 2021, 06:58:11 pm
I haven’t commented on this thread before but have read most of it and have just scanned back.

A point to note is that although I disagree with 99% of the stuff from Dan and don’t exactly like his way of posting, it has never been unpleasant or rude. This is in sharp contrast to quite a few posts directed at him which in my opinion have crossed the line. Certainly several by oldmanmatt seem extremely aggressive and unpleasant to me and quite unnecessary. I can’t be bothered putting the relevant posts in quotes, a quick read back would be sufficient. I agree that some posts are frustrating and I don’t understand much of what Dan posts but I think it’s okay to have different opinions on the forum and for some of those opinions to be a bit unusual without it descending into personal attacks.

One of the reasons I read the forum is to listen to voices and opinions that are different from my own but well thought out.



Dave
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: tomtom on March 18, 2021, 07:22:11 pm
I didn’t engage on this thread - but he’s been rude/offensive to me on the cv19 thread. 

Previous usernames/characters of Dan  have been offensive/unpleasant to many people on this forum - and it’s unsurprising that this carries over to LooseTools.

Two wrongs don’t make a right etc... but given the track record I think he’s been dealt with pretty politely by many.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 18, 2021, 07:46:42 pm
I haven’t commented on this thread before but have read most of it and have just scanned back.

A point to note is that although I disagree with 99% of the stuff from Dan and don’t exactly like his way of posting, it has never been unpleasant or rude. This is in sharp contrast to quite a few posts directed at him which in my opinion have crossed the line. Certainly several by oldmanmatt seem extremely aggressive and unpleasant to me and quite unnecessary. I can’t be bothered putting the relevant posts in quotes, a quick read back would be sufficient. I agree that some posts are frustrating and I don’t understand much of what Dan posts but I think it’s okay to have different opinions on the forum and for some of those opinions to be a bit unusual without it descending into personal attacks.

One of the reasons I read the forum is to listen to voices and opinions that are different from my own but well thought out.



Dave

Well, I’m glad you weren’t offended. He rubbed me up the wrong way and directed comments directly at me. I will always hit back harder and I will not apologise for doing so. Dan just tried to drown out everything in his path and became impossible to simply ignore across several threads. Did you miss his “Lattice patrol” shit (or whatever it was) amongst many others.
It’s not as if I didn’t try and converse with him over the last year in all his forms. Sorry, but a great deal of his shit was ridiculous conspiracy theory rubbish, particularly on the Covid thread and that’s not something I would leave unchallenged.
Apart from arguing heatedly with Alex early in the pandemic, about some hypothetical moral issue, for a couple of posts, I generally don’t get too worked up on here. I can think of a handful of occasions over the last ten years.
This got to the point where nothing could be discussed without Dan hijacking and dragging stuff off into “it’s all about Dan”.
As I said earlier, I had come to regret engaging with him and was quite happy to stop.
I’m sorry you think I was aggressive,  but if you think posting outright lies (such as “Biden has gone missing” “Book burning” etc) or trying to say that AOC’s political stance was equivalent to the GOP extremism (attempted coups, right wing terrorists, mass shooters etc etc) is “reasonable” then I can’t agree. Actually, he didn’t merely compare the two, he actually stated the roles were reversed and the likes of AOC represented something worse. I’m not even particularly fond of AOC.

Anyway, I was mostly holding back, so mildly disappointed that it seemed so harsh.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Andy W on March 18, 2021, 07:58:19 pm
This ousting of 'Dan' (albeit, allegedly leaving voluntarily) with a 'cooling of period' what is that?, seems a bit of a witch-hunt. For the record I feel that if UKB can't stomach the challenges to the 'evidence' based hegemony of its self proclaimed 'arbitrators'. Then it has become a lesser place.

I also don't like reading posts that refer to a generalised 'We' or 'most of us' etc etc when talking about this chap Dan, it's patronising and alienating.



Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Davo on March 18, 2021, 08:29:02 pm
I haven’t commented on this thread before but have read most of it and have just scanned back.

A point to note is that although I disagree with 99% of the stuff from Dan and don’t exactly like his way of posting, it has never been unpleasant or rude. This is in sharp contrast to quite a few posts directed at him which in my opinion have crossed the line. Certainly several by oldmanmatt seem extremely aggressive and unpleasant to me and quite unnecessary. I can’t be bothered putting the relevant posts in quotes, a quick read back would be sufficient. I agree that some posts are frustrating and I don’t understand much of what Dan posts but I think it’s okay to have different opinions on the forum and for some of those opinions to be a bit unusual without it descending into personal attacks.

One of the reasons I read the forum is to listen to voices and opinions that are different from my own but well thought out.



Dave

Well, I’m glad you weren’t offended. He rubbed me up the wrong way and directed comments directly at me. I will always hit back harder and I will not apologise for doing so. Dan just tried to drown out everything in his path and became impossible to simply ignore across several threads. Did you miss his “Lattice patrol” shit (or whatever it was) amongst many others.
It’s not as if I didn’t try and converse with him over the last year in all his forms. Sorry, but a great deal of his shit was ridiculous conspiracy theory rubbish, particularly on the Covid thread and that’s not something I would leave unchallenged.
Apart from arguing heatedly with Alex early in the pandemic, about some hypothetical moral issue, for a couple of posts, I generally don’t get too worked up on here. I can think of a handful of occasions over the last ten years.
This got to the point where nothing could be discussed without Dan hijacking and dragging stuff off into “it’s all about Dan”.
As I said earlier, I had come to regret engaging with him and was quite happy to stop.
I’m sorry you think I was aggressive,  but if you think posting outright lies (such as “Biden has gone missing” “Book burning” etc) or trying to say that AOC’s political stance was equivalent to the GOP extremism (attempted coups, right wing terrorists, mass shooters etc etc) is “reasonable” then I can’t agree. Actually, he didn’t merely compare the two, he actually stated the roles were reversed and the likes of AOC represented something worse. I’m not even particularly fond of AOC.

Anyway, I was mostly holding back, so mildly disappointed that it seemed so harsh.

Thanks for the reply. To be honest I don’t disagree with any of your issues with the content and way of posting by Dan. As I said I don’t agree with pretty much of any of Dan’s posts but I do in general think he kept it polite and the right side of the line. I can’t really remember any actual personal or unpleasant attacks from him to you or to TomTom but am happy to be corrected on this.

My main point is that I like hearing and reading different opinions than my own on this forum and I think it would be good to preserve this by treating other posters with respect. There is clearly a difference between challenging robustly what someone says and responding harshly and in a way that can only be construed as personal.

Anyway, I think that’s realistically all I have to comment on the issue .

Cheers

Dave

Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: erm, sam on March 18, 2021, 08:40:50 pm
For the record, when I say "thank fuck" I mean "thank fuck that ill focussed stream of near gibberish has dried up" I wish Dan/LooseTools/alteregoinserthere all the best and would like to see him posting in at least a semi coherent way.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: northern yob on March 19, 2021, 07:26:36 am
Whilst I don’t post on here a lot I am an avid reader of most stuff. I can  imagine that getting involved with Dan on a thread can be highly frustrating.
Despite all the bollocks there’s often at least an inkling of an idea or an interesting point of view, it’s a shame he can’t turn the volume down a little. I will miss the madness and think we will all be poorer for the lack of his posting, it has certainly encouraged some interesting debates.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Bradders on March 19, 2021, 08:29:41 pm
Is there a sweepstake going on when Biden will be deemed unable to continue? I heard September. Apparently he hasn’t been seen in a while.
I enjoyed this left bloggers post on Twitter.

https://mobile.twitter.com/leftiblog/status/1367506736202928131

Back on topic; I can't help but think Dan might have had a point. Certainly, Biden seems to be consistently leaving the goal posts wide open for people to speculate anyway.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/19/joe-biden-trips-stumbles-three-times-boarding-air-force-one/
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Bradders on March 19, 2021, 08:52:09 pm
Is there a sweepstake going on when Biden will be deemed unable to continue? I heard September. Apparently he hasn’t been seen in a while.
I enjoyed this left bloggers post on Twitter.

https://mobile.twitter.com/leftiblog/status/1367506736202928131

Two minutes (to open the Sky news app and then use the menu to navigate to “US news’) shows me his last public speech was on Tuesday, or two days ago, given time differences.
 COVID-19: US aims to have enough vaccines for all adults 'by end of May', Biden says (http://COVID-19: US aims to have enough vaccines for all adults 'by end of May', Biden says)

Did you just make up your post, in your imagination, or are you following some “Alternative Media” source and not questioning their narrative?
You should do some research. Check out the “Mainstream Media”, they even have this thing called “Evidence” (like actually transmitting a speech live (can you believe that?)). The “Alternative Media” just want you to believe their narrative, if you check, you’ll see they don’t have any evidence to back up their claims.

Just on this; I've no wish to defend Dan, but I do think it's incredible the cumulative effect consuming news media which tends towards one perspective (whichever side) can have on an individual's eventual views. I follow this account on Instagram, which I find really helpful in shining a light on this issue:

https://instagram.com/groundnews?igshid=as01rh51i29y
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on March 26, 2021, 11:28:27 am
An article on the undemocratic nature of the Senate filibuster. States representing only 22% of US citizens could block legislative change. Obviously something very relevant to the new President.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/26/just-how-severe-will-americas-minority-rule-become
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on April 08, 2021, 10:59:25 pm
Although it seems to be an obvious choice,  I really wonder what will happen if Chauvin is not found guilty.  His defence only has to prove reasonable doubt; I'd be very concerned about the extent of potential for widespread riots, it seems like a really potentially dangerous situation. 
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on April 11, 2021, 09:40:38 am
An article on serious gerrymandering concerns due to risk of state abuse of the 10 yearly redistricting. The irony is demographic change that favours the Democrats is giving Republican run states more seats that they can redistrict to benefit their own party.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/11/putin-style-democracy-republicans-gerrymandering-electoral-map-democrats-census
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Oldmanmatt on April 11, 2021, 11:04:27 am
An article on serious gerrymandering concerns due to risk of state abuse of the 10 yearly redistricting. The irony is demographic change that favours the Democrats is giving Republican run states more seats that they can redistrict to benefit their own party.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/11/putin-style-democracy-republicans-gerrymandering-electoral-map-democrats-census

I wonder why? Do you think the demographic changes might be “concerning” in some areas?

 https://taskandpurpose.com/news/army-officer-windsor-police-video/?fbclid=IwAR3elKEtg7TRheuC30DmYMFlOKPuF5h63TFq4Zfk7XDj843l6YDRhsmCSjY (https://taskandpurpose.com/news/army-officer-windsor-police-video/?fbclid=IwAR3elKEtg7TRheuC30DmYMFlOKPuF5h63TFq4Zfk7XDj843l6YDRhsmCSjY)

Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on June 08, 2021, 09:31:54 am
This is a really interesting read, on dystopia and contemporary international politics.  Its quite long, but worth reading. 

https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2021/06/04/dystopia-revisited/
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on November 02, 2021, 07:24:01 am
Thread resurrection; is the possibility of Trump running for the Presidency in 2024 a significant threat to Western democracies, and any possibility of climate change being controlled to some extent?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fa9e69cc-3b3e-11ec-a9ce-48a11f44f00d?shareToken=5427a27ab6556a592eb0fedd75af449d

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/nov/01/republicans-violence-save-us-poll?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Bradders on November 02, 2021, 09:12:29 am
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/nov/01/republicans-violence-save-us-poll?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

That poll surveyed c. 2.5k people...hardly representative in such a huge country!
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on November 02, 2021, 10:03:37 am
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/nov/01/republicans-violence-save-us-poll?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

That poll surveyed c. 2.5k people...hardly representative in such a huge country!

Isn't it? I really don't have the time to calculate the confidence interval, investigate their sampling process and things to know that,  I acknowledge that it may not be sufficient,  but theres also every chance that it is.
A bigger sample isn't necessarily more accurate. 
In any case the question stands: Trump looks very likely to have premeditated a campaign to overthrow the democratic process to cling to power. Its gobsmacking that this almost happened in the United States,  rather than a small country riven by violence where this has happened in the past. 
Its looking increasingly likely that hes up for another go.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: dunnyg on November 02, 2021, 10:20:19 am
Word. Do yo stats.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: jwi on November 02, 2021, 10:55:46 am
The population size is irrelevant when judging if a sample is large enough, as I am sure you all know. Two and a half thousand is a large, expensive survey if they used live interviews.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: remus on November 02, 2021, 11:10:22 am
The population size is irrelevant when judging if a sample is large enough if the sample is a small proportion of the population, as I am sure you all know. Two and a half thousand is a large, expensive survey if they used live interviews.

A little caveat, though it's not really relevant here as it's not practical to sample a meaningful proportion of the total population of the US here.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: duncan on November 02, 2021, 12:16:58 pm
The full survey results (https://www.prri.org/research/competing-visions-of-america-an-evolving-identity-or-a-culture-under-attack/). Details of the methodology at the very end. It seems to be pretty robust.

30% is surely credible. This is in a country born through violent revolt against the (British) government and whose quintessential cultural form, the Western, frequently involves people taking the law into their own hands, the state being corrupt or absent or both.
 
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: seankenny on November 02, 2021, 01:03:05 pm
This is an interesting discussion on the prospects for civil war in the US:
https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/will-the-us-have-another-civil-war

The 30% figure is troubling but I suspect it's a violent fantasty for most. My partner and many of my in-laws lived through an actual civil war; even after accounting for the killings, bombings and all the horror, it's just a lot of day-to-day hassle. Arbitrary lock-downs, check points, curfews, a crappy economy, I just can't see your average modern American being up for that. (I think it's a lot different in more starkly winner takes all political systems where patronage really is a route out of poverty for many people.)
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on November 02, 2021, 08:57:06 pm

The 30% figure is troubling but I suspect it's a violent fantasty for most. My partner and many of my in-laws lived through an actual civil war; even after accounting for the killings, bombings and all the horror, it's just a lot of day-to-day hassle. Arbitrary lock-downs, check points, curfews, a crappy economy, I just can't see your average modern American being up for that.

Obviously have no direct experience, but I get the idea that the additional life admin it may cause is not front and centre in the thinking of those planning a coup.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: jwi on November 02, 2021, 09:05:33 pm
I have the impression that people keen to take to arms are more often righteous than rational.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on November 03, 2021, 06:24:30 am
The result in the Governors race in Virgnina (and possibly also in NJ) does not bode well for the Democrats in the mid-terms in 2022 - to put it mildly. No doubt other shifts played their part, but there was a dramatic swing from Dem to Rep among white women, AKA "moms." The race became centred on a confected but very effective moral panic over books and CRT in schools. Expect much more of this to come. A friend sits on the school board of a small town/rural PA school board. They've managed to keep the schools open during the pandemic, get good results, and - needless to say - don't promote/teach CRT and yet our friend, a moderate, centrist liberal, has been harangued and harassed, followed to his car by mobs following meetings, accused of being a paedophile, and received threats, all for trying to carry out some public service. The campaign against the current school board is financed by murky outside money.

Biden is already stymied by his tenuous hold on Congress (and by the showboating of Manchin and Systema. And his own missteps, it must be admitted). Loss of control in 2022 would pave the way to Republican presidential victory in 2024.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on November 03, 2021, 07:33:37 am
The result in the Governors race in Virgnina (and possibly also in NJ) does not bode well for the Democrats in the mid-terms in 2022 - to put it mildly. No doubt other shifts played their part, but there was a dramatic swing from Dem to Rep among white women, AKA "moms." The race became centred on a confected but very effective moral panic over books and CRT in schools. Expect much more of this to come. A friend sits on the school board of a small town/rural PA school board. They've managed to keep the schools open during the pandemic, get good results, and - needless to say - don't promote/teach CRT and yet our friend, a moderate, centrist liberal, has been harangued and harassed, followed to his car by mobs following meetings, accused of being a paedophile, and received threats, all for trying to carry out some public service. The campaign against the current school board is financed by murky outside money.

Biden is already stymied by his tenuous hold on Congress (and by the showboating of Manchin and Systema. And his own missteps, it must be admitted). Loss of control in 2022 would pave the way to Republican presidential victory in 2024.

I think that positive results for the Republican party in Congress are likely to embolden Trump to run again. Ultimately if it's him or an acolyte it's potentially very bad news for the whole world.
Indirectly as well as directly, giving other unpleasant populists an excuse to behave as they like.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: seankenny on November 03, 2021, 10:51:56 am
I have the impression that people keen to take to arms are more often righteous than rational.

I think that when large numbers of people take up arms in rebellion against the state they tend to have been both locked out of political power and suffer economic pain as a result. Catholics in Northern Ireland, Sri Lankan Tamils, Bangladeshis in East Pakistan - all suffered discrimination on those two axes. The other thing is that doing this on any kind of large scale requires some collective action and the last 18 months have shown that modern America just isn't that good at collective action.

A coup? Yeah, could see that. A Putinesque style "managed democracy" strikes me as very likely, but with a lot of political violence from small fringe groups rather than large organised ones. But who knows? More important to me is that Europeans start engaging seriously with the possibility that the US will no longer be a full democracy and what that means for us.

This was interesting reading:
https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/new-initiative-explores-deep-persistent-divides-between-biden-and-trump-voters/
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on November 03, 2021, 12:27:49 pm
A friend sits on the school board of a small town/rural PA school board. They've managed to keep the schools open during the pandemic, get good results, and - needless to say - don't promote/teach CRT and yet our friend, a moderate, centrist liberal, has been harangued and harassed, followed to his car by mobs following meetings, accused of being a paedophile, and received threats, all for trying to carry out some public service. The campaign against the current school board is financed by murky outside money.

Said friend just posted about last night's election for his school board (he was not running again himself). In his words: a "well-timed text/robocall blast with explicit threats about a gay agenda fueled by outside megadonor cash," whipping up fear about books that simply weren't in the school system, succeeded in getting three "extremists" (again, his word) on the school board. In some ways, these grass roots stories, if they're happening in enough places, are as important as the headlines.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on November 05, 2021, 07:54:33 am
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/woman-who-stormed-capitol-then-said-she-s-never-going-to-prison-is-going-to-prison/ar-AAQkqUI?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531

Worth it for the headline
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on May 03, 2022, 07:54:59 am
The leaked draft opinion from the Supreme Court revealing that the justices have now settled on overturning Roe vs. Wade is not completely unexpected but is still utterly dismaying.

The US slips further into deepening illiberalism. Protestations that this decision relates only to abortion are worthless. They will be coming for marriage equality next.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Will Hunt on May 03, 2022, 09:15:15 am
Admittedly I haven't read anything about this, but does this remove a federal right to have an abortion, but leave it for states to legislate independently; or is it a complete ban on abortions across all states?
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on May 03, 2022, 09:24:42 am
It removes federal protection and will leave it to states, many of whom have been busy preparing legislation in anticipation of this day. We already know that in many cases abortion will be effectively criminalised (e.g. there will be no exemptions for rape, for example).
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on May 03, 2022, 09:28:35 am
Admittedly I haven't read anything about this, but does this remove a federal right to have an abortion, but leave it for states to legislate independently; or is it a complete ban on abortions across all states?

UK news sources seem confused about the distinction as well, to be honest. 
This is the original story on politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473

It seems as though this ruling would remove the federal guarantee,  and it would then be up to states individually whether to overturn it, unless I've misunderstood. 
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 03, 2022, 09:39:06 am
Roe v Wade enshrined a right, this will remove it.

Quote from:  Guardian
Politico quoted Alito as saying: “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.”

The justice adds: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. It is time to heed the constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on May 03, 2022, 09:54:11 am
You can guess where the split will go between those that choose to overrule and those that don't.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on May 03, 2022, 10:45:58 am
Just a clarification, if this decision goes forward (and there seems little reason to doubt it will) then RvW will have been overturned. States won't need to overturn it themselves but will, rather, be freed to set abortion laws as they see fit.

Overturning Obergefell, which protects marriage equality, will be next in their sights.

Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Nails on May 03, 2022, 12:40:27 pm
As horrendous as these developments are, it's worth remembering that abortion was only legalised in Northern Ireland in October 2019. Currently, to date the Northern Ireland executive has failed to actually commission abortion services. It's pretty staggering really that in 2022 there isn't actually proper access to abortion services in the whole of the UK.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Paul B on May 03, 2022, 01:24:31 pm
Roe v Wade enshrined a right, this will remove it.

This is worth a read:
https://davidallengreen.com/2020/11/why-the-phrase-to-enshrine-in-law-is-a-fraudulent-device/
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: JamieG on May 03, 2022, 01:33:06 pm
I realise this isn't why the right wing are after Roe Vs Wade, but criminalising abortions doesn't even decrease them! It just forces it underground, where it is more risky. If they really wanted to cut back abortions, they would massively invest in sex education and family plan. But that's not the point, its a culture war and meant to punish a certain type of woman.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/11/criminalising-abortion-does-not-cut-number-of-terminations-says-study

(The same is true for drugs, decriminalising and providing education and healthcare to addicts is massively more effective than punitive measures!)
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 03, 2022, 04:56:39 pm
If they really wanted to cut back abortions, they would massively invest in sex education and family plan. But that's not the point, its a culture war and meant to punish a certain type of woman.


The type with ovaries, I expect.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: JamieG on May 03, 2022, 05:15:32 pm
If they really wanted to cut back abortions, they would massively invest in sex education and family plan. But that's not the point, its a culture war and meant to punish a certain type of woman.


The type with ovaries, I expect.

You'd think that wouldn't you. But there are definitely woman out there that are all for this and then complain when they are mistreated by right wing men.

https://www.salon.com/2017/12/04/alt-right-women-are-upset-that-alt-right-men-are-treating-them-terribly/

It would be funny if it wasn't so depressing.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: mrjonathanr on May 03, 2022, 05:23:07 pm
Good point Paul, it’s sloppy language. ‘Legally mandated’ would be too strong and purposive. ‘Confirmed the right to’ maybe?
Jamie: haters gotta hate…
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on May 03, 2022, 05:49:22 pm
I realise this isn't why the right wing are after Roe Vs Wade, but criminalising abortions doesn't even decrease them! It just forces it underground, where it is more risky. If they really wanted to cut back abortions, they would massively invest in sex education and family plan. But that's not the point, its a culture war and meant to punish a certain type of woman.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/11/criminalising-abortion-does-not-cut-number-of-terminations-says-study

(The same is true for drugs, decriminalising and providing education and healthcare to addicts is massively more effective than punitive measures!)

The enthusiasm of the Republican party for overturning Roe vs Wade is also significantly due to being able to command the evangelical votes. I can't imagine that the likes of Trump actually give anything like abortion very much thought, except as a tool for leveraging a few more votes. I'm sure the same is true of his support for Israel. (NB I'm not opining on the right or wrong of supporting Israel, just that Trump just uses it for votes).
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Johnny Brown on May 04, 2022, 01:47:01 pm
It doesn't help much with where things are, but Jon Ronson's 'Things Fell Apart' podcast has a fascinating episode on the origins of the anti-abortion movement: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0011cpq
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on May 05, 2022, 09:19:14 am
It doesn't help much with where things are, but Jon Ronson's 'Things Fell Apart' podcast has a fascinating episode on the origins of the anti-abortion movement: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0011cpq

IIRC, the Democrats were anti abortion and the Republicans historically more pro choice before the 1980s? I listened to another podcast on the issue,  it might have been stories of our times. 
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on May 25, 2022, 08:17:02 am
In response to the mass shooting in Texas, the state legislator calls for arming teachers.  Sickening doesn't begin to cover it.
BBC News - Texas shooting: 19 children among dead in primary school attack
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61573377
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: James Malloch on May 25, 2022, 09:02:49 am
In response to the mass shooting in Texas, the state legislator calls for arming teachers.  Sickening doesn't begin to cover it.
BBC News - Texas shooting: 19 children among dead in primary school attack
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61573377

These quotes, from the article, show how fucked up the USA is with respect to guns.

Quote
Active shooter lockdown drills are a common part of the school curriculum, from primary to high school.

Quote
Guns overtook car crashes to become the leading cause of death for US children and teenagers in 2020, according to data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) last month.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Nails on May 25, 2022, 09:25:57 am
(May 11th 2022) U.S. appeals court overturns California ban on semiautomatic rifle sales to those under 21. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-05-11/federal-court-rules-california-ban-on-gun-sales-to-people-under-21-unconstitutional (https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-05-11/federal-court-rules-california-ban-on-gun-sales-to-people-under-21-unconstitutional)

What can you do when you have a significant proportion of Americans who are more outraged that Under 21s aren't allowed to buy semi-automatic guns in California, than they are about the litany of gun related atrocities. Just sad!
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on May 25, 2022, 09:58:49 am
In response to the mass shooting in Texas, the state legislator calls for arming teachers.  Sickening doesn't begin to cover it.
BBC News - Texas shooting: 19 children among dead in primary school attack
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61573377

These quotes, from the article, show how fucked up the USA is with respect to guns.

Quote
Active shooter lockdown drills are a common part of the school curriculum, from primary to high school.

Quote
Guns overtook car crashes to become the leading cause of death for US children and teenagers in 2020, according to data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) last month.

It is horrible that the facts are so appallingly obvious. This doesn't happen anywhere else in the developed world, but still a significant part of the population are willing to listen to the voice of the wealthy lobbyists, and try to rely on an obvious misinterpretation of the constitution to justify anyone to own an assault rifle.

A historic and anachronistic law being utilised as a political lever; it is as though the law in France that you aren't allowed to call a pig Napoleon (apparently true) were killing hundreds of thousands of people, and half the country supported it. 
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: sherlock on May 25, 2022, 11:39:30 am
A couple of years ago I was bouldering with an American para-climber and their sight-guide. They were perfectly normal, balanced folk until I broached the subject of gun control. The sight guide mentioned that they were thinking of buying a gun and when I asked why was told "My gym is in a bad area."
So many people, from all walks of life seen to think guns are a good idea.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: jwi on May 25, 2022, 11:58:44 am
I think they are beyond saving. All US climbers I taked with about guns when I was there some fifteen years ago seemed like  clinically insane gun enthusiasts to me --- and I grew up on the Swedish countryside where gun ownership is high but where no one in their right mind would 1) own a handgun and 2) bring it to the crag with 3) a bullet in the chamber. Something I came across more than once. I am just happy that there is an ocean between us, making smuggling of guns tricky. I pity Mexico and Canada, but I have no pity left for US.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: tim palmer on May 25, 2022, 12:26:17 pm
I think they are beyond saving. All US climbers I taked with about guns when I was there some fifteen years ago seemed like  clinically insane gun enthusiasts to me --- and I grew up on the Swedish countryside where gun ownership is high but where no one in their right mind would 1) own a handgun and 2) bring it to the crag with 3) a bullet in the chamber. Something I came across more than once. I am just happy that there is an ocean between us, making smuggling of guns tricky. I pity Mexico and Canada, but I have no pity left for US.

  I have been to America to climb and travel a lot, I have almost never had this experience.    Almost everyone I have met who I have discussed it with have been pro gun control and this is borne out in the polling, the majority of Americans want stricter controls (see gallup). 

Gun control is another area in which the majority are disenfranchised by the right wing, I have enormous sympathy for people living in the US on this and a litany of other issues.

America bashing is easy but I think many of the institutional and social issues there are of increasing importance in the UK.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: sherlock on May 25, 2022, 01:02:57 pm
For clarity I wasn't America bashing but the rest of your post was spot on.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on May 25, 2022, 01:20:00 pm
You would think people working in Colorado ski areas and skiing are fairly enlightened, but a lot of the guys i worked with carried handguns in to work every day (had to check them in at resort security) and they could spot guys getting on charlifts with concealed carries (telltale bulge under jacket). You are not supposed to carry weapons in the ski area, but us lifties were told not to confront them, but notify security, though no-one ever bothered AFAIK.

We used to go to a saloon / bar in a town just out of the resort (cheaper beer!) and you would often see locals sitting at the bar with a handgun in a holster. Used to scare the crap out of me, but none of my American friends seemed bothered, and in conversation few seems to in favour of gun control, and I know some of them who were keen hunters and got firearms for their kids so they could hunt together, from about age 9.

I was on a running facebook page, where people were talking about the best way to carry your handgun when running.     

This is not bashing as such, just saying how it is part of a culture very different to the UK.   
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: largeruk on May 25, 2022, 01:42:48 pm
Gallup’s rolling poll shows support for stricter gun laws generally at 52% in the US but this is down from 78% in 1991 and 67% in 2018. This trend seems to show that broadly Americans are becoming less and less in favour of stricter gun controls despite there having been 900 more school shootings in the US since Sandy Hook a decade ago. Why might this be?

IMF research into the social impact of inequality in America (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2882614 (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2882614)) shows "there has been a sharp decline in the extent to which individuals trust one another, and other social capital indicators, over the past 40 years in America". Perhaps this has contributed to people having more libertarian attitudes towards gun control. Ultimately, there are likely real limits to how functional you can expect the USA to be given that people don’t trust each other combined with increasing levels of distrust of government (of either political persuasion). If the perception is that government can’t/won’t protect people (regardless of who’s in power), many people conclude they have to at least consider protecting themselves and their families. This chimes with my personal (anecdotal) interactions with American friends and colleagues.

Meanwhile, the NRA is promoting an appearance by Donald Trump at its 150th annual conference this weekend. Ironically, guns won't be allowed at the conference. As Trump is an ex-president he gets Secret Service protection which has taken over the venue and it doesn’t allow guns...
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: seankenny on May 25, 2022, 02:32:05 pm
I was walking to a crag in Joshua Tree with some American climbers. The wash had a Y shaped junction, from the other direction to the one we took came the noise of semi-automatic rifle fire. Lots of it. The Americans rolled their eyes, explained this was strictly illegal in a national park, but it wasn’t worth alerting the authorities because then there would be a “situation” which would be more trouble than it was worth. Who knew what had driven someone to go out into the desert and fire blindly?

California doesn’t feel like a gun nut place and lots of people I met hated gun culture, but it’s always there beneath the surface.

Like jwi, by this point I don’t really have much sympathy any more. I say this as someone who broadly likes the US and finds lots to admire in American culture.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on May 26, 2022, 10:10:03 pm
This piece has some interesting information and statistics https://news.sky.com/story/texas-school-shooting-why-do-us-gun-sales-increase-after-attacks-and-how-have-other-countries-reacted-to-similar-incidents-12621704
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on May 27, 2022, 08:04:29 am
That millions of background checks a month graph surprised me. I did a quick google and 20 million guns were sold in America last year.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: chris j on May 27, 2022, 10:03:19 am
California doesn’t feel like a gun nut place and lots of people I met hated gun culture, but it’s always there beneath the surface.

I worked briefly on an oilfield vessel in the Gulf run out of Fourchon in Louisiana. One of the officers was from California and one of his favourite rants was about how the environmentalists had forced him to use lead free ammunition for hunting...

This was also shortly after Obama was first elected and there was a lot of talk among the officers about how for his own good he had better not visit Louisiana. The amount of hate on the radio phone in shows at the time was also startling. The cultural differences across the USA are quite staggering I think, it is really becoming (has always been?) several different countries stitched together under the federal umbrella.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on June 23, 2022, 09:59:57 pm
BBC News - Supreme Court ruling expands US gun rights
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61915237

Just what the country needs to stem the constant epidemic of gun violence and mass shootings,  more concealed firearms. 
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: remus on June 24, 2022, 04:03:20 pm
Roe v Wade has been overturned https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61928898

Seems an amazingly regressive move.

Ed: a question for those more familiar with the US legal system than me: what's the reasoning behind having judges appointed for life? Maybe only seems obvious from the current point in time, but it seems like the supreme court is going to be very conservative for a long time which strains the separation between politics and the judiciary.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on June 24, 2022, 04:34:33 pm
2  steps back in 2 days. Impressive.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: edshakey on June 24, 2022, 04:53:37 pm
Not surprising the decisions are regressive when rules written in the 1700s are being used to justify decisions today.

Sure, the constitution says people should have the right to bear arms, but when that's making it possible to have more than one mass shooting a day, maybe it's time to rethink some stuff  :shrug: not sure the guys in 1791 were expecting that when they wrote it (or if they were, it doesn't mean they were right!)
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Bradders on June 24, 2022, 06:04:40 pm
Not surprising the decisions are regressive when rules written in the 1700s are being used to justify decisions today.

Sure, the constitution says people should have the right to bear arms, but when that's making it possible to have more than one mass shooting a day, maybe it's time to rethink some stuff  :shrug: not sure the guys in 1791 were expecting that when they wrote it (or if they were, it doesn't mean they were right!)

Well that was actually part of the problem with Roe v Wade, and why it has now been overturned; it was an attempt to crowbar the right to an abortion into law under the existing constitution. I.e. arguing that the constitutional right to privacy meant that abortion should automatically also be legal, which to me has always seemed like extremely shaky ground. Obviously abortion isn't mentioned explicitly in the constitution.

This approach to gaining nationwide abortion rights was obviously easier at the time, with a more liberally minded court, than doing the actually democratic thing and making a law in Congress and the Senate that could then be protected by the court instead of struck down. In that sense, this is actually a win for democracy in that the elected state representatives can decide what to do for their state. If the people of each state don't like it they can vote to remove those representatives. The tragedy is that in the meantime, lots of suffering will be caused.

Although you also can't get away from the fact that to a lot of people abortions are utterly abhorrent. I personally think they're wrong, but I get where they're coming from.

Either way you're absolutely right, the excessive reliance on a document written such a long time ago is completely bonkers.

On gun rights and school shootings, I'm at a stage where if I were Joe Biden I'd be putting an executive order in place funding armed guards for every school. On the basis that the priority has to be protecting children, and that can be accomplished much more quickly and easily than restricting gun ownership. If it doesn't work then at least you'll have tried, and you'd also be able to counter the nonsensical argument that more guns = a safer society.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: joel182 on June 24, 2022, 06:24:25 pm
the left has been warning about the overturning of Roe for a long time now.

next on the list (https://twitter.com/RobOHanrahan/status/1540342098217631747) are Obergerfell (same sex marriange), Griswold (contraceptives) and Lawrence (same-sex sexual activity).

here is a guide on post-Roe abortion resources (https://www.wired.com/story/guide-abortion-resources-post-roe-america/) written last month, many of the drugs have a multi-year shelf life (some up to 5 years), surely good to be prepared if you or anyone in your life may need access to an abortion over the next few years
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Bradders on June 24, 2022, 06:32:33 pm
This is from the latest ruling:

"And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe [has] enflamed debate and deepened division."

I totally agree with that. Wherever you stand on the issue (and I am 100% pro choice), pushing major changes to society via undemocratic back door means was never going to end well.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: edshakey on June 24, 2022, 06:33:29 pm
Well that was actually part of the problem with Roe v Wade, and why it has now been overturned; it was an attempt to crowbar the right to an abortion into law under the existing constitution. I.e. arguing that the constitutional right to privacy meant that abortion should automatically also be legal, which to me has always seemed like extremely shaky ground. Obviously abortion isn't mentioned explicitly in the constitution.

This approach to gaining nationwide abortion rights was obviously easier at the time, with a more liberally minded court, than doing the actually democratic thing and making a law in Congress and the Senate that could then be protected by the court instead of struck down. In that sense, this is actually a win for democracy in that the elected state representatives can decide what to do for their state. If the people of each state don't like it they can vote to remove those representatives. The tragedy is that in the meantime, lots of suffering will be caused.

Agreed, it's certainly not written clearly into the constitution, it was always going to be up to debate - but rather than using that as a reason the amend the constitution/write new laws, the Republicans only want to go back to how it was. And many many women will suffer for it. Lots of supporters bring out the "Offer the women support to have the child" line; well you don't do that by supporting the kind of policies the Republicans come up with nowadays.

next on the list (https://twitter.com/RobOHanrahan/status/1540342098217631747) are Obergerfell (same sex marriange), Griswold (contraceptives) and Lawrence (same-sex sexual activity).

Scary times over there. The UK is a mess right now but it's looking blissful compared to the state of the US. Who knows what damage could be done by a Republican majority in both houses + Republican president come 2024, with the supreme court by their side.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on June 24, 2022, 06:49:54 pm
Wherever you stand on the issue (and I am 100% pro choice), pushing major changes to society via undemocratic back door means was never going to end well.

This current court - in terms of representation - and this decision - in terms of public opinion - are both profoundly anti-democratic.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: joel182 on June 24, 2022, 06:53:41 pm
Scary times over there. The UK is a mess right now but it's looking blissful compared to the state of the US. Who knows what damage could be done by a Republican majority in both houses + Republican president come 2024, with the supreme court by their side.

We should be aware that our right wing looks to America for guidance.

Last month, The Times published an article in support of overturning Roe (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-times-view-on-us-abortion-law-and-overturning-roe-v-wade-right-to-choose-vdbb2jdnh).

This is the kind of fight our right wing will look to have once they overturn the Human Rights Act
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: edshakey on June 24, 2022, 07:30:46 pm
We should be aware that our right wing looks to America for guidance.

Last month, The Times published an article in support of overturning Roe (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-times-view-on-us-abortion-law-and-overturning-roe-v-wade-right-to-choose-vdbb2jdnh).

This is the kind of fight our right wing will look to have once they overturn the Human Rights Act

For sure, it does. And we should definitely all be wary for the future of our laws on similar matters.

I can only see the free initial part of that article but it seems to support the view Bradders raised above, that the right to abortion should protected explicitly in modern law, as opposed to in an ambiguous interpretation of a 250 year old document. But maybe you read it differently.

One redeeming note for the UK is that we don't have nearly the same level of mobilised opposition to abortion. There are definitely people who want to fight it, but they aren't as organised and vocal as across the pond. That could change, but it's got some way to go.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Bradders on June 24, 2022, 09:24:43 pm
Wherever you stand on the issue (and I am 100% pro choice), pushing major changes to society via undemocratic back door means was never going to end well.

This current court - in terms of representation - and this decision - in terms of public opinion - are both profoundly anti-democratic.

I don't agree with that at all. The original Roe v Wade decision was completely undemocratic, essentially forcing abortion rights federally without a democratic mandate. This decision has corrected that wrong, and put the matter into the hands of the elected representatives of each state. That is fundamentally democratic.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: abarro81 on June 24, 2022, 09:30:29 pm
What you said doesn't actually disagree with anything andy wrote as far as I can tell
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Bradders on June 24, 2022, 09:34:22 pm
He said the decision is anti-democratic, I think it is democratic  :shrug:

Or, to put it another way, it allows for a democratic settlement of the issue.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 24, 2022, 09:48:58 pm
It depends if you think the way the supreme Court has been loaded with Conservative judges to be democratic or not, considering that Trump didn't win a majority of votes in 2016, and that across the US the population are strongly in favour of choice when it comes to abortion. I think its perfectly coherent to argue that given the extremely slim electoral college victory of Trump and the fact he lost the popular vote made the stacking of the SC undemocratic. On top of that, its also perfectly coherent to argue that even with a Conservative majority of judges, it is undemocratic to overturn Roe when public opinion still shows strong support for it. We haven't even got into the fact that the newer justices all said they had no problem with the precedent of Roe in their preliminary hearings...

I think it misses the point. This is a matter of human rights. We don't put fundamentals of human rights to popular vote, or at least we shouldn't. That way lies total chaos and all sorts of horrible outcomes. Having a referendum on the death penalty in the UK would be democratic, it would also be profoundly wrong. That's why I think falling back on the "it's democratic" line is a bit weak, its not what responsible government and responsible lawmakers do.

Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: dr_botnik on June 24, 2022, 09:49:45 pm
He said the decision is anti-democratic, I think it is democratic  :shrug:

Or, to put it another way, it allows for a democratic settlement of the issue.

Errrrrrr, I don't think democracy extends to removing people's right to healthcare? Like, should we have a vote on which genders can access cancer treatment???
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: spidermonkey09 on June 24, 2022, 09:57:51 pm
It will be interesting to see the view of the Times and other right wing papers on this decision. I found that editorial from a month ago profoundly chilling, I did a double take over my cereal! Couldn't believe what I was reading.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: abarro81 on June 24, 2022, 10:11:46 pm
He said the decision is anti-democratic, I think it is democratic  :shrug:

He said
"This current court - in terms of representation - and this decision - in terms of public opinion - are both profoundly anti-democratic." - bold is my addition. Both statements seems pretty solid to me, even if you can argue that the position of lawmakers having the power to decide is also democratic
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on June 25, 2022, 06:08:36 am
Or, to put it another way, it allows for a democratic settlement of the issue.

That would be fair enough if there weren't also serious concerns about the health of democracy in many of these states - those states eager to reinstate abortion bans (or, indeed, have already done so since yesterday's decision) also often being those most zealous in trying to systematically disenfranchise segments of their populations. In any case, I wasn't trying to argue that the original decision was more democratic, only that any argument that this decision is notably more democratic is on very thin ice. Basically, I think its just a mistaken premise.

In any case, Pence was already arguing yesterday in favour of a federal ban on abortion. As it was with slavery, states' rights is really just a figleaf.

What comes next? Kavanaugh has said this ruling has no implications beyond abortion but anyone who trusts him is a fool. He, Gorsuch, and Coney-Barrett all vowed that they viewed Roe vs. Wade as settled law during their (recent) confirmation hearings. Thomas' opinion yesterday explicitly pointed to Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell, protecting in turn rights to contraception, same sex sex, and marriage equality. They will be the next targets. Interestingly, he didn't mention Loving, protecting interracial marriage. Obviously, Thomas is himself in an interracial marriage (to a lunatic).

Anyway, I have a teenage American daughter who is beginning to think about college - she will not be going to college in a red state.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on June 25, 2022, 06:44:14 am
Further: this same court's decision on Thursday removed the right of the state of New York to impose certain conditions on carrying guns. The concern for states' rights is extremely selective.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Bradders on June 25, 2022, 09:33:23 am
It depends if you think the way the supreme Court has been loaded with Conservative judges to be democratic or not, considering that Trump didn't win a majority of votes in 2016, and that across the US the population are strongly in favour of choice when it comes to abortion. I think its perfectly coherent to argue that given the extremely slim electoral college victory of Trump and the fact he lost the popular vote made the stacking of the SC undemocratic. On top of that, its also perfectly coherent to argue that even with a Conservative majority of judges, it is undemocratic to overturn Roe when public opinion still shows strong support for it. We haven't even got into the fact that the newer justices all said they had no problem with the precedent of Roe in their preliminary hearings...

I think it misses the point. This is a matter of human rights. We don't put fundamentals of human rights to popular vote, or at least we shouldn't. That way lies total chaos and all sorts of horrible outcomes. Having a referendum on the death penalty in the UK would be democratic, it would also be profoundly wrong. That's why I think falling back on the "it's democratic" line is a bit weak, its not what responsible government and responsible lawmakers do.

Well I think the fundamental problem, notwithstanding that I agree completely around the current make up of the court, Trump, etc., is that on so many of these issues the court has essentially ended up making the law and that is not what it is there for. They are not legislators, but in interpreting that the constitution affords rights that didn't exist when it was written they become so. This is why I think it is democratic for the decision to be returned to the elected legislators.

Further: this same court's decision on Thursday removed the right of the state of New York to impose certain conditions on carrying guns. The concern for states' rights is extremely selective.

You're absolutely right, but I'd also point to the gun control bill which has just passed through Congress and will now become law:

BBC News - Congress passes first gun control bill in decades
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61919752

My hope, and maybe I'm being too optimistic, is that in the long term this all pushes people to sort it out properly. Given the clear popular support for abortion rights in the US I don't think that's naive. The tragedy is it will take time and people will suffer in the meantime.

RE example of a referendum on the death penalty; it would be wrong in your opinion! Responsible governments and lawmakers are beholden to their citizens. If they are elected on a manifesto commitment to implement capital punishment then that is what they should do. We absolutely do put human rights to a popular vote; those rights didn't appear out of thin air!

He said the decision is anti-democratic, I think it is democratic  :shrug:

Or, to put it another way, it allows for a democratic settlement of the issue.

Errrrrrr, I don't think democracy extends to removing people's right to healthcare? Like, should we have a vote on which genders can access cancer treatment???

Well this is why abortion is such a desperately contentious issue. Millions of people believe that, far from it being healthcare like treatment of disease, it is nothing other than state sponsored infanticide. Spidermonkey is absolutely right that this is a question of fundamental human rights; your view of whether abortion is right or wrong comes down to whether and at what point the human rights of the fetus take precedent over the human rights of the mother.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on June 28, 2022, 09:55:39 pm
BBC News - January 6 hearings: Trump urged armed supporters to storm Capitol - aide
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61971428

I don't know why any of this account surprises me,  but its pretty shocking behaviour from any grown man,  let alone one who is president.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on June 29, 2022, 10:22:22 am
Well, that was wild!
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on September 01, 2022, 06:05:20 pm
Is this too soon for hope?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/01/democrats-sarah-palin-mary-peltola-alaska-special-election
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Sasquatch on September 01, 2022, 09:45:16 pm
As an Alaskan, I think the BIG change here is the introduction of ranked-choice voting.  This allowed many people to vote moderate and still have their vote count.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on September 02, 2022, 07:53:56 am
Man it would be lovely to get some of that ranked choice or proportion representation over here!
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on September 02, 2022, 08:09:18 am
That boat sailed back in 2011. It sank with Clegg tied to the mast.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on September 02, 2022, 08:49:30 am
Is this too soon for hope?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/01/democrats-sarah-palin-mary-peltola-alaska-special-election

Itd be great to think that the midterms will go well for the Democrats,  but I think that the Guardian's coverage is usually over optimistic about politics from their point of view,  but I'd like to be proved wrong. 
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on September 02, 2022, 10:29:12 am
Is this too soon for hope?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/01/democrats-sarah-palin-mary-peltola-alaska-special-election

Itd be great to think that the midterms will go well for the Democrats,  but I think that the Guardian's coverage is usually over optimistic about politics from their point of view,  but I'd like to be proved wrong.

I'm definitely less pessimistic than I was a couple of months ago.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on November 09, 2022, 12:12:39 am
Much less optimism right now. Fingers crossed I'm wrong.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on November 09, 2022, 05:25:36 am
Much less optimism right now. Fingers crossed I'm wrong.

Mixed (and far from complete) picture so far this morning. No signs of huge wave Republican wave yet, even if they might well still take House and/or Senate.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on November 09, 2022, 06:25:28 am
Republican gains definitely much more limited than projected and some unexpected Dem gains. Two very good results in PA.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on November 09, 2022, 09:01:37 am
I believe Fetterman won in PA? Definitely seems like a good thing that the Democrats have done better than expected,  but, unfortunately not well enough to deter Trump from having another run, and not badly enough to deter Biden either.  I think a rerun of Biden vs Trump would go the wrong way next time,  hopefully I'm wrong though. 
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on November 09, 2022, 09:06:18 am
Please no MAGAA.

Surely there is someone else the Republicans would rather have lead them?
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on November 09, 2022, 09:15:41 am
I remain in the situation I was last night. However well the Democrats have defied expectations it's not good enough if they lose the House majority. The Republicans just need 5 extra wins. State adjustment of house seat boundaries have gifted Republicans additional victories, especially in Florida. The Republicans could go slightly backwards in votes for house seats compared to 2018 and still win a house majority.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 09, 2022, 10:24:07 am
It was clear from ages ago they were going to lose the House. Its also pretty common for the incumbent to lose one or the other. Entirely possible they keep the Senate which would be a fairly decent outcome for the incumbent in midterms. No wonder you're pessimistic if you were hoping for the democrats to hold both.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on November 09, 2022, 11:14:04 am
Looks like there’s potential Boebert will lose her seat, which brings joy to my heart 😄
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on November 09, 2022, 05:51:40 pm
Please no MAGAA.

Surely there is someone else the Republicans would rather have lead them?

Not if millions of people would vote for him, which they will. Much like Boris Johnson, I'm not sure many Republicans actually like him very much, but they'll put up with him if he can win them an election.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on November 10, 2022, 09:10:44 am
I'm aware of the situation, it was more a comment of exasperation rather than an actual question.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on November 10, 2022, 10:03:52 am
I'm aware of the situation, it was more a comment of exasperation rather than an actual question.

Apologies then, I'm sure you knew what I said anyway. Despite the UK media reports of DeSantis' success and Trump's rage, I find it unlikely that Trump can turn down the amount of attention he'd get from a presidential bid. His dominant quality is pathological narcissism, I'm not sure if he cares about popularity, he just wants to get his way and for everyone to talk about him. 
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on November 10, 2022, 10:15:46 am
Indeed. There are few people on this planet I detest more.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on November 13, 2022, 08:56:23 am
The BBC are now reporting that the Democrats have held onto the Senate: BBC News - US midterms: Democrats retain control of Senate after key Nevada victory
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-63612410

Should Biden take the unexpected success as a victory lap, and bow out to let someone less ancient run in 2024?
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on November 13, 2022, 09:39:07 am
I remain in the situation I was last night. However well the Democrats have defied expectations it's not good enough if they lose the House majority. The Republicans just need 5 extra wins. State adjustment of house seat boundaries have gifted Republicans additional victories, especially in Florida. The Republicans could go slightly backwards in votes for house seats compared to 2018 and still win a house majority.

These elections have been pretty disastrous for the Republicans. Facing an incumbent with poor personal approval ratings and obvious flaws (Biden simply is too old) who has had to deal with very rough economic conditions and an even rougher foreign policy context, Republicans should have swept the board. Instead the Dems have pulled off the best result of an incumbent administration in decades. They've retained the Senate (possibly with an increased majority, depending on how the run-off in Georgia goes) and the House is still in play. If the GOP does win the House their majority will probably be tiny and the party fractious and hard to govern. Plus there are GOP reps Biden can work with - and did work with effectively over the last two years. Yes, plenty of MAGA loons won but some of the most high profile Trumpers - Doug Mastriano, Blake Masters, Kari Lake (hopefully) - lost. As important is what happened at the State level, where Dems took complete control of the government in Michigan and Minnesota - these are very important swing states that won't now be further gerrymandered or have the '24 elections run by some "Big Lie" believer (see loss by Finchem in AZ). Most of all this was a pretty thorough repudiation of MAGA/Trumpism. The best outcome would be for the GOP and Trump himself to entirely fail to learn the obvious lesson. I'm looking forward to an imminent announcement from him, triggering intraparty warfare with De Santis.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: mrjonathanr on November 13, 2022, 10:23:01 am
The best outcome would be for the GOP and Trump himself to entirely fail to learn the obvious lesson. I'm looking forward to an imminent announcement from him, triggering intraparty warfare with De Santis.
I think you can be confident about that!
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on November 13, 2022, 10:28:26 am


These elections have been pretty disastrous for the Republicans.

Yeah this is definitely a good news politics story which have been in short supply recently!
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on November 13, 2022, 06:03:58 pm
I remain in the situation I was last night. However well the Democrats have defied expectations it's not good enough if they lose the House majority. The Republicans just need 5 extra wins. State adjustment of house seat boundaries have gifted Republicans additional victories, especially in Florida. The Republicans could go slightly backwards in votes for house seats compared to 2018 and still win a house majority.

These elections have been pretty disastrous for the Republicans. Facing an incumbent with poor personal approval ratings and obvious flaws (Biden simply is too old) who has had to deal with very rough economic conditions and an even rougher foreign policy context, Republicans should have swept the board. Instead the Dems have pulled off the best result of an incumbent administration in decades. They've retained the Senate (possibly with an increased majority, depending on how the run-off in Georgia goes) and the House is still in play. If the GOP does win the House their majority will probably be tiny and the party fractious and hard to govern. Plus there are GOP reps Biden can work with - and did work with effectively over the last two years. Yes, plenty of MAGA loons won but some of the most high profile Trumpers - Doug Mastriano, Blake Masters, Kari Lake (hopefully) - lost. As important is what happened at the State level, where Dems took complete control of the government in Michigan and Minnesota - these are very important swing states that won't now be further gerrymandered or have the '24 elections run by some "Big Lie" believer (see loss by Finchem in AZ). Most of all this was a pretty thorough repudiation of MAGA/Trumpism. The best outcome would be for the GOP and Trump himself to entirely fail to learn the obvious lesson. I'm looking forward to an imminent announcement from him, triggering intraparty warfare with De Santis.

It is essentially good news, I'd agree. But it may have given Biden the confidence to run again, which I think would be a mistake but I don't live there, or know much other than digesting a lot of media. My real concern is that a much more canny and clever candidate will adopt the Trump MO of ignoring any norms of behaviour and cause some real damage or conflict. Trump seems to be blinded by his own narcissism and hubris in office, and became a fool. Someone else could be more dangerous, equally, Trump may have learnt from his previous experience, although the that seems unlikely at the moment. In any case I think the Democrats would be better off with a much younger leader (like Obama, he's about two decades younger than Biden!). Obviously someone else really though.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on November 14, 2022, 08:53:43 am

These elections have been pretty disastrous for the Republicans. Facing an incumbent with poor personal approval ratings and obvious flaws (Biden simply is too old) who has had to deal with very rough economic conditions and an even rougher foreign policy context, Republicans should have swept the board. Instead the Dems have pulled off the best result of an incumbent administration in decades. They've retained the Senate (possibly with an increased majority, depending on how the run-off in Georgia goes) and the House is still in play. If the GOP does win the House their majority will probably be tiny and the party fractious and hard to govern. Plus there are GOP reps Biden can work with - and did work with effectively over the last two years.


The key par result for GOP was taking the House. I keep looking at the voting detail on the remaining results and can see no way through for the Democrats. Maybe I'm being dim and am missing something. To describe the outcome as pretty disastrous seems to me to be beyond clutching at straws. I don't need to give egg sucking lessons on what they can do with house control. The elections have only been a disaster for the Republican election deniers.

The context arguments in my view are simply wrong ... those past elections were not a face off with a completely unhinged Republican threat, visibly slathering for blood in the news. That the US is still near enough split down the middle with risks of lunacy, like massive support for counterfactual positions on elections (often run by state Republicans) and theocratic tendandancies (that regard the rights of a foetus produced from rape or incest as more important than the mother) just seems terrifying to me.


Yes, plenty of MAGA loons won but some of the most high profile Trumpers - Doug Mastriano, Blake Masters, Kari Lake (hopefully) - lost. As important is what happened at the State level, where Dems took complete control of the government in Michigan and Minnesota - these are very important swing states that won't now be further gerrymandered or have the '24 elections run by some "Big Lie" believer (see loss by Finchem in AZ). Most of all this was a pretty thorough repudiation of MAGA/Trumpism. The best outcome would be for the GOP and Trump himself to entirely fail to learn the obvious lesson. I'm looking forward to an imminent announcement from him, triggering intraparty warfare with De Santis.

These are important results but it's not everywhere and much damage is already done. Look at Florida and see how redrawn constituency boundaries have helped turn the biggest traditional swing state so red. There is a glimmer of hope in internal warfare but just as GOP deliberately rode Trump's surge to a win they could well just dump him now.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 14, 2022, 12:27:49 pm
The issue is that looking at what you term a disaster, a disaster was always overwhelmingly likely given historical precedent. You can't seriously have been expecting an incumbent govt to hold onto the House and the Senate, but if you did than I think that's where the problem in your analysis is. It simply was never going to happen. You might as well just say US politics is a disaster in general, but that's a different point.

Disaster is all relative, sure any kind of Republican advance I also see as a disaster but this is, in the context, a very good result for the Democrats on its own terms.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on November 14, 2022, 01:03:42 pm
I can hardlly be accused of not paying attention, having spent a lot of time in the US, knowing many people there and watching the media on the country pretty often. Maybe I'm just an optimist at heart about the good in people.

More than half of white college educated men and not far below half of white college educated women voted for Trump and most of that will have been tribal GOP voting or self interest (tax, religious  conservativism etc). All their media back then will have been saying the Democratic message was woke exaggeration of his risks. Then we had covid, the terrible economic fallout of his disastrous handling of the pandemic, the needless annoying of allies well beyond issues of arguments on fair expenditure, the endless lies, the praising of dictators, election denial in the face of incredibly strong push back from Republican election officials, the invasion of Congress, post presidential breaches of state security that make Hillary's email foolishness look trivial and much more besides. Then the Roe vs Wade repeal and the auto triggered bans on pretty much any abortion in some states. This is all plain unamerican.

https://www.pewresearch.org/2021/01/29/how-america-changed-during-donald-trumps-presidency/

I just can't see the vast majority of well educated Republicans as bad people and the ones I've met should have seen the light and helped 'clean house' on the key issues in these mid terms. That is not what has happened, although some Republican voters have helped keep some of the worst of the wolves at bay. I felt the same about brexit... people who live in bubbles will more easily get duped but a sizable proportion would see the error of Boris's brexit in time and will help 'clean house'.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: spidermonkey09 on November 14, 2022, 01:41:11 pm
I can hardlly be accused of not paying attention, having spent a lot of time in the US, knowing many people there and watching the media on the country pretty often. Maybe I'm just an optimist at heart about the good in people.

I'm not (and haven't been!) accusing you of that, or anything; I just don't agree with your analysis!

I'm well aware of the depths the Trump administration plumbed, its partly because of that I'm surprised you were daring to hope for things to 'snap back' to (relative) normality. I see the GOP as fairly fundamentally broken; now they've let the populist genie out of the bottle its very hard to return to politics as normal. The 'guardrails of democracy' are well and truly down in the US at the moment and in that context every election is an absolute dogfight (been reading How Democracies Die which has influenced my thinking on this!). I think, unfortunately, for the forseeable future every election will be characterised as a winner takes all game and 'a fight for the soul of America' etc etc.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Offwidth on November 14, 2022, 03:43:11 pm
Well my prior early autumn mid term optimism on a 'snap back', due to enough well educated Republican voters pushing against the worst and most rabid idiocy, only just turned out to be not enough this time. As such your claim that the house win was clear from ages ago pretty obviously wasn't true. My real disappointment in the 'near miss' in house results leading to a very likely tiny Republican majority will almost certainly be justified.. as will my relief about the Senate. The overall result is no cause for celebration, even if nothing like as bad as it could have been, and even if it does for Trump there are other lesser monsters ready to step in and continue the damage.

If we believed comparisons with previous midterms were going to be especially indicative of the results this time, given the US economic problems and low presidential ratings, Republican wins would have been even greater than the Republicans incorrectly expected.

I also doubt we have many significant difference in views on the venal nature of too much in US politics, so I can only  guess I was unclear in, or you misread, what I was saying.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on November 14, 2022, 06:05:54 pm
I can hardlly be accused of not paying attention, having spent a lot of time in the US, knowing many people there and watching the media on the country pretty often. Maybe I'm just an optimist at heart about the good in people.

I'm not (and haven't been!) accusing you of that, or anything; I just don't agree with your analysis!

I'm well aware of the depths the Trump administration plumbed, its partly because of that I'm surprised you were daring to hope for things to 'snap back' to (relative) normality. I see the GOP as fairly fundamentally broken; now they've let the populist genie out of the bottle its very hard to return to politics as normal. The 'guardrails of democracy' are well and truly down in the US at the moment and in that context every election is an absolute dogfight (been reading How Democracies Die which has influenced my thinking on this!). I think, unfortunately, for the forseeable future every election will be characterised as a winner takes all game and 'a fight for the soul of America' etc etc.

I pretty much agree with all of that. Some of the Republican party and their core voters have totally bought into the populist Trump playbook, and that's not changing for a while. All future US elections carry a significant risk of violence, in my opinion. See the 'Doomsday Watch' podcast for a lot on this.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on December 07, 2022, 08:12:24 am
Great news that the Trump organisation has been convicted of tax fraud,  and that the Democrats won Georgia.  Nice change from the unmitigated bad news about everything else. 
BBC News - Georgia Senate runoff result: Democrats solidify Senate control after Warnock victory
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-63877555
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on December 07, 2022, 08:25:19 am
Was about to post the same, watch the slime try and wriggle off the hook now, or make some feeble spin on it. Hopefully another reason for him to not try and run again.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: petejh on December 15, 2022, 06:06:24 pm
This is the former president of the United States. Truth beating fiction yet again.

https://mobile.twitter.com/AutismCapital/status/1603428488194555907/mediaviewer
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on December 15, 2022, 06:37:29 pm
Grifters gonna grift.  I bet he was thrilled with the idea of NFTs - money for something with no tangible value at all, surely the holy grail of grifts!
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Johnny Brown on December 15, 2022, 07:31:07 pm
I reckon Pete’s gonna invest.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Ged on December 15, 2022, 08:18:54 pm
Surely that's a deep fake and this is a big piss take?
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Snoops on December 16, 2022, 07:32:17 am
Appears fully genuine.
All over the news
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: slab_happy on December 16, 2022, 11:40:44 am
Even the MAGA faithful appear to be underwhelmed:

https://twitter.com/willsommer/status/1603433447489413131

https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/status/1603507158246629382
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on December 16, 2022, 11:47:50 am
Further highlights his level of delusion.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on December 16, 2022, 05:49:45 pm
Further highlights his level of delusion.

I assume that the link was those NFT cards he's flogging. I'd like to think it means he's a dribbling imbecile and won't even be picked to run for the Republicans, but I seem to remember everyone thought he was mental and not going anywhere in 2016...
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on December 16, 2022, 11:53:03 pm
https://decrypt.co/117431/trumps-nft-rollout-went-exactly-as-youd-expect

Dodgy shell company deffo nothing to do with Trump and definitely not an east way to funnel some untraceable funds!
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: slab_happy on December 17, 2022, 09:16:28 am
Apparently Elon's decided to get in on the action, since "selling overpriced shit to your fanboys" turns out to be a good grift:

https://www.theverge.com/2022/12/16/23513407/elon-musk-equity-investment-sucker-born-every-minute
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: petejh on December 17, 2022, 12:11:12 pm
Ha, Musk is in a slow motion car crash. My prediction, for what it’s worth (what you paid for it), is that Tesla will halve in value over the next 2 years. Read a stat that even if they halve in value from today’s price Tesla would still be the largest car company globally, by market cap. Which is clearly insane.

Also humorous to consider what the $44 billion spent purchasing a social media platform could have been used for instead. For example partnering or purchasing lithium and nickel projects in safe jurisdictions to secure the physical assets required to run Tesla vehicles for the next couple of decades. But no, Twitter. Madness.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on December 17, 2022, 12:54:33 pm
After being interested in one for years a Tesla has become a more realistic proposition recently, but Musk’s actions have managed to completely put me off and I bet there are tonnes of people in the same position (but I guess millions of fanbois too).

I wonder how seriously both Tesla and SpaceX boards must be thinking about ousting him, I can’t imagine NASA are particularly happy! Not sure there would even be a mechanism with him being such a major shareholder?
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: slab_happy on December 17, 2022, 02:38:15 pm
I wonder how seriously both Tesla and SpaceX boards must be thinking about ousting him

It does appear that some major investors in Tesla are publicly Not Happy about goings-on:

https://twitter.com/BriannaWu/status/1603942515723436033

https://observer.com/2022/12/koguan-leo-tesla-shareholder-oust-elon-musk/

CBS: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-musk-tesla-down-700-billion-in-value-angry-investors/

Not sure there would even be a mechanism with him being such a major shareholder?

According to Reuters, his stake is down to 13.4%:

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/elon-musk-sells-22-mln-tesla-shares-worth-36-bln-filing-2022-12-15/
 
And he keeps selling off Tesla stock to so he can pour money down the drain of Twitter.

OTOH, he's also got control of a huge social media website and no compunctions about setting angry mobs on people who annoy him by smearing them as pedophiles, so I can see why board members might be a bit hesitant to make a move.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 17, 2022, 02:58:17 pm
After being interested in one for years a Tesla has become a more realistic proposition recently, but Musk’s actions have managed to completely put me off and I bet there are tonnes of people in the same position (but I guess millions of fanbois too).

I wonder how seriously both Tesla and SpaceX boards must be thinking about ousting him, I can’t imagine NASA are particularly happy! Not sure there would even be a mechanism with him being such a major shareholder?

Even if I could afford one (I can't!) there is absolutely zero chance I would ever buy a Tesla. Thats entirely down to Musk. Complete nobhead.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: petejh on December 17, 2022, 03:02:57 pm
The money void of the metaverse is turning into Meta/Zuckerberg's downfall, from which apparently they are trying to claw their way back from. Twitter and other attention-grabbing fuckwittery might end up being Tesla's. These visions can work out when money is essentially free as per the last decade, which created companies with market caps predicated on earnings 15 - 20 years into the future assuming a low cost of money. But not when money costs 5%. It's going to be weird looking back from 2025 at the market and remembering the multi-billion dollar crypto, tesla and facebook market caps.
Can't beat this for a bit of perspective on changing of the guard:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z93yWXb9Tb0
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: petejh on December 17, 2022, 04:44:32 pm

Even if I could afford one (I can't!) there is absolutely zero chance I would ever buy a Tesla. Thats entirely down to Musk. Complete nobhead.

I would, I think they're nice cars if a bit pricey. Musk being a bellend should would have no impact on whether or not I bought a Tessie. Do you shun VW? I mean they systematically corrupted the emissions testing to cheat environmental regulations for years. A far worse crime than simply being a nob yet it doesn't appear to put people off.   
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: ali k on December 17, 2022, 10:29:37 pm
there is absolutely zero chance I would ever buy a Tesla. Thats entirely down to Musk. Complete nobhead.
I would…Musk being a bellend would have no impact on whether or not I bought a Tessie. Do you shun VW? I mean they systematically corrupted the emissions testing to cheat environmental regulations for years. A far worse crime than simply being a nob yet it doesn't appear to put people off.
SM isn’t trying to speak for the population as a whole though (or you!), just expressing personal opinion. Likewise, I wouldn’t buy a Tesla, Dyson or any Nestle products, nor use Amazon or Sports Direct to shop no matter how cheap. It’s up to the individual where they choose to spend their money and whose pockets they line in the process.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 18, 2022, 08:16:57 am
I agree it's not a totally coherent, logical position to shun some companies and not others, but that's the nature of individual choice isn't it? I find Musks combination of populism, far right adjacent rabble rousing and his absolutely massive ego really off putting, before we even get to him falsely accusing an innocent man of being a paedophile and buying his way out of legal ramifications. The risk of making yourself so overtly the "public face" of an entity is that people project their opinions onto the individual onto the company. I don't have the same view of the VW ceo; I don't even know their name.

On the other side of the coin, I bet some people avoid eg Ben and Jerry's because they object to their political stance.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: petejh on December 18, 2022, 10:26:11 am
Oh I completely understand it’s anyone’s right to make a personal choice, based on their personal opinion about someone else’s politics and behaviour. And of course hypocrisy is unavoidable in most consumer choices we make.
I just find it odd, because shunning something like Tesla for the reasons stated just means you buy a vehicle from a.n.other large car company. I doubt avoiding any particular major car manufacturer on principle is an efficient way to collect virtue points but if it makes you feel better than so be it.
 And in the case of VAG they have actually been found guilty of corruption on a mass scale - you don’t need to know anything about the ceo to know this btw.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: spidermonkey09 on December 18, 2022, 10:43:16 am
Well yeah, just like shunning Dyson because I think he's a nob means I buy a hoover from someone else. Or when people boycotted Esso but still bought fuel from other providers. Its a form of protest ultimately, against either poor behaviour by either an individual or company. That's not to say those you choose instead are pure as the driven snow, just that they align better in a specific way.

Its also not a case of virtue points. Everyone makes these choices on a daily basis, when we choose free range eggs over battery, mear from a local farm rather than Argentina, or choosing certain foodstuffs at the supermarket because they use recyclable packaging. If you don't do that and completely detach your wallet from your value system then fair enough, but surely most people do it to some degree.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: ali k on December 18, 2022, 10:46:07 am
It’s nothing to do with collecting virtue points. The idea of putting a single extra pound into the pocket of Musk just makes me feel sick. Same goes for Mike Ashley and several other individuals. Boycotting ‘faceless’ corporations is more nuanced and takes a bit more research, but when it’s an easily identifiable nobber at the helm then it’s a no brainer. For me at least.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on December 18, 2022, 10:56:07 am
What Ali said.

Top use of the word ‘virtue’ for baiting purposes Pete!
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: petejh on December 18, 2022, 01:58:55 pm
Boycotting folk such as Mike Ashley I get. And making cheap clothes is not on the level of value creation as engineering revolutionary forms of transport.

Musk, nope sorry I don’t understand what about him you’re so dead against morally? When compared to other CEO’s of companies in the specific business of selling cars.

On an individual level I think he’s a bit of bellend. He has some questionable views. I don’t think he’s morally outrageous or at least any more so than many other CEO’s of large companies. And he was a favourite pet of the left only a couple of years ago. I expect he plays to whatever political sympathies seem most apt in the moment.
On the level of making cars I think he’s done a pretty good job of popularising EVs and making a desirable product in the model 3/model s.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: teestub on December 18, 2022, 02:14:18 pm
I don’t think he’s morally outrageous or at least any more so than many other CEO’s of large companies. And he was a favourite pet of the left only a couple of years ago. I expect he plays to whatever political sympathies seem most apt in the moment.

Pet? He was selling posh electric cars, so this was always going to favour rich left leaning people.

Have any other car company CEOs recently spent spent $40bill with the apparent express purpose of giving a popular platform to racists and far right types?
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: seankenny on December 18, 2022, 02:53:41 pm
And making cheap clothes is not on the level of value creation as engineering revolutionary forms of transport.

I don’t think this is at all correct. Making cheap clothes is often the first step on the rung from an agrarian society to a more industrial society. It brings huge benefits to the people who undertake it, allowing them to urbanise and create new forms of social and political organisation. Elites get to make the transition from landlord-ism to running broader institutions that pave the way toward more complex production processes. Clearly it’s not the same value creation in terms of the transformation of inputs, labour and capital into an individual product, but the value creation on a wider scale is immense.

Human betterment is about both pushing out the frontiers and everyone else trying to catch up.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: slab_happy on December 18, 2022, 02:58:07 pm
I expect he plays to whatever political sympathies seem most apt in the moment.

I don't think it makes it morally better if he's decided to embrace the alt-right, QAnon dog-whistling, and the kind of people who incite terrorist threats against children's hospitals out of cynicism rather than sincerity.

I doubt many car company CEOs are paragons of virtue, but it's not surprising if people go "wow, Musk seems to be a very special kind of turd" and decide they don't feel like giving him their money.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: slab_happy on December 18, 2022, 07:31:57 pm
HAHAHAHAHAHA:

https://www.theverge.com/2022/12/18/23515221/twitter-bans-links-instagram-mastodon-competitors
https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/social-platforms-policy

Guess Musk must be really worried about the exodus. It is now Forbidden to let people know your account name on another social media site, or even post links to any content on one of the Forbidden Sites.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Bradders on December 18, 2022, 08:50:49 pm
Musk, nope sorry I don’t understand what about him you’re so dead against morally? When compared to other CEO’s of companies in the specific business of selling cars.

I think the big difference is the corporate structure in place at those other companies, to the extent that in the long run those CEOs really aren't all that important. I imagine it's only a vanishingly small number of people who could name any major car manufacturer's CEO other than Musk, off the top of their heads, and that's with good reason.

To draw the VW comparison, Martin Winterkorn (yes I had to Google his name) resigned over the emissions scandal and was rapidly replaced, which is what would happen to all of the normal CEOs if/when something went seriously awry.

As their power is more limited, it doesn't matter as much whether those other CEOs are right wing or left, etc.

Musk on the other hand is rather hard to get rid of, as was proven in the past at Tesla before they turned things around. He owns something like 20% of the shares, more than 3 times any other investor, he has family members on the board, etc. He now owns Twitter outright. And he essentially now runs both companies as something of a dictator, which would be bad enough let alone that one of those companies is a globally significant social media platform.

Such concentration of power in the hands of one person naturally draws a greater degree of personal scrutiny, and consequently I think it's a very logical outcome that more people would take a principled view over buying products from that person's company, versus A.N. Other's products.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: slab_happy on December 19, 2022, 07:22:05 am
Musk on the other hand is rather hard to get rid of, as was proven in the past at Tesla before they turned things around. He owns something like 20% of the shares

Now down to 13.4%, according to Reuters, since he keeps selling Tesla stock in order to pour money into the black hole of debt he's piled on Twitter. So he may be getting easier to get rid of.

Brutal piece on Musk from Linette Lopez at Business Insider:

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-business-playbook-boss-visionary-jerk-spacex-tesla-twitter-2022-12?r=US&IR=T
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 19, 2022, 09:12:43 am
Interesting read.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: galpinos on December 19, 2022, 10:46:15 am

Even if I could afford one (I can't!) there is absolutely zero chance I would ever buy a Tesla. Thats entirely down to Musk. Complete nobhead.

I would, I think they're nice cars if a bit pricey. Musk being a bellend should would have no impact on whether or not I bought a Tessie. Do you shun VW? I mean they systematically corrupted the emissions testing to cheat environmental regulations for years. A far worse crime than simply being a nob yet it doesn't appear to put people off.

I've always been baffled as to why/how VW ended up being the fall guy for this. It was industry wide, a "known secret", VW weren't even the worst yet seemed to cop the lot. The Nissan Qashqai was well known as being by far the worst offender but remained un-criticized and a massive best seller.

Re Musk, it has definitely put me off Teslas, for the same reasons as Ali et al articulated above. I know me buying a Polestar/Hyundai or whatever won't cause Elon to lose any sleep (and it I've no idea who the CEOs of those two example are, nor their political/ethical leanings) but it will mean I will sleep easier!
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Bradders on December 19, 2022, 11:13:34 am
Musk must read UKB

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-your-money-64021412
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: slab_happy on December 19, 2022, 02:46:51 pm
'"I imagine he's getting pressure from investors to step down and is using this poll to make it look like he's following the will of the people instead of the will of those paying his bills."'

That and/or Tesla investors threatening a coup if he doesn't get back to doing what's supposed to be his main job, rather than dicking around and tanking their stock in the process.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: mrjonathanr on December 19, 2022, 07:31:23 pm
 House January 6 panel recommends criminal charges against Donald Trump (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/dec/19/trump-criminal-charges-jan-6-panel-capitol-attack)
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: petejh on December 20, 2022, 02:56:30 pm
Hoping Trump will be denied running. Will then wait for Musk to poll twitter on whether he should run for president, millions of Chinese bots vote yes, and by 2027 we have a US/spaceX embassy on the moon.   
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: slab_happy on December 20, 2022, 03:26:18 pm
And then he finds out that someone at the embassy once said something critical about him on social media and cuts off their oxygen.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: SA Chris on December 20, 2022, 03:47:56 pm
Who, Trump or Musk? :)
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: Fultonius on December 20, 2022, 05:28:59 pm

Even if I could afford one (I can't!) there is absolutely zero chance I would ever buy a Tesla. Thats entirely down to Musk. Complete nobhead.

I would, I think they're nice cars if a bit pricey. Musk being a bellend should would have no impact on whether or not I bought a Tessie. Do you shun VW? I mean they systematically corrupted the emissions testing to cheat environmental regulations for years. A far worse crime than simply being a nob yet it doesn't appear to put people off.

I've always been baffled as to why/how VW ended up being the fall guy for this. It was industry wide, a "known secret", VW weren't even the worst yet seemed to cop the lot. The Nissan Qashqai was well known as being by far the worst offender but remained un-criticized and a massive best seller.

Re Musk, it has definitely put me off Teslas, for the same reasons as Ali et al articulated above. I know me buying a Polestar/Hyundai or whatever won't cause Elon to lose any sleep (and it I've no idea who the CEOs of those two example are, nor their political/ethical leanings) but it will mean I will sleep easier!

There was a pretty "one eye closed" docu-stitch-up on Netflix or youtube a few years back, loads of talking head interviews in the US with people being "shocked" at what VW had done. Felt like total hatchet job with an agenda.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: petejh on December 20, 2022, 05:53:51 pm
I know what you (and other posters) are trying to say, but it isn’t very apt to say a ‘hatchet job’ when the subject in question actually *is* massively in the wrong!
‘Throwing under the bus’ might be more apt.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: andy popp on January 04, 2023, 04:31:43 am
If the GOP does win the House their majority will probably be tiny and the party fractious and hard to govern.
Title: Re: U-S-A! The American Politics Thread.
Post by: TobyD on January 04, 2023, 05:39:06 pm
If the GOP does win the House their majority will probably be tiny and the party fractious and hard to govern.

Serves them right for allowing Qanon fruit loops into the party. I would include the previous President in that category.
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal