advertisement


President Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
@vuk. Which shows you understand nothing about peaceful support and mobilisation and standing up to bullies. But I am glad you think of yourself as a bully even though you are just glib. Anyway Pence will become president. If not sooner via Electoral College then later via impeaching Trump. We live in a time when its entirely possible and not outlandish.

Some folk on pfm will initially celebrate then realise something worse than Trump and Hillary was possible.
 
droodzilla said:
I think Eagle is spot on about the corrosive effect on politics of a Trump victory built on lies. It's one of the things about Trump's campaign that upset me most. I doubt Trump even makes a distinction between what's true and what's convenient for him to believe at any given moment. In that sense, he really is a psychopath.
Click to expand...

not sure if you've watched the interview with trump's former ghost writer, but some of what was revealed, if true, adds up to a perception i have formed of trump having very little intellectual (i use that broadly now) curiosity. his temperament isn't the best temperament, it is that of a hyperactive teeenager looking for the next score (in very similar realms too). i can't imagine him weighing even the wisest advice properly. the truth for him lies in his egocentric thoughts and desires.

the first american mistake regarding trump was to make him a billionaire and destroy any chance of reflection and humility.


vuk.
 
One lesson needs to be learned from Brexit and Trump, and this is that post-truth politics cannot be allowed to become a thing.

We need some robust rules around political campaigning, truthfulness and media manipulation, we need them soon, and we need them to bite. Hard.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
A few pages back it was suggested that Trump will stimulate the US economy by, among other things, massive spending on defence.

Given his avowed intention to back out of Syria and the middle east, and determination to take a back seat in NATO and let other (under-contributing) partners step up to the plate, I have to ask myself why he intends to spend all that money on the military. I don't have an answer, but I suspect I won't like any that emerge.
Click to expand...

He'll need to pay lip service to opening a couple of coal mines and a steel plant in the Rust Belt, but he'll take money for that from the NATO budget. Two years funding only, till Fox News get bored with it and he can close them.
The Wall- that may be by patriot direct subscription- pass the bucket round his white and poor strongholds.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
One lesson needs to be learned from Brexit and Trump, and this is that post-truth politics cannot be allowed to become a thing.

We need some robust rules around political campaigning, truthfulness and media manipulation, we need them soon, and we need them to bite. Hard.
Click to expand...

I hope you know what you're dealing with! His chief of staff elect, son in law Kuchner Jr. is no natural academic- old man Kuchner got his sons into Harvard Business School with a $2.5m 'donation'. This is an interconnected elite in the true meaning of the word. They make the weather, the truth is an incidental. Johnson, Gove, Fox and Farage showed themselves highly able in the field. They're not going to let anyone change a system that works for them any time soon. We are I'm afraid a long way from the bottom.
 
I was talking to a chap the other day who works for Trump in the UK (Scotland I think).

Anyway he said that the last time Trump visited the site he came into a meeting of sub-contractors and said: 'guys, hurry up and get finished here, I'm bringing you all out to the States and you're going to build a big fu**ing wall'

After which he and they roared with laughter, so make of that what you will..

I'm told he went around the site too handing $200 each to all the workers, flanked of course by his security team.
 
I bet you're envious Max. If only you could find a role, even a modest one, as internet shill for Trump? Maybe he'll force Congress to pass the Trump-Felatio Act, allowing the president to pass out $200 any time he spots positive behaviours he wishes to reinforce.
 
TheDecameron said:
I bet you're envious Max. If only you could find a role, even a modest one, as internet shill for Trump? Maybe he'll force Congress to pass the Trump-Felatio Act, allowing the president to pass out $200 any time he spots positive behaviours he wishes to reinforce.
Click to expand...

You seem upset by my report, Dec?
 
max.

please don't waste your time on this one (dec). at the very least to spare us all yet another feeble attempt at humour.


vuk.
 
claire.fox said:
Some folk on pfm will initially celebrate then realise something worse than Trump and Hillary was possible.
Click to expand...

Pence is not worse than Trump for exactly the same reasons Hillary could never be worse than Trump. As much as one might disagree with their politics it's orders of magnitude safer than electing a unstable, narcissistic bully and you are making, IMO, the same mistake as Max albeit likely for very different reasons.
 
maxflinn said:
You seem upset by my report, Dec?
Click to expand...

Max, I'm simply surprised anyone on PFM would act as a self-uncensored cheer leader for an individual like Trump. Unless you're trolling, you've painted yourself into a very small corner, though you do seem to be drawing energy from Trump and the other authoritarians you retweet.
 
vuk said:
actually, i think that alot people here do not like me and are offended by many of my beliefs. i certainly don't believe anybody adores me -- you have clearly fabricated that one for a rhetorical purpose.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it's actually possible to like, or for that matter to hate someone one has never met based solely on their contributions to an internet forum.

I've been researching some early 19th century writers, including Hazlitt and Coleridge. It's interesting that, for the most part, the biographers of Coleridge haven't a good word to say for Hazlitt, and vice-versa. You can see how, in writing about the same event in which both men were involved, one or other is either given the benefit of the doubt, or ascribed the worst possible motives, depending on the bias of the biographer. Clearly the 'truth' about the event will have been much more complicated than one entirely bad person doing down one entirely good person.

Which is a roundabout way of saying that I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt, and assume that they mean well even if they are, IMO mistaken or misguided.
 
Trump's Scotland -

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&r...otland&usg=AFQjCNHWmyj6RAv0wYJqdVIyzPTdPgXCkA

10477a46918a7202d911549cbb727ec1.jpg
 
@matthew I'll disagree there as ousting an unstable narcissistic bully is provisioned for in the constitution and the way the government is structured by Senate and Judiciary... Oddly a powerful Republican owned senate can do more harm to Trump than a weak one and will do if they are not on the same page. There are so many ways Trump is heading for impeachment i've lost count. If his Taxes are not in order and are seen as evasive that is enough to legally start the process.

A stone-cold stable Republican with religiously mandated deep-seated misogyny and sexism stripping women of the rights to their bodies and who are capable of implementing their batshit policies which are voiced in a way to appeal to the people running things (which Trump is not -- remember populist electioneering to get votes is over, it's policy time) are far far far more dangerous. What's more, there does not seem to be much dirt on pence that the Republicans and the Republican voter-base do not actually like.

Pence knows how to work with Republicans. Trump is an independent that attached to limpet like to the GoP who are fair weather friends. They got in, they don't like him.

And good weather does not last long.

You'll see. FWIW I am in support of Hillary. I see pathological misogyny and patriarchy at work (and stop that thought of a counter-argument right there: women are capable of sexism and misogyny towards women just as effectively as men) underlying everything being slung at her. Elizabeth Warren was too much of a risk. Bernie I am still trying to work out of he really would have been enough to erode Trump -- for sure we cannot trust the professional pundits for anything rational. I'd have liked Sanders/Warren or vice versa but even they are like oil and water.
 
There's the same outright hostility and lack of humour here that we saw and continue to see with Brexit.

It's sad to see. This is a community and politically two recent issues have polarised it like never before.

I find the intellectuals trying to explain the Trump victory whilst feverishly wringing their hands to be highly entertaining actually, and indicative of just what a waste of bandwidth many of these represent in the modern world.

I know it's a bit rich coming from me (....) but can we not have some content instead of the mud slinging? Max never did give us that one reason to vote for Trump that would stand up to cursory scrutiny and lead to an improvement in the lives of those doing so AFAIK. Come on Max, why not get us on our way to civilized debate?
 
@claire I don't disagree with much of that but ultimately I would take a stable bad guy over an unstable bad guy. And regardless of the power of the other branches to stop him, he can still do a lot of extra harm on a smaller scale even if the actual legislative agenda is much the same. Also a lot of the people around him are genuinely scary and many of those would be replaced by Pence who allows normal Republicans to join the administration.
 
I need to research Pence further, but I suspect denying evolution and the dangers of smoking places him firmly in a part of a Venn diagram where one doesn't really want leaders of superpowers to reside.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top