• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

2017 Trump Presidency Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
fucking hell. this is the most dysfunctional political disaster i've ever seen in the west.
really, this is unprecedented in modern times. i can't think of anything to compare it to. an absolute circus.
makes watergate look pretty tame.
 
Here's an outlandish comment. Seeing as how Trump doesn't value our allies. Do you think they would stand with us if we get into it with oh, let's just say North Korea. Then other enemies like Russia and China, etc. decide maybe this would be an opportune time to take advantage of us trying to spread ourselves out in so many different directions? The US is certainly powerful, but are we able to defend against so many adversaries at the same time? I know it's unlikely but you said you wanted something outlandish.
 
sadly, i think the australian government would go in all guns blazing even if trump decided to invade australia.
 
neither country really has a choice - the american empire has took over from britain as australia's imperial overlord sometime during the second world war.
militarily, both nations (and NZ and canada) are essentially one entity.

war with north korea would be very messy business indeed. massive civilian casualties, and i would expect japan would be a target if full-blown war were to break out.
NK have been gearing up for this since the 1950s, and the invasion of iraq only served to further reinforce their aggressive rhetoric, because it showed that any sign of weakness or capitulation would mean full-scale invasion.
america's global position as superpower has never looked shakier, and i'm not quite sure if that should be comforting in this situation, or terrifying.
as much as trump seems to be pushing for isolationism, he does love a bit of posturing and pretending to be a big boy.

i think the north koreans are exploiting the chaos in US politics. trump fancies himself as some kind of master troll, but he's got nothin' on kim-jong un.
 
alasdairm said:
"resigned".

lol. ok :)

is this indicative of a “fine-tuned machine”? it's hard to take that claim seriously at all.

alasdair
Click to expand...

I know, I know. I read two breaking stories and I literally changed it as I typed it.
Why? Because Trump usually bullies people into resigning rather than firing them. And I guess I felt like Preibus has been through enough, and I'd rather err on the merciful side. :\
 
spacejunk said:
fucking hell. this is the most dysfunctional political disaster i've ever seen in the west.
really, this is unprecedented in modern times. i can't think of anything to compare it to. an absolute circus.
makes watergate look pretty tame.
Click to expand...

Britain is arguably worse. At least the Republican's dysfunctionality involves a lot of tripping over their own two feet, limiting what they actually accomplish (well, that and the judicial system).

Britain's dysfunctionality involved leaving the second largest economy in the world, then becoming dysfunctional when they needed to negotiate a lot of deals.
 
Escher's Waterfall said:
Britain is arguably worse. At least the Republican's dysfunctionality involves a lot of tripping over their own two feet, limiting what they actually accomplish (well, that and the judicial system).

Britain's dysfunctionality involved leaving the second largest economy in the world, then becoming dysfunctional when they needed to negotiate a lot of deals.
Click to expand...

True, and maybe i'm just a bit of a one-eyed socialist - but i see some hope in Britain in that they have a strong opposition party fighting against the conservative elites.
I wish we had something comparable to the Corbynistas in Australia.
Purely from a political perspective - we're basically being held hostage by a bunch of far-right loonies in an all-but hung parliament that relies on a redneck party and or two - and the 'major' opposition party is just another neo-liberal joke.

The choas in the US seems to not just be polarising the political classes, but the wider people as well.
At least, that's what my stateside friends and families are telling me, but they are all staunchly anti-trump.
I don't think i've ever seen a government so at war with itself as the trump administration seems to be.
Ineptitude is not the most comforting saving grace - especially not when we're talking about the US government.
 
Last edited:
FLA said:
Here's an outlandish comment. Seeing as how Trump doesn't value our allies. Do you think they would stand with us if we get into it with oh, let's just say North Korea. Then other enemies like Russia and China, etc. decide maybe this would be an opportune time to take advantage of us trying to spread ourselves out in so many different directions? The US is certainly powerful, but are we able to defend against so many adversaries at the same time? I know it's unlikely but you said you wanted something outlandish.
Click to expand...

It's outlandish, because Trump would never go to war with either of those countries, especially China, since it would effect his administration's clothing lines. Ivanka's stuff is hot in China right now, according to Time.

And he wouldn't attack Russia as long as Putin keeps playing hard-to-get. Plus all the secret financing and peepee tapes.
 
alasdairm said:
absolutely. i'd expect no less. i'd love to see an example of an outlandish comment.
Click to expand...

Well your justification for Trump encountering massive problems within the swampy bureaucracy is the repeated false claim that "Trump said everything would be easy!" This is a cop-out, you are refusing to discuss concrete and real systemic problems by deflecting and reverting back to assumptions and character-assassinations of Trump. You disagree with how he ran his campaign, and you assume that he is nothing but a conman which is objectively not the case. Start by accepting reality - he is the President, the government is plagued by serious problems. It appears to me that you have a vested interest in demonizing Trump and making sure that he fails first and foremost, as opposed to legitimately recognizing when he is cleaning the swamp. You would prefer criminal career politicians in charge as opposed to an American patriot which I can understand, but it is not an intelligent position to take (it may feel safe and comfortable but it is not smart). I know I once again assumed your position but correct me if I'm wrong.

yet here you are doing exactly the same - not "waiting to pass judgement". why the double standard? so why not save your criticism for something that's actually happened?
Click to expand...
My comment went straight over your head. That's one criticism of you that I've seen is that you like to nitpick people's arguments while ignoring context or nuance. I've discussed these topics at length with people previously and the exact same accusations repeatedly pop up, so I know what angle people are coming from and I preempt the ridiculousness. Labeling something "Russian propaganda" because it simply runs counter to the deceitful-media narrative is stupid. I can pick apart establishment and media lies without resorting to labeling them "Western propaganda" and then wiping my hands.
 
alasdairm said:
is this indicative of a “fine-tuned machine”? it's hard to take that claim seriously at all.
Click to expand...

You can't have it both ways. You either recognize the swamp or you do not. Traitor Priebus is now gone, and firing him is evidence that the "fine-tuned machine" is beginning to operate effectively by removing the trash. They are finally taking care of leakers, and the more time that passes, the more effective this administration will become (the Clinton-owned media will have you believe the opposite).

There is so much hysterical nonsense being spewed here it is hard to keep up (I'm referring to everyone here). I question someone who gets all their information from media sources that have (a) been proven to have been extremely biased and dishonest in the past and (b) were explicitly colluding with the Clinton camp and Trump's enemies.

Nobody serious is suggesting that sweeping governmental changes could happen instantly and smoothly, and nobody intelligent would deny that the government was crippled by massive problems and corruption that needed to be addressed. The debate is around whether Trump is actually addressing those problems in the correct way.
 
Liquid, do you and Alisdair live together, by any chance?

ETA: oo, an actual example of the confirmation bias you mentioned a while back:

"Traitor Priebus is now gone, and firing him is evidence that the "fine-tuned machine" is beginning to operate effectively by removing the trash".

He was fired, therefore a traitor. Thus confirming your delusion that the admin is working fine. You might use that next time it comes up.
 
I considered Priebus a liability from the very beginning and am glad he has finally been shown the door.
I also do not trust Jared Kushner in the slightest, but Trump is kinda screwed there since he is his son-in-law.

This is a problem Trump faces - there are not many people entrenched in the system that will fully support his agenda to change things. The legitimate patriots do exist - but it is up to Trump to identify them and place them in the right positions. He is new to this so I always expected some trial and error.
 
The problem he faces is never having had employees or any management experience.

He wouldn't know what to do with competent staff, besides fly off to Florida to jabber at people pretending to be his friend.

But do you think a failed Real Estate broker and reality TV producer has any idea what even counts as competence when staffing the executive branch? What departments there even are?

And the problems with Kushner that you bring up are why nepotism rules are made. A few million people pointed this out before he even took office.
 
Scrofula said:
The problem he faces is never having had employees or any management experience.
Click to expand...
hahaha ok.... One of the most successful and reconizable businessmen in the world, who has his name on over 500 successful companies, doesn't know shit and is a big failure. This is the type of straight-up nonsense that I have no idea how to reply to. You may not like his personality and think that he is a big meanie, but denying that he is successful is just plain retardation.

Scrofula said:
And the problems with Kushner that you bring up are why nepotism rules are made. A few million people pointed this out before he even took office.
Click to expand...
I didn't have a problem with him hiring family members per se. Theoretically nepotism is bad but the swamp is full of traitorous scum so currently he may need to know that he can trust his employees. Except I feel Kushner has loyalties that lie elsewhere.
 
LiquidMethod said:
hahaha ok.... One of the most successful and reconizable businessmen in the world, who has his name on over 500 successful companies, doesn't know shit and is a big failure. This is the type of straight-up nonsense that I have no idea how to reply to. You may not like his personality and think that he is a big meanie, but denying that he is successful is just plain retardation.
Click to expand...

When you've reached a certain level of wealth and brand recognition it doesn't matter if you go bankrupt and fail as Trump has done numerous times, you are carried by the system.

Irrelevant anyways as running the country like a business is a dumb shit idea anyways. What a brilliant idea hiring someone who has absolutely no experience.
 
We've been through this. I don't need to remind you that 500 companies are just paper, the name on the buildings is just a license, not ownership (exception of a few), or his spectacular, unprecedented losses. He didn't catch a break until the TV show. You know this on some level, you have to. Even still, a guy who buys and sells real estate or licenses his name, doesn't have employees beyond a secretary or a driver. He doesn't hire a guy to be his sole accountant, he hires a firm. Find me one of those companies that has 500+ employees that report to him personally. Or an org chart of any kind.

I bet you'd have a hell of a problem with Hillary hiring Chelsea for anything, though. "Theoretically" nepotsm is bad, but in THIS case, it's not the right kind of murky water that was intended to be drained, yeah I got you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top