2017 Trump Presidency Thread

[LiquidMethod]

Nonsense. A couple of months after he's sworn in and he's the most obviously crooked president in american history.
Cute line, but as usual with trump, it has absolutely no bearing in reality.
A lot of people are finding a lot of dirt on trump, but if you only watch pro-trump news channels, of course you're not aware of that.

Trump scooped the angry disenfranchied bigot vote, which is not such an achievement in a nation that has so underfunded education, health and social welfare for the last 30+ years.

"most obviously crooked president in american history" haha based on what? If this were true he would not be president, and he would definitely have been impeached by now. We've yet to see any kind of accusation or charge stick to him or be verified. You must know zero about the previous american presidents if you make a call like that based on media smear campaigns and zero evidence.

Where's the dirt? Also it's a bit difficult to only expose oneself to pro-trump news, as 95% of the MSM are on a crusade to make the public think that Trump's administration is crumbling from within and the White House roof is falling on their heads, when the reality is probably the opposite.

"angry disenfranchied bigot vote" - this is an uninformed liberal excuse as to why Clinton didn't win. Ironically Trump's win came from people actually beginning to educate themselves and disentangle their minds from the corrupt (and now obviously deceptive) MSM. We saw leaks that showed how Clinton colluded with journalists, and we saw leaks that gave us an (IMO very small) insight into how corrupt and criminal the Clinton enterprise really stretches. That's one reason Trump won. Whether you think Russia was responsible for leaking those documents or not (still no evidence), the fact remains that any "hacking/influencing of the election" was simply exposing the corrupt, globalist, establishment candidate Hillary Clinton and her immoral buddies.

 

[SKL]

Whatever "Russian connections" may be, it's benign relative to Chinese influences on the American economy and politics (from a nuclear-deterrant to a diplomatic, e.g. Taiwan recognition, to a local-level, as in the always politically connected business of real estate, here in New York to an incredible degree), and on the minds, even involuntarily, of many American politicians and businessman; Trump's anti-China posturings are a huge part of the geopolitical extent of this thing, it's not just an American issue, it's inherently international, and by the use of technology, geopolitical interference with elections [and again, there is no evidence that Russia did anything but possibly propagandize] is no longer a thing of superpowers exclusively and no longer a thing to which the U.S. is immune. (Actual digitally-based election fraud is a terrifying but as-yet-unrealized (or unnoticed) phenomenon, although some have cast aspersions on, e.g. the election of GW Bush, on these issues; and of course a lot of accusations are purely based on partisan number-cracking with Gerrymanderesque sort of intention, no-ID voting of course is a purely partisan issue, not a voter's rights one—I have lived without ID for long periods of time. You are cut off from all sorts of stuff, and if you're motivated to get it, you manage to get an ID, somehow—otherwise we're looking at low-information low-motivation voters who happen to befit the Democrat Party, as have some of their initiatives like sending mail/proxy ballots to welfare recipients.)

 

[spacejunk]

I'm not a liberal, but thanks for the thought.
I dislike Clinton also. I hate all war-mongers.
I do sincerely despise all white supremacists though.
The thought of such pond-scum humans as Steve Bannon and the like having control of the world's most powerful military is disturbing.
If these degenerates do manage to goad North Korea into a nuclear holocaust, i just hope it's over quickly.

 

[LiquidMethod]

Saying "(fact)" doesn't make him a good businessman.

I was just basing that on the fact that he turned a million dollars into one of the most recognizable multi-billion dollar brands in the world, boasting over 500 successful companies and less than 6 bankruptcies.

I would hate to see your definition of a bad businessman!

 

[SKL]

The thought of such pond-scum humans as Steve Bannon and the like having control of the world's most powerful military is disturbing

The thoughts of them in power warms the cockles of my dark fascist heart at the beginning but then starting to hear their foreign policy continuing to follow the whole neoconservative gameplan make me feel cold again.

If these degenerates do manage to goad North Korea into a nuclear holocaust, i just hope it's over quickly.[/QUOTE]

Madder-than-the-madman theory.

 

[LiquidMethod]

no-ID voting of course is a purely partisan issue, not a voter's rights one—I have lived without ID for long periods of time. You are cut off from all sorts of stuff, and if you're motivated to get it, you manage to get an ID, somehow—otherwise we're looking at low-information low-motivation voters who happen to befit the Democrat Party, as have some of their initiatives like sending mail/proxy ballots to welfare recipients.)

Voters should be made to present ID to vote. If the Democrats saw that as a problem then they could introduce legislation to make it easier for people to get ID (if it really is that difficult to get a photo ID). I personally believe the DNC (and probably the GOP too in the past) have been involved in electoral fraud which is why they don't push this type of policy.

 

[LiquidMethod]

Bannon should be the least of your worries.
The warmongering Deep State are the ones that want to goad the US into another war (seemingly now with Russia).
Trump/Bannon are here to fight against that.
War is bad for business if you don't profit from it - which Trump doesn't but a multitude of other US politicians do.
It's not fucking rocket surgery.

 

[spacejunk]

Voters should be made to present ID to vote. If the Democrats saw that as a problem then they could introduce legislation to make it easier for people to get ID (if it really is that difficult to get a photo ID). I personally believe the DNC (and probably the GOP too in the past) have been involved in electoral fraud which is why they don't push this type of policy.

Again, there is no evidence of this type of voter fraud.
It's a total red herring. Something lying politicians (even sub-par amateurs like trump) excell at.
Most are much more convincing and canny, but it's nice to see the smarmy old bastard giving it a shot.

All i can really say though, is that Rome is burning. And thank goodness for that.
This is the Asian century, and the sooner and cleaner we get that paradigm shift out of the way, the better.

 

[SKL]

Turns out that Trump's grandfather didn't want to be deported.

A ridiculous comparison to a conscientiously false analogy to create a slogan and pretty well-wrought propaganda at that as most people't don't bother to read the text of an article critically, and are just as pleased enough with the intended "take-home" propaganda message, a false analogy which will never be remembered as such, except for a slogan to shout him down as a hypocrite.

Let's look at the actual situation.

Trump's grandfather opposed his deportation from his country of birth for political reasons involving his having immigrated for a time to America and wishing to return.

This is entirely different from being deported as a non-citizen. It's an entirely different question and warrants an entirely different kind of response in terms of what is a reasonable claim, ontologically and ethically at least, even if not legally; to wit, a genuine imposition against human rights, which are not violated in any, way, shape or form by any country wishing to protect it's borders and regulate immigration.

Response to some of your replies before they're written:

Personally, I certainly wish that I could visit various other countries, let my visa expire, and be able to become as comfortably established as many of our illegal immigrants. If I could, there is an absolute zero percent chance that I would still be in the U.S., I can tell you. I can tell you that I get no sense of safety out of some fantasy of illegally immigrating to Russia or something like that, and I don't think that letting do so is any kind of "human right;" so this is some sort of humane right that only certain nations are obliged to oblige, depending on specific cases, refugees vs. migrants, etc. But there is no parity between the reality here and the reality atmosphere whatsoever in terms of illegal immigration as something which is treated as a "human right" and actually indulged in soi-disant "Sanctuary Cities!") We, as a nation, are different, and this is a problem and is unaccaptable; as a sub-set of the larger problems around expecting that in terms of expanding our populations, White and historically White nations are seen as obliged to do so to a demographically unreasonable extent.

This is up there with some of the best of Trump's false analogies and rhetoric.

 

[SKL]

Again, there is no evidence of this type of voter fraud. It's a total red herring.

Hordes of Mexicans voting and hordes of Chicagoans voting for their ancestors is not something that has been reliably reported at any significant scale in some time, although various forms of electoral fraud, Gerrymandering, and the like, are inevitable. Opposition to the ID question has nothing to do whatsoever with fraud; it's because it will improve numbers for the Democrats; so, too, Republican opposition to efforts to mail absentee-ballots to Welfare refugees, and so on. "Fraud" is immaterial. It's just about pushing the numbers in one direction or another. Just (for U.S. residents) look at the shape of your voting district, it probably is totally arbitrary-looking and bizarre, and that is, again, for manipulation of the vote, or at least, altering and controlling of the outcome of the vote, or the popular vote, something which goes on in all varieties.

Photo ID cards are something that the parties are separated on on grounds of demography, not ideology, although an ideological or factually-based reason will be presented publically.

All i can really say though, is that Rome is burning. And thank goodness for that.
This is the Asian century, and the sooner and cleaner we get that paradigm shift out of the way, the better.

Something I can agree with you on wholeheartedly. Perhaps with slight modulation of what you'd call Asian, but yes, I'm with you here.

 

[LiquidMethod]

Again, there is no evidence of this type of voter fraud.

Not exactly true. If you search around you will find more.

Also what I don't get, is why some people are worryingly against an investigation into electoral fraud. It is a very big deal and if there is any fuckery involved in the voting process it must be addressed, as a fair election is the foundation of a democracy.

A reason I believe there was electoral fraud committed: before the election the DNC (and its media cronies) were CERTAIN that they would win. Remember some news outlets giving Clinton a 98% chance of winning? They were extremely smug in their retorts to any accusations: "Obama to Trump "Stop Whining". And what happened after their shock loss? Ohh now all of a sudden the election was rigged. But it was by Russia... somehow? I've still yet to hear a sensible and reasonable explanation as to how Russia influenced the voting...

But then as soon as Trump accuses the DNC of padding the voting - oh no, no evidence, shut up, conspiracy theory, no investigation needed.
Also Trump stood by his accusations even after he won. If he wasn't serious he would've taken his win and shut up. But he re-iterated that the WH would investigate it, and I hope they do. Anyone arguing against an investigation is an enemy of democracy, or is a scared partisan Democrat worried that "their" party is going to look even more shit if electoral fraud does surface (and especially if they lost despite attempting to rig voting).

I believe this to be one of the (if not the) most spectacular political miscalculations of all time

 

[SKL]

But it was by Russia... somehow? I've still yet to hear a sensible and reasonable explanation as to how Russia influenced the voting...

"Influenced" only by propaganda, not by any other means; this propaganda, of course, being free speech, even if directed at us as a democratic state from a foreign power, isn't voter fraud, it's just propaganda. And nation-states engage in propaganda against each other all the time, I've of no doubt that the U.S. is one of the most active which are taken seriously. So this is if anything just about a media leveling of that particular obstacle, now that we have, only as the most official, well-known and legitimate being the RT, basically as biased as CNN, to more obscure outless of lesser and lesser relationship to the memorably-termed "reality-based community" (do a little research on the context of the phrase, if you haven't, it really will bring out it's focus a little bit more as to even what I'm saying here; the phrase "we create our own reality," actually comes out, although it's better known as a quotation from Timothy Leary off all people, and much to say the same effect. In the same context Leary says "you create your own reality," the explicit doctrine of Rove et al. was that as an empire we did in fact create our own (geopolitical) reality, but this thesis has been disproven ultimately as it has for empire.) This is just what propaganda is. This is just what nations do.

Americans are simply convinced to hold to the term "Democracy" with such a religious fervor that a threat to it seems horrifying, and that obviously many forces in our government do not want the Russian perspective to invade on the "reality-based community." Being pragmatic, though, this is more or less the situation and language of every geopolitical rivarly or opposition, ever. The American Establishment just can't bare it being called as such, though—nor could anyone else, and this often involved measures of severe censorship especially in the more ideological countries—and these are, after all, in a 'post-truth' world, perfectly equal things and proportionate actions (or, even, proportionately more practiced the same of it all!)

In memetic warfare, which is what we're going to be seeing soon, it doesn't matter, everyone will be on their proper "side," but that "side" was constructed for him memetically by his own "side," anyway.

 

[LiquidMethod]

That's very interesting I will look into it more.
Except it still doesn't offer any concrete examples as to how Russia could have influenced the election.

We know they didn't hack voting machines which would be a tangible and verifiable action.
What did the propaganda entail? Broadcasting alternative news on RT? That is not influencing the election, and whether RT is state-sponsored or not I find their reporting to be much more truthful and objective compared to the major American MSM outlets. How many voters watch RT anyway?

Did Russia pay a bunch of trolls online to criticize Clinton? Trust me there were enough internet users from the US (and other countries worried about a Clinton presidency) to handle that for them.

DNC leaks? Unverified, most probably an internal leak via murdered staffer Seth Rich.
Podesta emails? Again no evidence that it was Russia and even less evidence to suggest the release of those email would "influence" the election.

This is the thing: for so many proponents of the Russian hacking narrative, they are unable to explain the operations in detail. It is all very vague, and most unsurprisingly (and worryingly), explanations of this "election-meddling" fail to even address the content of the emails that were published by Wikileaks.

 

[noone1]

I love the line of thinking that Trump supporters use "we won, that makes everything right" or that because he won he's not an incompetent cretin. He won because of voter apathy, the democrats put up a deeply flawed candidate and 50% of America basically said "fuck this noise, I'm out" about 20% of people voted for Trump, 23% voted for Hillary he only barely won because of our archaic system.

There are some on the left that want to characterize him as a mastermind too because it makes the sting of losing easier to swallow. But in the end Hillary was shit and its sad that the democratic party isn't going to accept this. We are heading down the path of not even hiding the fact that we are a plutocracy anymore America is already slowly dismantling its status as a superpower.

 

[SKL]

Just a fun fact from history, and maybe a parable.

At one time in England, you could purchase a "baronetcy" from the government, with which came some land but most importantly the title of being able to be called "Sir," and considered the lowest, but still, real enough, in effect if not in degree of respect, members of the aristocracy. But you weren't really a Baron. It was a favourite of the bourgeois and noveau riche and was looked down upon. It was not inheritable. Later on, these increased in status and price but were eventually no longer sold and became heritable and the Baronets gaining more and more admittance to aristocracy, on more of a level to be able to interact, although of course within the strict limits of decorum and social protocol but becoming more so by the generation, with more and more highly noble and highly-titled people, up and including the House of Lords and even the royalty, before whom they were nothing, really, not real aristocrats, but people's who's unaristocratic ancestors, if not themselves, had been paid money to be admitted into a social strata.

 

[Jabberwocky]

He should be in a fucking nursing home with all the bitter unfuckables that voted for him.
Won't be long.

We're actually more attractive https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...looking-research-says/?utm_term=.40fa776aeeec

Confirms what I noticed, far left women always happened to be ham beasts lolol

 

[Morninggloryseed]

What links between tramp and russia again?

Isn't the russian mafia/kleptocracy an establishment of sorts?
He may be looked down upon in mainstream American political circles, but amongst rogues and oligarchs, he seems pretty well connected.

I mean, his links to the Russian establishment seemed fairly developed..
More of a scofflaw than an outlaw.

 

[noone1]

We're actually more attractive https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...looking-research-says/?utm_term=.40fa776aeeec

Confirms what I noticed, far left women always happened to be ham beasts lolol

Did you actually read the link? Says nothing about the base. This only says conservative politicians are more attractive because the base votes them in based on attractiveness. Which makes sense conservatives don't care about any deeper meaning, they care more about superficiality than anything else.

Between the bases you can find "uglies" and "beauties" on both sides I'm sure.

 

[SKL]

More to do with mate selection, really. Look at politican's wives, and families, too. Trump of course is an outlier. JFK is an outlier. But of all people even Nixon, one of our less aesthetically blessed presidents, his wife and daughters were quite attractive.

 

[alasdairm]

But of course you have no problem coming up with nicknames for Trump

substantiate that with examples please.

thought so

alasdair