The 2018 Trump Presidency thread

[JGrimez]

I find it pretty fucking disturbing that there are people still trying to convince us that trump is anything other than a dangerous idiot.

Once he does something dangerously idiotic then we can discuss that. Until then he has had some positive influence. To completely deny that shows unhealthy partisanship or blind hatred.

 

[spacejunk]

No, that's complete nonsense.

 

[JGrimez]

No positive influence at all? Way to be objective.

 

[Roger&Me]

Once he does something dangerously idiotic then we can discuss that. Until then he has had some positive influence.

Actually, I agree with you. Trump hasn't done anything that bad yet. Hopefully he never will. And he's been able to wield some positive influence in certain respects (along with plenty of negative influence too, FTR). But Trump just moved into the White House like yesterday. Hitler didn't start gassing Jews during his first year in office either, he worked his way up to it. Maybe Trump will turn out to be a benign actor, but I keep a close eye on him because I suspect that he's gonna do some crazy, evil shit sometime soon. I hope he proves me wrong though. I don't like Trump, and he really concerns me. But, at least so far in his tenure, we've had worse presidents. I think it's fair to conclude that Trump has been a decent president so far.

 

[spacejunk]

What do you think about his cuts to science funding and environmental regulators? Do you think that is bad?

No positive influence at all? Way to be objective.

What?
Opinions don't have to be "unbiased". I mean, seriously?

I hate trump. I think he's a vile creep who should be locked up.

 

[Roger&Me]

What do you think about his cuts to science funding and environmental regulators? Do you think that is bad?

Yeah, I mean almost everything he's done is preposterous. Don't mistake my reticence to immediately condemn Trump for some sort of tacit approval of him. But I'm comforted by the fact that Trump, at least so far, has remained essentially a political phenomenon. I pretty much disagree with everything he stands for, but, at this point, he actually has more or less played by the rules. He's the President, and he's allowed to be a dumbass and make stupid, unreasonable decisions if he wants to. And that's why we'll probably elect a congress in 2018 that will make his life a living hell and cut his balls off, and then we'll vote his ass out of office in 2020. D) This will end up being a really weird episode in the history of democratic self-governance, and probably lots of people will suffer all sorts of harms because of Trump, but our institutions will survive long after him and things will get better. This is just another example of "two steps forward and one step back," which has been the defining characteristic of democracy since its inception.

And as much as I'd like to see Trump impeached or indicted, I don't think either of those are likely. I recommend you peruse Professor Tribe's latest book To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment, for a complete discussion of all that stuff. Professor Tribe is about as far from a conservative as a human being can get, but he concludes that Trump probably couldn't be impeached based upon what is publicly known at this point in time.

 

[Roger&Me]

You can't go inserting moles or informants into campaigns then fraudulently apply for a surveillance warrant.

Lmfao. That's just wrong, bro. There's nothing unlawful about placing an informant in a political campaign, and there are all sorts of situations where a warrant could be procured based upon information acquired from such an informant. And informants are private citizens, their actions are not constrained by the constitution. If you expose information to an informant, well, I guess that sucks for you. Courts can't even review that evidence, because it wasn't even collected by an agent of the government. It was collected by a private person. A private person has the right to collect information about anybody and provide that information to anybody they want (including the government).

And, answer this for me please: If you've done nothing illegal, why would you care if anybody is investigating you or collecting information about you? If I were accused of a crime that I didn't commit, I'd be begging the government to investigate the living dogshit out of me -- so I could clear my name without having to go through the enormous expense and hassle of having a trial.

 

[Roger&Me]

It almost seems like people who have committed crimes are more scared of being investigated than people who have not committed crimes ...

 

[spacejunk]

Yeah, I mean almost everything he's done is preposterous. Don't mistake my reticence to immediately condemn Trump for some sort of tacit approval of him. But I'm comforted by the fact that Trump, at least so far, has remained essentially a political phenomenon. I pretty much disagree with everything he stands for, but, at this point, he actually has more or less played by the rules. He's the President, and he's allowed to be a dumbass and make stupid, unreasonable decisions if he wants to. And that's why we'll probably elect a congress in 2018 that will make his life a living hell and cut his balls off, and then we'll vote his ass out of office in 2020. D) This will end up being a really weird episode in the history of democratic self-governance, and probably lots of people will suffer all sorts of harms because of Trump, but our institutions will survive long after him and things will get better. This is just another example of "two steps forward and one step back," which has been the defining characteristic of democracy since its inception.

And as much as I'd like to see Trump impeached or indicted, I don't think either of those are likely. I recommend you peruse Professor Tribe's latest book To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment, for a complete discussion of all that stuff. Professor Tribe is about as far from a conservative as a human being can get, but he concludes that Trump probably couldn't be impeached based upon what is publicly known at this point in time.

Top post, thanks.

The sad thing about trump apologists is that people get tired of engage with them and just give up trying to have a reasonable discussion - so it's nice to read a measured, informed post for a change.

It seems like trump's really given a lot of self-belief to people who apparently reject notions like the burden of proof and critical analysis of information.
I mean,i tend to view conspiracy theories as either a get-rich-quick scheme for two-bit writers, or just a large-scale disinformation project - but apparently a lot of people take that stuff seriously and use it to inform their political beliefs, which is pretty unsettling.
I mean, just because the mainstream press churns out a lot of shit, doesn't mean it is all "fake".

Or, more importantly, that "the media" is the "enemy of the people".
That is dictator language, but some people lap it up.

I have always seen conspiracy theories for what they are: amusing light entertainment.

It's a great distraction though, isn't it? And it allows for two groups of people (ie trumpers and those who do not follow trump) to discuss a topic without any common ground, any common sources of information or any overlapping undetstandings of what is happening.
The fragmentation and polarisation of discourse and political media is one of the creepiest things to come out of the trump era.
It's like a "choose your own adventure" book of toxic ideology and cognitive dissonance. It's a bit of a worry when the president himself buys into these low-rent conspiracy tales.

I will have to check out this book you mention. I wonder if trump's future criminal enterprises will face greater scrutiny in the years following his presidency?
He's made a lot of powerful enemies - i don't think i'd want to make an enemy of the FBI, CIA et al.

 

[JessFR]

Top post, thanks.

The sad thing about trump apologists is that people get tired of engage with them and just give up trying to have a reasonable discussion - so it's nice to read a measured, informed post for a change.

It seems like trump's really given a lot of self-belief to people who apparently reject notions like the burden of proof and critical analysis of information.
I mean,i tend to view conspiracy theories as either a get-rich-quick scheme for two-bit writers, or just a large-scale disinformation project - but apparently a lot of people take that stuff seriously and use it to inform their political beliefs, which is pretty unsettling.
I mean, just because the mainstream press churns out a lot of shit, doesn't mean it is all "fake".

Or, more importantly, that "the media" is the "enemy of the people".
That is dictator language, but some people lap it up.

I have always seen conspiracy theories for what they are: amusing light entertainment.

It's a great distraction though, isn't it? And it allows for two groups of people (ie trumpers and those who do not follow trump) to discuss a topic without any common ground, any common sources of information or any overlapping undetstandings of what is happening.
The fragmentation and polarisation of discourse and political media is one of the creepiest things to come out of the trump era.
It's like a "choose your own adventure" book of toxic ideology and cognitive dissonance. It's a bit of a worry when the president himself buys into these low-rent conspiracy tales.

I will have to check out this book you mention. I wonder if trump's future criminal enterprises will face greater scrutiny in the years following his presidency?
He's made a lot of powerful enemies - i don't think i'd want to make an enemy of the FBI, CIA et al.

If you ask me life is way to short to spend it arguing with conspiracy theorists, climate change deniars, trump lovers, etc.

 

[swilow]

Actually, I agree with you. Trump hasn't done anything that bad yet. Hopefully he never will. And he's been able to wield some positive influence in certain respects (along with plenty of negative influence too, FTR). But Trump just moved into the White House like yesterday. Hitler didn't start gassing Jews during his first year in office either, he worked his way up to it. Maybe Trump will turn out to be a benign actor, but I keep a close eye on him because I suspect that he's gonna do some crazy, evil shit sometime soon. I hope he proves me wrong though. I don't like Trump, and he really concerns me. But, at least so far in his tenure, we've had worse presidents. I think it's fair to conclude that Trump has been a decent president so far.

I agree with a fair bit of what you say but I do think the bar has been set really fucking low. I do think that rather than being a decent president, one could say he hasn't been as bad as expected in some respects. In others, he has proven to be as negative and distracting as anticipated.

There is a point where negatives effectively nullify positives. To use the Hitler analogy, he achieved something positive for the German economy but he was also gassing the Jews, gypsies, and other undesirables. You could argue that Trump isn't quite there yet. Thin praise though.

 

[Roger&Me]

If you ask me life is way to short to spend it arguing with conspiracy theorists, climate change deniars, trump lovers, etc.

Nah, we have to instruct them or they'll never get it.

 

[spacejunk]

^ true.

Y'know, a couple of people have told me that it was debating on folks on CE&P that finally rid them of the fantastical belief in the dogma of "truthers" and various other conspiracy tripe.
I've definitely had some of my beliefs shaped and challenged through robust debates with some of the bright folks that post here.
You don't get that in places where everyone believes roughly the same shit.

I love it when people are actually keen to debate (that's most of us) rather than just spam certain perspectives that nobody cares about.
It's not about this being an echo chamber, because it's most certainly not; there are all sorts of perspectives represented in here, but there's very little discussion that can come out of conspiracy theorist stuff which only works if you dismiss the idea of supporting your ideas with varifiable evidence.

But i agree that it's good to present people with perspectives they otherwise wouldn't be introduced to, thanks to the confirmation bias of the algorithms used by youtube, facebook and the like.

The problems that sort of stuff is presenting to democracy is only becoming evident now - especially with trump (and a bunch of other crazy shit like fucking "pizzagate")
Weaponised disinformation is so fucking destructive, and something tells me it won't be disappearing in a hurry.

 

[Roger&Me]

I do think that rather than being a decent president, one could say he hasn't been as bad as expected in some respects

From my perspective, I'm more toward the opposite of your theory. I think he's been orders of magnitude worse than we ever expected him to be. But he's still been a fairly good president, because he's too stupid to figure out how to be a bad one.

 

[spacejunk]

^ that's a spot-on analysis, i reckon.
He's a great deal worse than i expected, but his saving grace is (paradoxically) his political ineptitude.
It would be downright scary if a fascist fuck like trump was politically savvy.

 

[cduggles]

But he's still been a fairly good president, because he's too stupid to figure out how to be a bad one.

Two words: Roy Moore

The only reason that everything-ist perv isn't a senator is because the Alabama voters hate Trump and child molestors and like a guy who prosecuted church bombers enough to barely eek out a win.

Has Moore conceded yet? I don't even have the heart to check.

 

[swilow]

Nah, we have to instruct them or they'll never get it.

...yes, but only to a certain extent. After that its repetitive and futile. There are plenty of other places to discuss this stuff anyway.

 

[Cream Gravy?]

I think it's sad that him and his hommies are focusing so much damn effort on repealing abortion rights when a Catholic ass country like Ireland just legalized it for the first time in its history.

Two steps forward, one step back indeed.

I'm sorta on board with Trump's America first type attitude with foreign policy. I doubt he'll defuse the Korea situation, and I wouldn't be surprised if we went into a war with Iran at this point. Or Russia for that matter. Not excited about such things, but in an era of continued global hatred of America, having a strong attitude can be useful.

I wish he would get over the culture wars. They should have died in the 80s. This is the Age of Aquarius, and the people of Pisces really need to die or get over it (of course I mean natural death by age). There are things we should keep from our past, but barring people from self-expression isn't one of them.

 

[nuttynutskin]

What's this shit I'm hearing about children of illegals being separated from their families by ICE? I've been purposefully ignoring the news lately, but I saw something regarding that on my Yahoo main page.

 

[JGrimez]

What's this shit I'm hearing about children of illegals being separated from their families by ICE? I've been purposefully ignoring the news lately, but I saw something regarding that on my Yahoo main page.

I think I posted something about it in the sex allegations thread.

Hitler didn't start gassing Jews during his first year in office either, he worked his way up to it.

Who is Trump supposed to be ethnically cleansing eventually?

I think it's fair to conclude that Trump has been a decent president so far.

Hey good on you. Unfortunately just having that opinion in some circles takes courage

This will end up being a really weird episode in the history of democratic self-governance, and probably lots of people will suffer all sorts of harms because of Trump, but our institutions will survive long after him and things will get better. This is just another example of "two steps forward and one step back," which has been the defining characteristic of democracy since its inception.

Trump's presidency has (purposefully or inadvertently) exposed a lot of deep state corruption and collusion within the highest levels of the government, and also some shady dealings with individuals of other countries. Would you agree that shining a lot on any and all corruption is a positive step forward? I couldn't give a damn which party was in charge of the country as long as they were following the rules.

Lmfao. That's just wrong, bro. There's nothing unlawful about placing an informant in a political campaign, and there are all sorts of situations where a warrant could be procured based upon information acquired from such an informant. And informants are private citizens, their actions are not constrained by the constitution. If you expose information to an informant, well, I guess that sucks for you. Courts can't even review that evidence, because it wasn't even collected by an agent of the government. It was collected by a private person. A private person has the right to collect information about anybody and provide that information to anybody they want (including the government).

As you are well aware this is a complicated issue. At what point does one break the law? Covertly moving campaign funds through a law firm to pay an ex-British spy who then paid the Russian government? How about attempting to corroborate the Russian intel by using a news clipping that references the exact same British spy that compiled the original file. How about knowing it was false information yet using it to strengthen a warrant application to wiretap an opposition political candidate.. and a non-rhetorical question: if Papadopolous drunkenly told Downer about Russians having compromising emails on Hillary before the DNC was "hacked", then what emails was he referring to?

And, answer this for me please: If you've done nothing illegal, why would you care if anybody is investigating you or collecting information about you? If I were accused of a crime that I didn't commit, I'd be begging the government to investigate the living dogshit out of me -- so I could clear my name without having to go through the enormous expense and hassle of having a trial.

Normally you'd be right. But imagine you've attained a new position of power. Then there's a cop that you know for a fact is dirty and he is investigating you for things that you are innocent of but you know he is guilty of. What would you do in this situation let him do his thing and hope it all works out for the best? Or would you fight back in an attempt to see justice be carried out

If you ask me life is way to short to spend it arguing with <truth-tellers>

I love it when people are actually keen to debate (that's most of us) rather than just spam certain perspectives that nobody cares about.

Some of the most important issues at the moment deserving of discussion, you will decide are beneath you and unworthy of debate.
Or you refuse to engage with a certain issue for other reasons.