The 2018 Trump Presidency thread

[spacejunk]

^ i haven't had a chance to yet, but i hear wikileaks have published the whole book so people can read it for free

Maybe assange has soured on the dirty old man now too?

If he wasn't smart he would have been impeached by now. When will he be removed by, care to make a prediction?

His own party aren't likely to impeach him. Yet.
The republicans aren't really known for being principled.

I made a prediction - i think he'll be indicted once he leaves office (ie is voted out, impeached or quits).
I think it's more likely he'll die in office than be impeached, but i don't know how it could play out after the mid-terms.
I think the republicans will continue to haemorrhage supporters and support.

I've yet to see any solid evidence of him committing serious crimes, so I don't know what you're referring to.
Russian theory is dead now yea?

Dead? Lol. Far, far from it.

You haven't seen any evidence because the investigation is ongoing. And unlike trump's white house, nobody in the investigation is leaking important information.

That's a level of loyalty in an organisation that a "genius" like trump could never nurture.

I bet al capone thought he was a genius too, until he came unstuck. Now he's just remembered as a criminal.
I suspect trump will be remembered the same way - a two-bit pimp's son who built an empire on dirty mafia money.

Being intelligent and sexual impropriety have no correlation.

I disagree.
It shows a lack - or absence - of emotional intelligence to be an abusive misogynist like trump is.

He's gotten away with so much for so long because he has aggressive lawyers who make it financially impossible for people to sue him or take legal action against him.

And keyword being allegations. Honest question, is it possible that someone could make a false accusation against someone for political purposes. Do you think that this ever happens? Could it have happened in Trump's case? The guy demonstrably used to associate with a plethora of some of the most beautiful women in the world. Nobody credible has come forth. This makes zero sense. Especially coupled with evidence like this:

Hillary Clinton backer paid $500,000 to fund women accusing Trump of sexual misconduct before Election Day

That's not evidence. It's conjecture, and has nothing to do with the credibility of the women he allegedly abused.

But y'know - if you look at the weinstein thread, i explain at length why it's really irresponsible and inappropriate to doubt people that are brave enough to report sexual assault and rape.

It's not an easy or fun thing to do, and we need to respect those women. I don't care how dismissive trump is of those (and all) women - he's not a role model, he's a nasty piece of shit - and it's pretty fucking low to disbelieve allegations of sexual abuse (from a dozen fucking people) based on politics.

 

[LiquidMethod]

It shows a lack - or absence - of emotional intelligence to be an abusive misogynist like trump is.

I said intelligence. That can be more or less measured. Emotional intelligence far less so. Psychopaths can be extremely intelligent yet lack any empathy. And I could say that someone is emotionally unintelligent if they do not understand, or get seriously offended by, how an alpha male interacts with women and how some women respond to them. In your world you think that there is no way that a beautiful woman would want to have her pussy grabbed by a powerful male. Why do you think bands have groupies?

And since you are so convinced that no false allegations have been leveled at Trump, and that he really is some disgusting sexual assaulter - can you pick one case/person who has accused Trump of sexual impropriety that you would consider the most convincing?

 

[LucidSDreamr]

Liquid.

Geniuses generally don't incriminate themselves on Twitter then make thier lawyer say that he logs in under said geniuses personal Twitter account and posts pretending to be him. SAD!

There's nothing that genius about appealing to the uneducated and racist demographic to win an election against the works candidate in history crooked Hillary...most could come up with that idea. The other gop candidates just weren't pieces of shit enough to openly promote hatred to win an election...they had some standards for themselves and kids to look in the eye

 

[alasdairm]

geniuses also don't tend to tell people "...being, like, really smart". like? i can understand people saying that - perhaps without even realising it - while speaking. in this day and age, like is a common filler word.

but to actually type it out in a tweet? that doesn't make him seem very smart.

alasdair

 

[JahSEEuS]

that doesn't make him seem very smart.

it's all, like, part of the, like, master-genius-plan. ya dig?

 

[swilow]

I don't know how many times I need to explain this but there are many women that love to be grabbed by their pussies if it's consensual. Why do you think that leaked audio didn't sink Trump's chances in the election? Why do you think a surprising amount of white women still voted for Trump after they heard that audio? The only people that are shocked by what Trump said are the virtue-signalers, the Trump haters or the betas that don't understand the truth about male/female social dynamics. We all need to be honest with ourselves and then admit that there's a difference between being a womanizer and being a sexual assaulter. To the untrained eye they may even sometimes look similar, the key difference being that the woman is OK with it. So if a woman loves powerful high-status man and is ok having their pussy grabbed (after making it clear that they will be fine with it), who are you to judge or even tell those women what they are or aren't allowed to do with their bodies? Why do we have evidence now that Trump's opponents were offering hundreds of thousands of dollars to women to come up with fake assault allegations against him? Why are there none that are credible? How come almost 100 credible women were very quick to come out against Weinstein when the floodgates opened yet we're not seeing the same with Trump and he's supposed to be a similarly disgusting rapist? There are so many people that hate Trump with a passion and really want to see him removed but we don't have enough evidence to remove him for sexual impropriety? It does not make sense. I'm also getting really tired of explaining this ad nauseum.

I read "betas" and "virtue signallers" and just ignore. If you're going to throw in broad insults and generalization I'm not going to discuss this with you.

 

[LiquidMethod]

There's nothing that genius about appealing to the uneducated and racist demographic to win an election against the works candidate in history crooked Hillary...most could come up with that idea. The other gop candidates just weren't pieces of shit enough to openly promote hatred to win an election...they had some standards for themselves and kids to look in the eye

Actually it is genius to be able to send a message effectively and connect with such a broad range of voters, races and classes. But you're right it was easier than expected for Trump because he realized that (almost) everyone in the United States was feeling the same way - completely screwed and f**ked over by the government. People were getting sick of political correctness suppressing their expression and they were sick of blatantly corrupt politicians operating under a completely different set of laws to the rest of us. Most of these career politicians are psychopaths, that's how they can appear so squeaky clean and have enough charisma to get followers to idolize them irrespective of their actions. Remember Obama '08? It's safe to say that the mainstream media was almost unanimously behind Obama's campaign. "Change!" and "hope!" 24/7 with all TV anchors lauding this new angel - I bought into it man, hard. I thought Obama was the savior that finally will unite the world and do positive things. We all know how that turned out (a disappointing disaster, but some of us are still in denial). But the image portrayed by the mainstream media is what's important here. Obama was the establishment's chosen candidate, and he performed his duties excellently. Now apart from the expected rebound of the economy, things did not significantly improve under Obama in fact many things got worse. This disillusioned a lot of people.

Enter Trump. What is the mainstream media's portrayal of Trump? Basically the exact opposite of Obama. They portray him like he is literally a crazy, racist, sexist, danger to the world. They didn't always say this about him though! How was the media coverage of Trump before he decided to get into politics? Very fair and balanced. He had fun playing the asshole boss on his TV show but he was generally well-liked and even greatly admired by a ton of politicians and celebrities. He was not known as a racist or crazy person. In fact politicians would attempt to solicit donations from him, and he made many very politically astute comments in interviews. So what changed as soon as he decided to run for politics and talk about making some legitimate change? By analyzing the media we can deduce that he was not on board with the establishment's globalist agenda, the one that both Obama and Bush Jr happily submitted to. Now where I and a lot of you disagree is on whether there is any real difference between the current two parties, and whether the globalist agenda is good or bad for our society.

There's nothing that genius about appealing to the uneducated and racist demographic

Unfortunately there are a lot of dummies in America. This is not Trump's fault. He kept his message simple. spoke his mind like a normal person and connected with a lot of people including a lot who are not racist. Many previous Obama voters voted for Trump. Also a substantial amount of minorities. Maybe some racists voted for him too and even though he'll happily take their votes it does not make him racist. He did not make any racist campaign promises. If he was legitimately exposed as a racist he would not have won. Enough people saw through the mainstream media's lies and publishers like Wikileaks really redpilled a lot of people as to the reality of government corruption. You know that feeling of hope that people felt during Obama's first run? Multiply that and you'll know how people feel about Trump's campaign and drive to make something good happen (and so far overall a positive report).

but to actually type it out in a tweet? that doesn't make him seem very smart.

It was a joke. It doesn't seem smart for a psychiatrist to diagnose him on CNN.

I read "betas" and "virtue signallers" and just ignore. If you're going to throw in broad insults and generalization I'm not going to discuss this with you.

I also specified Trump haters. I should also have said - good people that have been brainwashed by the MSM/CIA

 

[alasdairm]

Many previous Obama voters voted for Trump.

define many?

Also a substantial amount of minorities

what does that mean?

It was a joke.

the lamest cop out of all...

alasdair

 

[LiquidMethod]

define many?

It's difficult to calculate exactly but these guys estimate that "9.2 percent of Obama voters flipped to support Mr. Trump - a hair lower than the estimates from other surveys." The ANES found that about 13% of all Trump voters cast a ballot for Obama in 2012.

what does that mean?

It means that Trump is demonstrably not a racist.

the lamest cop out of all...

It's only lame if you don't get the joke.

 

[alasdairm]

It means that Trump is demonstrably not a racist.

no. what does "substantial amount of minorities" mean? you mean that not only mexicans, african americans, etc. but other minorities? pakistanis? south sea islanders?

and your reasoning is specious. the fact that minorities voted for him doesn't mean he's not racist any more than having a jewish lawyer means your not an anti-semite. he was promising tax cuts. it's entirely possible some minority voters would put having more money in their wallet ahead of his being a racist.

It's only lame if you don't get the joke.

q.e.d.

alasdair

 

[LiquidMethod]

and your reasoning is specious. the fact that minorities voted for him doesn't mean he's not racist any more than having a jewish lawyer means your not an anti-semite. he was promising tax cuts. it's entirely possible some minority voters would put having more money in their wallet ahead of his being a racist.

Isn't that a bit of a paradox? Why would a racist improve the lives of minorities?

And I just meant a consequential number of votes that did not come from fascist-loving Caucasians.

 

[alasdairm]

And I just meant a consequential number of votes that did not come from fascist-loving Caucasians.

because he's not really able to pass a bill that give tax breaks to everybody except mexican immigrants

what are your thoughts on trump's disrespectful behavior during the national anthem at the alabama georgia game last night? non-issue, right?

alasdair

 

[LiquidMethod]

What disrespectful behavior? Are you making a joke

 

[swilow]

^What happened?

 

[alasdairm]

he made it pretty clear he didn't know the words to our national anthem. you know, the national anthem son-of-a-bitch black players disrespect by quietly kneeling.

alasdair

 

[LiquidMethod]

Do not underestimate how much images like this mean to a massive number of voters.

 

[mal3volent]

 

[alasdairm]

^ lol.

nice dodge liquidmethod. again.

i get that this is - or at least should be - a petty issue. but trump made this an issue with his crusade against nfl players exercising their first amendment rights. then he shows up and clearly doesn't know the words to the national anthem. now who's disrespecting the national anthem?

this is a common theme - he berates somebody for doing something then does it himself. his own words come back to bite him time after time after time.

alasdair

 

[JessFR]

I know this is kinda off topic but Obama has a funny idea of where the heart is.

 

[LiquidMethod]

i get that this is - or at least should be - a petty issue. but trump made this an issue with his crusade against nfl players exercising their first amendment rights. then he shows up and clearly doesn't know the words to the national anthem. now who's disrespecting the national anthem?

He did not forget the words, and one is not obligated to sing the anthem. It is just expected that people show respect and unity as a nation by standing. Refusing to stand is extremely disrespectful and if you choose to do so (or publicly support others doing so) as a political figure, then you will alienate a huge segment of the voting population. People do have free speech which may involve kneeling during the anthem if they choose, but don't cry victim when others exercise their free speech to explain that they are unhappy or that they think it is a bad idea.

Your crusade to point out hypocrisy often misses the mark when you ignore context.

----------------------------------------

I urge Liberals to watch this video.
Try to see things from the "other side" and understand the why not just the what.
There is a Conservative wave sweeping the western world.