Trump General Discussion

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Don't worry guys, Trump's impending financial crisis is clearly just from fallout from the Obama administration. And Obama's success was a product of the Bush administration policies finally showing results. And the Bush administration's economic woes were actually a product of fallout from the Clinton administration. And the Clinton administration's economic success was actually just layover as Ronnie Ray planted the seeds and HW sowed them.
 
After the Jamie Dimon rumors, leaks suggested the transition team was looking at Bernanke or Paulson as treasury secretary. Bernanke has apparently immediately shut this down, anyone who knows anything about him knows he'd be horrified (as an aside he is a huge baseball fan and his autobiography is great). The problem with the Trump administration which his supporters don't get at all is that not only has he alienated half the country but most capable people don't want anything to do with him for a million and one reasons. So while it would actually be a very positive development to have a guy like Bernanke involved, Trump's behavior and attitude and policy positions preclude that. So he will reap what he has sown, unfortunately for everyone else they'll have to live with it too.
 
Don't worry guys, Trump's impending financial crisis is clearly just from fallout from the Obama administration. And Obama's success was a product of the Bush administration policies finally showing results. And the Bush administration's economic woes were actually a product of fallout from the Clinton administration. And the Clinton administration's economic success was actually just layover as Ronnie Ray planted the seeds and HW sowed them.
Well, the Clinton part is at least half true. He stripped away half the regulations and pushed for people who couldn't afford homes to be able to get one. W just hammered down a nail that was already in place.
 
Well, the Clinton part is at least half true. He stripped away half the regulations and pushed for people who couldn't afford homes to be able to get one. W just hammered down a nail that was already in place.


I'm not lauding the democrats for their success. I'm mocking the republicans for the same wash-rinse-repeat explanation for recent economic failure, which we are sure to see a repeat of.
 
conned!

"Just before the election, after the last debate, 51 percent of them intending to vote for Trump supported increasing taxes on high-earning individuals," says Michael Pollard of RAND.

But Trump's plan does the opposite, says Lily Batchelder, a law professor at New York University and visiting fellow at the Tax Policy Center.

"If you look at the most wealthy, the top 1 percent would get about half of the benefits of his tax cuts, and a millionaire, for example, would get an average tax cut of $317,000," she says.

What Is Donald Trump's Tax Plan? An Analysis Of Whom It Will Benefit : NPR
 
No you were conned, Maddy McAngrypants



53491d1396682189-i-have-quick-question-sirs-madams-if-you-will-please-thanks-towelie8fy.gif
 
A few weeks ago a friend told me about a New York Times podcast he recently heard that included a very revealing interview with Donald Trump. (I haven't heard it yet)

At one point Trump was asked if he has (like most of us) looked at himself in the mirror and taken stock of who he is as a person. The answer, according to my friend, was something to the effect of "I haven't because I'm afraid of what I would see", which tells you a lot about what he thinks of himself.

That type of reflection seems highly out of character for Trump.
 
So where were these articles during the campaign? Maybe they were out there, just wasn't discussed on any media forum (major networks, CNN, Fox, etc)

His economic plan will not bring jobs back in the manufacturing sector, those were never coming back. Automation and globalization will continue, despite what anyone says.

His trade plans, while there is some merit in making sure it's fair (for both sides), probably won't have the desired effect either. I'm not sure we really want to piss off China either.

But all that being said, it'll be Obama's fault for anything that happens.
 
So where were these articles during the campaign? Maybe they were out there, just wasn't discussed on any media forum (major networks, CNN, Fox, etc)

His economic plan will not bring jobs back in the manufacturing sector, those were never coming back. Automation and globalization will continue, despite what anyone says.

His trade plans, while there is some merit in making sure it's fair (for both sides), probably won't have the desired effect either. I'm not sure we really want to piss off China either.

But all that being said, it'll be Obama's fault for anything that happens.

I think the answer is two-fold:

1) Racial/xenophobic/sexist appeals overrode economic motivations in the vote;

2) The evil brilliance of Trump's tactics was to turn the conversation from policies into his appalling statements (which was also the campaign tactic that the Democrats adopted). Most of us thought would disqualify him from being elected, but as it turns out, the appalling statements actually help him mobilize his supporters.
 
Oregeropa, thanks for the response. I guess the thing to me that solidifies the flag as a racist symbol is that it first appeared as a battle flag - i.e., flying for the side that was literally willing to kill in order to keep slavery legal. Were there other reasons the south was fighting? Yes, but slavery was inarguably at the core of the fight. Is the flag of historical significance? Yes. But its historical significance is inextricably tied to slavery and the racism that sought to prevent its abolishment. So you can't argue that the flag is just a marker of a noteworthy heritage without acknowledging that that heritage was explicitly racist. And the Breitbart article does its best to minimize that connection.


Thanks for your response. I sent the post and thought 'oh god I just defended the confederate flag on FYM, I'm a dead man'. And ducked out for a couple hours to watch football. Glad you read through it with an open mind.




Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Also, on 60 Minutes, when he was asked specifically if he would appoint a special prosecutor to go after Hillary, he said he would "think about it".

Trump told “60 Minutes” that Clinton “did some bad things,” but that ultimately the Clintons are “good people.”

“I don’t want to hurt them, I don’t want to hurt them,” he said. “They’re, they’re good people. I don’t want to hurt them. And I will give you a very, very good and definitive answer the next time we do 60 Minutes together.”
 
But Trump's plan does the opposite, says Lily Batchelder, a law professor at New York University and visiting fellow at the Tax Policy Center.

"If you look at the most wealthy, the top 1 percent would get about half of the benefits of his tax cuts, and a millionaire, for example, would get an average tax cut of $317,000," she says.

This is wonderfully selfless behavior from the rust belt Trumpsters. The coastal elites thank you!
 
This is wonderfully selfless behavior from the rust belt Trumpsters. The coastal elites thank you!
Isn't that the irony of all of this? I'm getting a tax cut and the rust belt voters who put him in office are getting dick (much to the chagrin of Mike Pence!)

Make my vacations great again. Thanks :up:
 
Last edited:
"Dr. Carson was never offered a specific position, but everything was open to him," Williams told The Hill in a phone call.

"Dr. Carson feels he has no government experience, he's never run a federal agency. The last thing he would want to do was take a position that could cripple the presidency."

Carson not interested in serving in Trump administration | TheHill

Not sure if Carson actually remembers running for president.
 
Isn't that the irony of all of this? I'm getting a tax cut and the rust belt voters who put him in office are getting dick (much to the chagrin of Mike Pence!)

Make my vacations great again.



if your household makes $225k or above, you are now taxed at the same rate as Beyonce! that's almost as good as getting dick!
 
Isn't that the irony of all of this? I'm getting a tax cut and the rust belt voters who put him in office are getting dick (much to the chagrin of Mike Pence!)

Make my vacations great again. Thanks :up:

Wait you won't use that extra cash to create jobs?

Sad!
 
I'm just guessing the bro-ish looking one on the far right (pun not intended) is your "alt right" brietbart douchenoggin.

Just guessing. Sorta looks like the type of frat boy who thinks he's not a sheep.
 
I'm just guessing the bro-ish looking one on the far right (pun not intended) is your "alt right" brietbart douchenoggin.

Just guessing. Sorta looks like the type of frat boy who thinks he's not a sheep.


Orthodox Jew Bro with a yamalka (excuse my spelling)
Could have been in AEPi or SAMu

(Yes I am a frat bro)



Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
i find it hard to disagree with much of this:

It’s worth repeating what Trump said throughout the election. His campaign indulged in hateful rhetoric against Hispanics and condemned Muslim Americans with the collective guilt of anyone who would commit terror. It treated black America as a lawless dystopia and spoke of black Americans as dupes and fools. And to his supporters, Trump promised mass deportations, a ban on Muslim entry to the United States, and strict “law and order” as applied to those black communities. Trump is now president-elect. Judging from his choices for the transition—figures like immigration hardliner Kris Kobach and white nationalist Stephen Bannon—it’s clear he plans to deliver on those promises.

Whether Trump’s election reveals an “inherent malice” in his voters is irrelevant. What is relevant are the practical outcomes of a Trump presidency. Trump campaigned on state repression of disfavored minorities. He gives every sign that he plans to deliver that repression. This will mean disadvantage, immiseration, and violence for real people, people whose “inner pain and fear” were not reckoned worthy of many-thousand-word magazine feature stories. If you voted for Trump, you voted for this, regardless of what you believe about the groups in question. That you have black friends or Latino colleagues, that you think yourself to be tolerant and decent, doesn’t change the fact that you voted for racist policy that may affect, change, or harm their lives. And on that score, your frustration at being labeled a racist doesn’t justify or mitigate the moral weight of your political choice.

In the same way that the election-year demand for empathy toward Trump supporters obscured the consequences of Trump’s support for his targets, this demand for empathy does the same. It’s worse, in fact. In the wake of Trump’s win, the United States was hit with a wave of racist threats, agitation, harassment, and violence, following a year in which hate crimes against Muslim Americans and others reached historic highs. With Trump in office, millions of Americans face the prospect of a federal government that is hostile to their presence in this country, and which views them as an intrusion, even if they are citizens. Even if they’ve lived their entire lives as Americans.

To face those facts and then demand empathy for the people who made them a reality—who backed racist demagoguery, whatever their reasons—is to declare Trump’s victims less worthy of attention than his enablers. To insist Trump’s backers are good people is to treat their inner lives with more weight than the actual lives on the line under a Trump administration. At best, it’s myopic and solipsistic. At worst, it’s morally grotesque.


Between 1882 and 1964, nearly 3,500 black Americans were lynched. At the peak of this era, from 1890 to 1910, hundreds were killed in huge public spectacles of violence. The men who organized lynchings—who gathered conspirators, who made arrangements with law enforcement, who purchased rope, who found the right spot—weren’t ghouls or monsters. They were ordinary. The Forsyth County, Georgia, sheriff who looked the other way while mobs lynched Rob Edwards, a young man scapegoated for a crime he did not commit, was a well-liked and popular figure of authority, as described by Patrick Phillips in his book Blood at the Root: A Racial Cleansing in America.

And the people who watched these events, who brought their families to gawk and smile, were the very model of decent, law-abiding Americana. Hate and racism have always been the province of “good people.” To treat Trump voters as presumptively innocent—even as they hand power to a demagogic movement of ignorance and racism—is to clear them of moral responsibility for whatever happens next, even if it’s violence against communities of color. Even if, despite the patina of law, it is essentially criminal. It is to absolve Trump’s supporters of any blame or any fault. Yes, they put a white nationalist in power. But the consequences? Well, it’s not what they wanted.

There is no such thing as a good Trump voter.
 
this hysterical insistence that every single person who voted for trump is a racist gay-hating scumbag is getting really fucking annoying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom