Trump Part VIII

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.
Covering the Trump administration is difficult because it requires disentangling three strands of its behavior: the normal, the incompetent, and the dangerous.

The normal aspect—the administration’s conventional Republican policies and appointments—is, broadly speaking, politics as usual. The amateur aspect—its early fumbling and bumbling—is what one finds every time power changes hands, exacerbated by an unusually inexperienced incoming team. The danger is unique.

Every administration spins, fights with the press and the bureaucracy, pushes its own agenda, and tries to evade intrusive oversight. But ordinary White Houses do not repeatedly lie, declare war on mainstream media institutions, pursue radical goals while disdaining professional input, and refuse to accept independent scrutiny.

How seriously you take these behaviors depends on how you assess the motivations behind them, generating a game that some have taken to calling “Stupid or nefarious?” or “Veep or House of Cards?” Do slow appointments signal poor management or a deliberate attempt to “deconstruct the administrative state,” as Trump guru Steve Bannon says? Is dismissing experienced senior officials en masse just a clumsy way of handling a presidential transition or a purge of potential obstacles and whistleblowers? Are all the lies mere venting or a deliberate plot to distract critics and undermine reasoned discourse?

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2017-04-17/present-destruction
 
I think the media and the administration need to just stop Trump from talking at all for a while. Leave this situation to people who actually know what the hell they're doing.

Trump supporters, meanwhile, need to take a long, hard look at their life choices.

While I tend to agree, I also caution myself to not make too many assumptions or generalizations about Trump supporters. There is in fact a spectrum, even if many of the most visible ones seem like they deserve everything they get.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/opinion/my-most-unpopular-idea-be-nice-to-trump-voters.html
 
I do appreciate the sentiment. After all, the great moral genius of Barack Obama was that he lost a congressional majority bringing health insurance to the children of the very people who called him n*gger.

But there's an inexcusableness about a Trump vote that I find impossible to get around. What did you think was going to happen? It's not like we didn't know it was going to be this bad. It's not like we didn't know he didn't know anything (and didn't know that he didn't know). We had the racism and sexual assault. And yet it was still ok to do such a thing?
 
I think the media and the administration need to just stop Trump from talking at all for a while. Leave this situation to people who actually know what the hell they're doing.

Trump supporters, meanwhile, need to take a long, hard look at their life choices.

Plot twist: nobody knows what they're doing.
 
Plot twist: nobody knows what they're doing.

hey Vlad, off-topic, but what do you think about Melenchon doing so well in the polls right now? it's looking like a 4-horse race into the 1st round... i am so pleasantly surprised and, if i had a vote, would 100% vote for him... seeing so much support for him among my friends and he has a huge following among young people - will be an interesting weekend - really hoping he gets through to the next round... would restore some faith in humanity :lol:
 
Oh this is so fun. I'm in France right now and will be here just in time for post-election celebrations. And then I'll be in the UK for post-election celebrations there, too!
 
hey Vlad, off-topic, but what do you think about Melenchon doing so well in the polls right now? it's looking like a 4-horse race into the 1st round... i am so pleasantly surprised and, if i had a vote, would 100% vote for him... seeing so much support for him among my friends and he has a huge following among young people - will be an interesting weekend - really hoping he gets through to the next round... would restore some faith in humanity :lol:

Of course I'm not Vlad, but do you think Melenchon may have a similar effect on the France election the way Bernie did within the Democratic party?

If he gets through: Would his votes help Le Pen?

If he doesn't: Would his supporters stay home or vote against Le Pen (or for her?)

This feels like a very critical election for Europe. Having someone like Le Pen in charge, guess it's a lot like Trump....we don't really know what will happen. Assume the worst, hope for meh.
 
While I tend to agree, I also caution myself to not make too many assumptions or generalizations about Trump supporters. There is in fact a spectrum, even if many of the most visible ones seem like they deserve everything they get.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/opinion/my-most-unpopular-idea-be-nice-to-trump-voters.html

I really disagree with a lot of that article.

The statement that progress cannot be made until "flyover country" is brought into the fold is simply untrue and also makes a small number of people in a small number of states disproportionately important in an election. The truth is about 20-25% of the country is immovable. These are the people who supported Dick Cheney in the end and probably the bulk of the open racists/other -ists. You will NEVER bring them into the fold and anybody who thinks otherwise is an idiot. The other thing is that there are relatively few "independent" voters who can be swung. You can probably bring some or many into the fold but the reality is that their number is tiny in comparison to the most important group out there - people who do not typically vote at all. The 18-25 crowd, blacks and Latinos, people living off the grid, people who feel totally disenfranchised (Trump brought out a bunch of this last group).

So the notion that we should all bend over for Trump voters and somehow accommodate them or wait it out until they come to the light is inefficient at best and disingenuous at worst.
 
So the notion that we should all bend over for Trump voters and somehow accommodate them or wait it out until they come to the light is inefficient at best and disingenuous at worst.

Fair enough but I don't think the article is saying that we have to bend over to or accommodate them (I will reread it) but rather that they are not all the same and many if not most have very different motivations.

Casting them all as racist bigots is not just inaccurate (I recognize a lot of the more visible ones are, unfortunately) but more importantly it is counter-productive...
 
Fair enough but I don't think the article is saying that we have to bend over to or accommodate them (I will reread it) but rather that they are not all the same and many if not most have very different motivations.

The article posits that we must "bring them into the fold" - well how do you propose we do that if not accommodating some of their demands?

Meanwhile almost half the country didn't vote at all. THAT is fertile ground for progress, not people who think that the Midwest will be an industrial and coal paradise again soon.
 
Meanwhile almost half the country didn't vote at all. THAT is fertile ground for progress



i've been pondering this lately, as well as the notion that if we just had another liberal (real liberal, not a fake liberal like HRC) messiah who addressed their concerns that the non-voters would be motivated to show up at the polls on a Tuesday in November.

but if the existential threat of a Trump presidency wasn't enough to get these people to vote, what is?
 
Doesn't the voting turnout percentage always end up alarmingly low? like hovering around half the eligible population?
 
Doesn't the voting turnout percentage always end up alarmingly low? like hovering around half the eligible population?


i think it's between 50-55% depending, Obama i think getting the highest turnouts.

i'm wondering what's preventing this 45% from not voting. apathy? ignorance? depression? ennui? working 3 jobs? entitlement that someone hasn't personally massaged their feet in order to win their vote?

i do think part of the problem is the Tuesday thing -- young people work, retirees do not.

but, honestly, with early voting more and more of a thing and the inescapable bombardment of the 24/7 news cycle in all aspects of life, how does one not vote? at least in such large numbers?
 
Oh this is so fun. I'm in France right now and will be here just in time for post-election celebrations. And then I'll be in the UK for post-election celebrations there, too!

argh good luck with that

hope you're enjoying your time in France though!
 
Of course I'm not Vlad, but do you think Melenchon may have a similar effect on the France election the way Bernie did within the Democratic party?

well, it's difficult to say, as Melenchon already has his own party (he broke away from the Socialists some years ago as they veered to the right)... but, for sure, there really does seem to be a spirit of optimism and hope about him, totally in contrast to the bitterness, hate and negativity fuelling Le Pen's campaign... my (adult) kids are really inspired by him - it's their first election here as adults, and they are 100% behind Melenchon (sadly we can't effing vote though as we don't have French nationality), and apparently every single one of their friends will be voting for Melenchon, so he really seems to have inspired young people, although some of the youth population (particularly in the rural context) are pro-Le Pen - the youth vote is really split among the 2 extremes... there is definitely that suspicion about big money, banking, multinational corporations among Melenchon supporters regarding the other main candidates, such as Macron and Fillon, and I see Macron (centrist candidate) getting similar treatment to Hilary in pro-Melenchon articles etc., i.e., he will only benefit big business and the rich... that's also a given with Fillon who is already up to his eyeballs in corruption scandals... out of the 4 main candidates, Melenchon really seems to be offering something new, especially re. the environment, the whole system even, whereas Macron and Fillon are pretty much same old same old, and Le Pen is plain dangerous

i've seen Melenchon being described as the French Bernie Sanders, and Le Pen as Trump... i think there is definitely a similar spirit, but obviously, being France, Melenchon is so much further to the left on the scale of things than perhaps Bernie would be...


If he gets through: Would his votes help Le Pen?

not sure i understand what you mean?
there are 11 candidates overall in the first round, but the 4 main candidates are all pretty close, so it's really a race between those 4 in the first round, and then the top 2 will go into the run-off two weeks later for the second round...

really hard to say how the second round could go... if Melenchon gets thru, and Le Pen is out, that will be fantastic... if he is up against Fillon, i imagine Le Pen voters might think of backing Fillon (who is very right wing, too far right for some French Republicans even), although perhaps some of her more "working class" voters might swing towards Melenchon for the social aspect... and i would imagine the socialists would back Melenchon against Fillon, but not sure about Macron's voters as they could veer either left or right - possibly right to stick with the money... although polls suggest Fillon would lose to Melenchon, but it's difficult to know for sure...

if Melenchon is up against Macron, i have no clue, but polls suggest Macron would win... Macron would definitely get Fillon's votes, and i reckon Le Pen's votes would be split, as would the socialists' votes (Macron was also a socialist like Melenchon originally and socialist politicians have already defected from the Socialist party to support him)

if Melenchon is up against Le Pen, then God help us all - it would be too bloody stressful haha (although polls say Le Pen would lose to Melenchon - polls also say she would lose to Macron and Fillon - it really is unlikely that she would win the election, but honestly you just never know)
I would hope the French would vote for Melenchon to block Le Pen, but again, it's so hard to know - world politics is so fucked up right now, it's impossible not to assume the worst...


If he doesn't: Would his supporters stay home or vote against Le Pen (or for her?)

no way, not in a million years would Melenchon's voters support Le Pen - he has publicly denounced her as a fascist (and won the libel case when she tried to sue lol) and is the polar opposite in terms of ideology - so i am pretty sure they would vote to block her at least...

This feels like a very critical election for Europe. Having someone like Le Pen in charge, guess it's a lot like Trump....we don't really know what will happen. Assume the worst, hope for meh.

i feel so sick thinking about the whole thing - am so worried... even dreaming about it, statistics and everything and waking up exhausted haha going to be a tough few weeks...

my best outcome would be Melenchon, obviously, but maybe i am too naive wanting to believe that a better, fairer world is possible...

i could live with Macron, but meh it would be same old same old, but Fillon in particular could do untold damage to the French healthcare system and would tear public services apart... Le Pen, well i would be devastated and would cry for France and feel something has gone horribly wrong with the country i love and believe in, Liberte Fraternite Egalite
 
Last edited:
i think it's between 50-55% depending, Obama i think getting the highest turnouts.

i'm wondering what's preventing this 45% from not voting. apathy? ignorance? depression? ennui? working 3 jobs? entitlement that someone hasn't personally massaged their feet in order to win their vote?

i do think part of the problem is the Tuesday thing -- young people work, retirees do not.

but, honestly, with early voting more and more of a thing and the inescapable bombardment of the 24/7 news cycle in all aspects of life, how does one not vote? at least in such large numbers?

- voting on Tuesday as opposed to a weekend (as you've pointed out)

- voting in November which can present gross weather in parts of the country (if you're not inclined to vote already, are you going to stand outside in pouring rain and 45 degrees?)

- early voting in my experience tends to attract serious voters who would vote anyway and want to make sure their votes are recorded or want to avoid line ups. Nobody who is on the fence or a voter who will decide on voting day whether to haul ass to their precinct is going to bother voting early.

- elections in the US are way too long so election fatigue is a big issue. The problem is too much $ goes into elections which leads to too many ads, commercials, signs, flyers, etc. People just can't wait for it to end.

- the president in the US does not actually have a lot of power to get things done so few people believe (s)he can bring about meaningful change while nearly everybody believes that Congress is obstructionist.

- gerrymandering is poison. You need to have an independent electoral commission to draw real and fair district lines. This should be one of the main priorities going forward. Even a greatly increased turnout would not be able to make a material change in a lot of cases when it comes to Congressional seats.

- term limits should be introduced in Congress, yet another broken promise of Trump's. This was lauded here by oregorepizza as revolutionary but of course we all knew it would never happen.

- apathy - if you don't vote when you're 18 or 22 or 26 because you're not interested, then you've built up no history of voting so it's easy to see once you get into your 40s you don't even consider it to be a conceivable option. That's why it's important to get people to vote as young as they can, before you're looking at a middle aged person who has NEVER been politically engaged on any level. Those people are basically lost causes.

-talk radio, this is related to the above point as it drives apathy. Talk radio is basically 99% controlled by right wing lunatics who command the airwaves across the country, even in districts that would surprise you. They have spent the better part of the last couple of decades convincing everybody that the system is broken beyond repair, that the government hates freedom and the American way, that the President is their enemy (whoever he may be, these people hated W for a good portion of his term and do now), that the establishment is not worth voting for, etc. This has resulted in large populations of brainwashed non-voters. Why the hell would you vote if your fearless leader Rush Limbaugh is telling you that it's all for naught?

- running positive elections. The Republicans have always made fun of Obama for his "hopey changey" message but the reality is that it works. You're not voting somebody OFF the island, you're voting FOR somebody. That requires incentive and you to be sold on the idea. When you have two candidates slinging mud, running fear-based campaigns, etc, you will maybe run up the turnout of the super devoted (like Trump fans) but you will also make many people sit out. Obama was a once-in-a-generation candidate in this respect, the Republicans can suck on their sour grapes.
 
There's always room for more douchebags at Fox News!

exactly. He was an arrogant a-hole, but far from as ideologically hidebound as one might possibly now get. The devil you know...

I doubt Carslon will last long, he comes across as the spoiled prep school d-bag that got pounded every day in the schoolyard. And neither likeable nor funny.
 
A lot of the states with large populations are also, for the most part, states that are non competitive.

13 million people voted for President in California. 18 million people are registered, 38 million in the state. That's 48% of the population. Only 26% of population is under 18... So 26% who don't even bother to vote.

23 million people who could vote didn't. In California alone.

How many of those people would choose differently if the state mattered?
 
It's hard to separate what's real vs what's bullshit. The Trump's are absolutely tied to Russia. So are a lot of people. Russia absolutely hacked our election, but was it with collusion? Or was the Trump campaign simply too stupid to realize they were patsys?

If there's a smoking gun​ out there I hope it presents itself soon. Otherwise we need to get onto 2018 and 2020.
 
- gerrymandering is poison. You need to have an independent electoral commission to draw real and fair district lines. This should be one of the main priorities going forward. Even a greatly increased turnout would not be able to make a material change in a lot of cases when it comes to Congressional seats.

Strongly agree. It's unfortunate that gerrymandering so clearly benefits one party at the House level right now, which makes what should be a fairly common-sense reform impossible.
 
hey Vlad, off-topic, but what do you think about Melenchon doing so well in the polls right now? it's looking like a 4-horse race into the 1st round... i am so pleasantly surprised and, if i had a vote, would 100% vote for him... seeing so much support for him among my friends and he has a huge following among young people - will be an interesting weekend - really hoping he gets through to the next round... would restore some faith in humanity :lol:

I'm pretty excited to say the least. From what I've seen and read, his campaign has been very effective, he makes a strong effort to connect through his regular YouTube videos, he's excelled at the debates, and was willing to innovate a bit (the hologram idea was that quite brilliant in my opinion). He's got a massive chance here although even if he wins he'll be pushing shit uphill because of his being a staunch leftist. It'll mean a lot having a leftist in power of a large European country.

Also, how good was Fiscal Kombat! Such a fun little game.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom