Cont: President Trump: Part 3

[acbytesla]

In the opinion of the GOP, it's a desirable feature, not a bug.

People overseas should not be mooching off the U.S. taxpayer. Unless they can pay for their research, or pay the U.S. to carry out research on their behalf then they deserve to die in the same way as the additional 24 million who will fail to have insurance under the GOP ACA replacement.

Is this supposed to be sarcasm?

 

[acbytesla]

It's a *********** creep on top of the staggering incompetence.

But we knew that long before he was elected. For the life of me, I can't see what anyone sees in this turd. Hell Trump is such a scumbag a turd would be a step up. When do people wake up to the fact that this man is a low life?

 

[elgarak]

This probably isn't that far off. The Orange Hair probably went into the meeting thinking he was going to own the meeting and ended up getting schooled my Merkel. She is a formidable intellect and politician and he's not the first male counterpart she's put in their place.

That's the thing about her: In public, she appears as this polite, timid, friendly grandmother. But given how many (mostly male) counterparts come out of closed door negotiations cut down to size, she must be a hard core negotiator who's mostly excellently prepared. Which means rather good intelligence (the secret service kind. The other one, too, but I don't mean it here).

And, yes, I think 45 went into the meeting pushing hard for trade negotiations thinking he got the upper hand all the way (a woman? Out of teeny tiny Germany? How hard can it be?), but evidently she was able to stop him dead in his tracks before he even started.

 

[Babbylonian]

But we knew that long before he was elected. For the life of me, I can't see what anyone sees in this turd. Hell Trump is such a scumbag a turd would be a step up. When do people wake up to the fact that this man is a low life?

Another potential reason it looks so miserable sitting with Chancellor Merkel is that it can't stand spending any significant amount of time with a woman to whom it's not sexually attracted. It is, after all, a notorious misogynist.

 

[Stacko]

That's the thing about her: In public, she appears as this polite, timid, friendly grandmother. But given how many (mostly male) counterparts come out of closed door negotiations cut down to size, she must be a hard core negotiator who's mostly excellently prepared. Which means rather good intelligence (the secret service kind. The other one, too, but I don't mean it here).

And, yes, I think 45 went into the meeting pushing hard for trade negotiations thinking he got the upper hand all the way (a woman? Out of teeny tiny Germany? How hard can it be?), but evidently she was able to stop him dead in his tracks before he even started.

How has nobody explained to him yet that that there are no "dues" for the NATO club. Rather, each member agrees to spend 2% of GDP on defense.

 

[The Don]

Is this supposed to be sarcasm?

It's my assessment of the mood of the GOP in general and President Trump and his inner circle in particular.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

It is a recognition of systemic racism in our justice system? Like how black teens don't smoke marijuana at a higher rate than white teens but they get arrested and charged with it at a much higher rate. So not more apt to criminal behavior but more likely to have criminal convictions.

Well, I wouldn't call that a negative stereotype of black people. As you say, it's simple recognition of negative racial bias in an institution.

Though I think very very few trump supporters would make such an argument.

Of course.

I suppose it's possible that the higher conviction rate for equivalent crime rate is what drives some people to erroneously form a negative opinion of blacks. These people could fall under the "redeemable" category if their opinion could be swayed by the existing research.

But there are no doubt plenty who use that unfortunate fact to justify or rationalize their preexisting opinion.

Is this supposed to be sarcasm?

I think The Don is just expressing what he believes is the conservative attitude toward government research spending.

 

[elgarak]

How has nobody explained to him yet that that there are no "dues" for the NATO club. Rather, each member agrees to spend 2% of GDP on defense.

...in 2024...

It's a goal that the countries agreed to strive for. Not a current requirement.

 

[The Don]

Trump and his administration are weaving their magic at the G20 summit:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39315098

G20 ministers left the two-day meeting without renewing their long-standing pledge to bolster free trade.

Last year, the group of the world's 20 largest economies vowed to "resist all forms of protectionism".

But since then, President Donald Trump has taken office, and is aggressively pursuing an "America First" policy.

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schauble said the meeting had reached an impasse when it came to the issue, and added that his counterparts could not "force partners" - read the United States - "to go along with wording with which they don't agree".

Mr Schauble insisted that there had been "a lot of goodwill" at the meeting, but whether that goodwill extends to the future trade relationship with the world's largest economy is now very much in doubt.

IMO the U.S. needs to be careful not to **** everyone else in the G20 off too much.


Interesting article on the effects of protectionism:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38731812

For example, there was an outcry in 2012 when cheap Chinese tyres flooded into the US market, putting the viability of the domestic producers in question.

President Obama responded with punitive tariffs to get China "to play by the rules".

The protectionist measures were well received in the US, but a study by the Peterson Institute established that the tariffs meant US consumers paid $1.1bn more for their tyres in 2011.

Each job that was saved effectively cost $900,000 with very little of that reaching the pockets of the workers.

 

[Craig4]

That's the thing about her: In public, she appears as this polite, timid, friendly grandmother. But given how many (mostly male) counterparts come out of closed door negotiations cut down to size, she must be a hard core negotiator who's mostly excellently prepared. Which means rather good intelligence (the secret service kind. The other one, too, but I don't mean it here).

And, yes, I think 45 went into the meeting pushing hard for trade negotiations thinking he got the upper hand all the way (a woman? Out of teeny tiny Germany? How hard can it be?), but evidently she was able to stop him dead in his tracks before he even started.

The Local reported before the trip that Germany shut down the administration when they bought up a separate trade deal, telling the US, "you've come to the wrong address, you need to talk to the EU". If The Hair tried to engage on that, I'm sure Merkel didn't even entertain the discussion.

 

[Bob001]

A number of commentators contend that Obama should sue Trump over the wiretapping accusations. It's hard for a public figure to win a libel suit, but falsely accusing an official of a serious crime and abuse of power "with reckless disregard for the truth" could certainly qualify. A case would likely take years to resolve, during which it would hang over both men's heads. Should Obama sue?

 

[BobTheCoward]

...in 2024...

It's a goal that the countries agreed to strive for. Not a current requirement.

A Target year agreed to in 2014 because they failed to comply so often since 2006.

 

[Bob001]

.....
And, yes, I think 45 went into the meeting pushing hard for trade negotiations thinking he got the upper hand all the way (a woman? Out of teeny tiny Germany? How hard can it be?), but evidently she was able to stop him dead in his tracks before he even started.

The underlying issue is that since childhood, Trump has been surrounded by people who were willing to believe whatever he says and give him whatever he wants. Hearing "No!" is a new and novel experience for him.

 

[Babbylonian]

A number of commentators contend that Obama should sue Trump over the wiretapping accusations. It's hard for a public figure to win a libel suit, but falsely accusing an official of a serious crime and abuse of power "with reckless disregard for the truth" could certainly qualify. A case would likely take years to resolve, during which it would hang over both men's heads. Should Obama sue?

Nope. It would be too easy to paint it as a partisan political exercise, despite the truth that vigorously opposing the current occupant of the Oval Office is the patriotic thing to do no matter where one resides on the political spectrum.

 

[acbytesla]

It's my assessment of the mood of the GOP in general and President Trump and his inner circle in particular.

I don't believe that. Trump's budget is dead on arrival. The Republican party is not monolithic. It's going to be interesting to see how much or how little the Trump administration will accomplish. I don't expect it to be much.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Oh give him a break! The hand isn't the part of a woman he usually grabs. He got confused.
Actually he shook her hand, if you look at the video real closely you will see, his hands are just too small to notice at first glance.

It's so bizarre, after the assault on the Japanese PM during the handshake. And Trump shook Merkel's hand when she arrived and at the end of the press conference. Clearly he was being a pouty little boy for some reason there in the chair photo-op.

 

[Darat]

A number of commentators contend that Obama should sue Trump over the wiretapping accusations. It's hard for a public figure to win a libel suit, but falsely accusing an official of a serious crime and abuse of power "with reckless disregard for the truth" could certainly qualify. A case would likely take years to resolve, during which it would hang over both men's heads. Should Obama sue?

It sounds like (from what Trump and his team have said) that Obama would have grounds, but if Obama did want to take further action I would say he should aim for a formal apology.

 

[The Don]

I don't believe that. Trump's budget is dead on arrival. The Republican party is not monolithic. It's going to be interesting to see how much or how little the Trump administration will accomplish. I don't expect it to be much.

The biggest opposition to the health bill comes from the right of the party - it's not harsh enough - not that it deprives too many of coverage. There are a small number of GOP moderates that hold the latter view but the vast majority of the GOP either seem happy with Trumpcare or Ryancare or Wedontcare or don't think it goes far enough.

IIRC the GOP has been trying to reduce funding for overseas aid for Obama's entire Presidency.

So reducing medical research from which people overseas would benefit seems right in the wheelhouse of the current GOP. Sure there may be some dissent but nothing major.

 

[acbytesla]

A number of commentators contend that Obama should sue Trump over the wiretapping accusations. It's hard for a public figure to win a libel suit, but falsely accusing an official of a serious crime and abuse of power "with reckless disregard for the truth" could certainly qualify. A case would likely take years to resolve, during which it would hang over both men's heads. Should Obama sue?

I have mixed feelings about that. There is no question in my mind that Trump defamed the former president. George W's former ethics lawyer thinks That Obama definitely has a case because it is clear that Trump was reckless.

I had been thinking 'no'. But I'm thinking Obama should do it if for no other reason then to keep making Trump look like a fool. Trump has said many times that we should make the libel laws tougher. That it shouldn't be OK to write something false about others and get away with it. (He just wasn't talking about himself. I think he believes he should be the exception)

 

[acbytesla]

The biggest opposition to the health bill comes from the right of the party - it's not harsh enough - not that it deprives too many of coverage. There are a small number of GOP moderates that hold the latter view but the vast majority of the GOP either seem happy with Trumpcare or Ryancare or Wedontcare or don't think it goes far enough.

IIRC the GOP has been trying to reduce funding for overseas aid for Obama's entire Presidency.

So reducing medical research from which people overseas would benefit seems right in the wheelhouse of the current GOP. Sure there may be some dissent but nothing major.

The problem is that research protects all Americans. Yes, I agree, the GOP tends to think that foreign aid is a waste. What politicians care most about is being reelected and Trump's budget probably hurts their chances.