The Trump Presidency VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
TofuFighter said:
Perhaps I did not word it properly. I wasn't referring to the democratic party being beaten in elections. I'm saying that if you allow yourself, personally, to descend to his level you've already lost. It's been argued here that it's worth doing that if it means getting rid of him. That sounds to me something like the equivalent of justifying the use of torture as a means of preserving national security. A subversion of principles for a higher cause.

I think you can and should achieve beating Trump without becoming him.
Click to expand...

Getting rid of him as the result of investigations is not stooping to his level. Neither is being honest about how despicable and loathsome Trump is qualifies as stooping to his level. Frankly, the level Trump operates on is subterranean and one would have to do more than stoop to get down there in the sewer with him.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Perhaps more to the point - nobody posting anything here is going to have even the tiniest bit of influence in whether or not Trump stays in office.
Click to expand...

(You could take that up with Craig4)
Craig4 said:
I'm willing to forego principals for the good of my country.
Click to expand...

From a purely technical standpoint, your statement is incorrect. Some here will vote in the next general elections. Some, like SpanishEddie (not his actual name* could be crazyeddie (also, not really), or RockerEddie - one of our more level-headed posters, republican, and disillusioned by Trump's antics), can, have and will write letters of complaint to their elected representatives about him. I'm not entirely clear why it matters whether people here will have influence or not, but that's not really what this conversation is about.

The "hey, our president calls people names, why shouldn't we?" argument is self-defeating. There's really only cheap gratification in it.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
Getting rid of him as the result of investigations is not stooping to his level. Neither is being honest about how despicable and loathsome Trump is qualifies as stooping to his level. Frankly, the level Trump operates on is subterranean and one would have to do more than stoop to get down there in the sewer with him.
Click to expand...

I really don't think you'll be able to find a post where i've suggested that any of those aren't true.
Being honest about how despicable and loathsome he is starts to tread a subjective path, and part of what i'm referring to is that people who go down that path sometimes get carried away.
 
TofuFighter said:
I really don't think you'll be able to find a post where i've suggested that any of those aren't true.
Being honest about how despicable and loathsome he is starts to tread a subjective path, and part of what i'm referring to is that people who go down that path sometimes get carried away.
Click to expand...

Its not really subjective. If I were to tell you about the actions and words of such an individual that person would be judged by the great majority of people with similar terms. Objectively Trump is loathsome and despicable. People are simply being dishonest with themselves.
 
acbytesla said:
Its not really subjective. If I were to tell you about the actions and words of such an individual that person would be judged by the great majority of people with similar terms. Objectively Trump is loathsome and despicable. People are simply being dishonest with themselves.
Click to expand...

By your own argument you've shown that it is subjective. Loathing and contempt are inherently subjective emotions. People can find certain aspects of him despicable and not loathe him overall.

I understand your point, and I understand that many people find it mind boggling that anyone wouldn't find him loathsome and despicable, but the fact remains that some simply do not. whether it's dishonest or not isn't relevant to it being subjective.

I have to go. I'm sounding more like Bob by the minute.
 
Crazy busy day. More stories:

Trump siding with Russia on Crimea against G6:

President Trump reportedly questioned the reasoning behind NATO's opposition to Russia's annexation of Crimea and appeared to defend Russia's explanation for the move during conversations with world leaders at the Group of Seven summit last weekend.

Two diplomatic sources told BuzzFeed News that Trump told world leaders over dinner that Crimea was part of Russia because most of its population speaks the Russian language, adding that the president appeared to question why world leaders had sided with Ukraine over Russia.

"Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries in the world," the president said, according to one source.
Click to expand...

Linky.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders goes full idiot:

Sanders said she wasn't familiar with the comments made by Attorney General Sessions before countering that "it is very Biblical to enforce the law." She then insulted Acosta's intelligence before blaming Democrats for refusing to close the "legal loopholes" that enabled the administration's new policy.
Click to expand...

Linky.

I don't want to see any more sympathy for her.
 
Minoosh said:
She's right, GOP complacency would be bad. But the second part? Is she warning GOP members of Congress who might be tempted to criticize Trump?
Click to expand...

Don't those congresspeople get that all Criticism of The Leader is forbidden?
 
Segnosaur said:
It used to be that working in the white house could be a career boost... something to proudly put on your resume. Now? Not so much.

From: https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/po...-less-boost/BSNVmebfnTFzjzoxB77bII/story.html
The big corporations where jobs come with mid-six-figure salaries have largely avoided the top tier of former Trump staffers. One company that picked a former top Trump aide to be its chief executive tried to paper over the association, leaving the word “Trump” off the press release when announcing the hire.
Click to expand...

No secret that most US business leaders have a low opinion of Trump as a businessman...that is naturally going to extend to anybody who worked for Trump.
Not to mention you don't want to hire an exec who might be facng severe legal problems...
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
...
Trump siding with Russia on Crimea against G6:

Linky.
...
Click to expand...
Technically, both claims are objectively true:
1. Crimea's population does indeed mostly speak Russian and identifies culturally as Russian. Had a proper, lawful and democratic process been undertaken for Crimea to determine its future, Scotland-style perhaps, there'd be little doubt that a solid majority would have voted to join Russia
2. Ukraine is consistently ranker among the most corrupt countries in Europe. Few Ukraineans would disagree.

These facts of course do not excuse the annexation: a proper process would take care of minority rights, would involve contracts to disentangle economic ties, and take a fee years, not weeks.
Also, Russia is of course corrupt, too, and so is Trump, so the claim is doubly hypocritical.
 
TofuFighter said:
(You could take that up with Craig4)


From a purely technical standpoint, your statement is incorrect. Some here will vote in the next general elections. Some, like SpanishEddie (not his actual name* could be crazyeddie (also, not really), or RockerEddie - one of our more level-headed posters, republican, and disillusioned by Trump's antics), can, have and will write letters of complaint to their elected representatives about him. I'm not entirely clear why it matters whether people here will have influence or not, but that's not really what this conversation is about.

The "hey, our president calls people names, why shouldn't we?" argument is self-defeating. There's really only cheap gratification in it.
Click to expand...

It can't just be random name calling. To dehumanize him in the eyes of independent voters it's got to be supportable (ie the Russian whore) epithet and repeated. It would make any sense to mock Trump about things he's not vulnerable on. Trump isn't smart to memes of him looking stupid with a message "Trump, too stupid to be president" would be useful. You want people to complete the sentence in their minds because the images match the message and they hear it a lot. Photo shopping Trump in prostitute clothes next to Putin would be good too because there are questions about him and Putin and that's a funny and humiliating way to raise those questions. It makes him less than human, like a character he's playing.
 
Oystein said:
Technically, both claims are objectively true:
1. Crimea's population does indeed mostly speak Russian and identifies culturally as Russian. Had a proper, lawful and democratic process been undertaken for Crimea to determine its future, Scotland-style perhaps, there'd be little doubt that a solid majority would have voted to join Russia
Click to expand...

That, of course, is because Stalin forcefully evicted the locals and forcefully relocated Russians there to replace them.
 
Let me say the hubbub over the saluting of the N Korean general by Trump is a tempest in a teacup.

1) It’s apparently customary to return a military salute out of politeness, and rude not to.

2) I doubt that Trump knows a lot about military protocol, and probably did it reflexively.

Sure, Trump berated Obama for bowing, which is very similar. But it’s probably best to keep one’s righteous outrage saved for the many, many, many things that really deserve it.
 
And did you feel the same about Obama's infamous OMG bow? He bowed to a Muslim, against all Christianity, blah blah blah.

As for the reflex, Trump was an idiot. He ignored what the diplomats on the team told him. He reached out to shake hands, the NK general saluted, Trump saluted about the same time the general reached out to shake hands.

Not a big deal (except for the right wing hypocrisy, IMO) but it looks like they were both awkward.
 
Last edited:
Fast Eddie B said:
Let me say the hubbub over the saluting of the N Korean general by Trump is a tempest in a teacup.

1) It’s apparently customary to return a military salute out of politeness, and rude not to.
Click to expand...

No it's not if you aren't in the military

2) I doubt that Trump knows a lot about military protocol, and probably did it reflexively.

Sure, Trump berated Obama for bowing, which is very similar. But it’s probably best to keep one’s righteous outrage saved for the many, many, many things that really deserve it.
Click to expand...

Trump isn't in the military. Why did he salute a foreign officer?

He is C in C of US forces and can return a salute from US military.

Why doesn't he know this protocol, he is the president?
 
Fast Eddie B said:
Let me say the hubbub over the saluting of the N Korean general by Trump is a tempest in a teacup.
Click to expand...
I agree, it is.

Fast Eddie B said:
1) It’s apparently customary to return a military salute out of politeness, and rude not to.
Click to expand...
No it isn't customary for a head of state to salute a general of your own nation let alone that of another. But I don't care. He blew it. I could care less about that. I do think the summit was in fact a joke and Trump failed miserably.
Fast Eddie B said:
2) I doubt that Trump knows a lot about military protocol, and probably did it reflexively.
Click to expand...
Probably from his time in a school that pretended to military in nature.
Fast Eddie B said:
Sure, berated Obama for bowing, which is very similar. But it’s probably best to keep one’s righteous outrage saved for the many, many, many things that really deserve it.
Click to expand...
I could have cared less, but the moron should learn.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom