Cont: The Trump Presidency: Part 22

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trump Tweets

Tremendous sincerity, what a guy. Hard to believe, with this kind of political talent, his numbers would “tank” so badly in Utah!
Quote Tweet

Hannah Natanson
@hannah_natanson
@MittRomney is marching with a group of nearly 1,000 Christians to the White House. Here he is on video saying why he’s walking: “... to make sure that people understand that Black Lives Matter” twitter.com/hannah_natanso…

Most recent Utah state poll at 538 was almost a month ago, with Trump just +3 in a deep red state. Next Utah poll should be interesting.
 

Attachments

  • utah.jpg
    utah.jpg
    35 KB · Views: 18
I suspect that Trump will never spend a day behind bars. It's too big a leap to put an ex-President in jail.

<snip>


I know where you're coming from and, sadly, I expect you're right.

But there is still a glimmer of hope. The Trump has managed to be the first to do any number of things that nobody ever expected from a POTUS.

With luck, perhaps this will be another. With even better luck, dying of old age behind bars will be his last.

Couldn't happen to a better fellow.
 
They are 9 of 13 Council members who are, imo, overreacting and unrealistic. Dismantle the existing department if it's rife with bad apples, hire new officers with new training, and add programs geared toward violence prevention and community services. But anyone who thinks social workers and medics are going to respond to an armed robbery or a report of a sniper shooting up a store is nuts.

This idea is beginning to take hold, and it is nuts. Radical reform of the police may well emerge and be better than what we have, but force - and lethal force - must always be a possibility, failing the arrival of utopia. The hard problem is to figure out how to contain the abuse of lethal force, given the history of racism in the US.
 
Trump Tweets

LAW & ORDER, NOT DEFUND AND ABOLISH THE POLICE. The Radical Left Democrats have gone Crazy!
I really have to wonder....

Twitter put a warning on a previous Trump post when he lied about voter fraud. Why haven't they labeled this particular tweet as containing incorrect information too?
 
Pushback from allies since Trump thugs attacked peaceful protesters. New entries in blue:

Pat Robertson
Mattis
Esper
Mike Mullen, former Chairman of Joint Chiefs
John Kelly
Gen. John Allen (ret)
Murkowski
Romney
George Bush
Colin Powell
NFL/Goodell

Majority of REPUBLICANS disapprove of how protests handled
Polls trending poorly
 
This discourse is starting to shift hard into what I've always thought of as the Anarchist's "We don't want a government, we just want a community with certain people who response to certain things and fufill certain roles for the good of the community" fallacy.

The distinction between tearing the system down and just renaming the parts is pretty much gone at this point.
 
This idea is beginning to take hold, and it is nuts. Radical reform of the police may well emerge and be better than what we have, but force - and lethal force - must always be a possibility, failing the arrival of utopia. The hard problem is to figure out how to contain the abuse of lethal force, given the history of racism in the US.

I think if you look below the surface, that is acknowledged. But sending an armed presence to almost every interaction between the government and the public is not productive. An armed response should be reserved for the times that it is actually required. And the literature and studies show this to be true not just in jolly old England, but also in the US of AR-15.
 
I really have to wonder....

Twitter put a warning on a previous Trump post when he lied about voter fraud. Why haven't they labeled this particular tweet as containing incorrect information too?

Those who want serious police reform are in a pickle. They have to persuade other progressives and simple phrases like "Defund the Police" and "Abolish the Police" are useful for that purpose, but they lack the nuance that these plans involve. They are uniformly negative and don't include the positive aspects of providing alternate solutions to social problems.

As a result, they are easily abused by the conservatives. Abolish the Police sounds utterly insane, much more insane than the actual plans that involve a different form of law enforcement combined with significant social programs. Trump has an easy attack here. Focus on the slogan, not the plan. The slogan sounds asinine by itself.
 
I think if you look below the surface, that is acknowledged. But sending an armed presence to almost every interaction between the government and the public is not productive. An armed response should be reserved for the times that it is actually required. And the literature and studies show this to be true not just in jolly old England, but also in the US of AR-15.

Yeah well when you figure out how to counter a bajillion "Well my pappy was a police officer back on 74 and he was shot just making a simple stop on the side of the road" anecdotes let us know.
 
Yeah noboody seems to be saying that we should totally getting rid of the police, but we keep talking about it because a lot of people keep looking at it and wiggling their eyebrows suggestively.
See this:
"Several of us on the council are working on finding out what it would take to disband the MPD and start fresh with a community-oriented, non-violent public safety and outreach capacity," Fletcher tweeted.
Whether a non-violent safety force is considered to be police or not, not having anyone authorized to use force to maintain public safety seems to be effectively the same as not having police, as that is the function that they are solely authorized to do.

Police reform is not up to the task of keeping Americans safe, said Alex Vitale, a sociologist at Brooklyn College and author of "The End of Policing." Instead, police departments must be defunded and eventually abolished, he said.

From https://www.insider.com/minneapolis-city-council-members-look-to-disband-police-department-2020-6
 
Even then, I wouldn't be shocked if a GOP majority senate didn't suddenly decide that a supermajority would be required for appointments (and to change that rule back) if there was a risk of a Democrat President and Senate.
I have wondered about that.

I'm not that familiar enough with Senate procedures (and the wording on the rules is difficult for me to wade through.) Can anyone explain (in simple terms) why the Senate cannot just say on the last day of their term "Ok, Supermajority rules" now? (Not that it would prevent an incoming Democratic senate from re-imposing the nuclear option, except for perhaps political embarrasment.)
 
I think if you look below the surface, that is acknowledged. But sending an armed presence to almost every interaction between the government and the public is not productive. An armed response should be reserved for the times that it is actually required. And the literature and studies show this to be true not just in jolly old England, but also in the US of AR-15.
Agreed.
 
Trump Tweets

96% Approval Rating in the Republican Party. Thank you!

The Lamestream Media refuses to talk about our Country’s record setting Jobs Numbers, which are indicating GREATNESS, and soon!

CNN Polls are as Fake as their Reporting. Same numbers, and worse, against Crooked Hillary. The Dems would destroy America!

It's amazing that shutting the country down and then opening back up would lead to a big spike in job numbers.
 
Trump Tweets

Big day for Stock Market. Smart money, and the World, know that we are heading in the right direction. Jobs coming back FAST. Next year will be our greatest ever!


This year has seen the lowest crime numbers in our Country’s recorded history, and now the Radical Left Democrats want to Defund and Abandon our Police. Sorry, I want LAW & ORDER!
 
Last edited:
Pushback from allies since Trump thugs attacked peaceful protesters. New entries in blue:

Pat Robertson
Mattis
Esper
Mike Mullen, former Chairman of Joint Chiefs
John Kelly
Gen. John Allen (ret)
Murkowski
Romney
George Bush
Colin Powell
NFL/Goodell

Majority of REPUBLICANS disapprove of how protests handled
Polls trending poorly

I believe they'll still support Trump's reelection and any policies Trump pushes.
 
This discourse is starting to shift hard into what I've always thought of as the Anarchist's "We don't want a government, we just want a community with certain people who response to certain things and fufill certain roles for the good of the community" fallacy.

The distinction between tearing the system down and just renaming the parts is pretty much gone at this point.

“De-funding the police” is every bit as silly when the anarchists advocate it as it is when libertarians advocate it. The difference is that when left wing anarchists propose defunding (as opposed to reforming how policing functions), mainstream democrats are usually critical of it, when libertarians propose it mainstream Republicans talk about how wonderful small government is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom