The Trump/Putin summit predictions thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am not sure how my thread on the Non-USA politics thread about the Trump-Putin Helsinki Summit has been transferred to US politics, when - hello? - Europe and Russia are still separate. I note Trump's visit to the UK is still in Non-USA politics, so presumably non-USA simply means 'British'.

So I am out.
 
acbytesla said:
No effing way does Trump get reelected. He's gone January 20, 2001 at the latest. I see him getting his ass kicked in the next election or resigning before then or gagging on some KFC or having a heart attack.
Click to expand...


I'd love I could share your optimism. So far it's Ronald McDonald the one most likely to take Trump out of the way.
 
acbytesla said:
Remember the details. Trump LOST the popular vote by 3 million votes. Flip 150K votes in 3 states and Hillary would be President. Trump won by driving down Clinton turnout in selected states, not by promoting himself. The GOP took 3 years of bogus investigations on emails and Ben Ghazzi to turn Hillary into the wicked witch. They will have 6 months at most this time.

There won't be voter apathy. It's going to be a wide open field and who gets nominated will make a huge difference. I also wouldn't be shocked to see a Kennedy running.

I'm not counting my chickens. But Trump is hated much much more than he is loved. And that idiot won't turn that around.
Click to expand...

This time Trump will be able to campaign by using executive orders. Especially if the Democratic party took partial or total control of the Congress next November, even using for that independents and some rogue Republican elements.

Trump would declare that Dems stalled his initiatives and blame on them the incipient economical crisis that will begin by the end of this year owing to the way Trump screwed up every sane economical measure taken by Obama plus the short effect of protectionism and the like. Then he'll take some decisions by ukase, no matter those decisions will be reverted by the courts after the 2020 elections, and those ukases will have the great public singing "monorail! monorail! monorail!".

Never underestimate the ability of an authoritarian leader to use the machinery of the government itself to win a campaign, no matter what solid and noble national traditions you may think there are in place.
 
Trebuchet said:
Biden, like Trump and Clinton, is too damn old. Hell, he's even older than me!
As for Duckworth, I'll vote for her every day of the week, but you are being far too kind to the Trumpistas. They'll claim she's not a natural born citizen. They'll hate her for not being white. They'll say she's a Communist/Socialist/Buddhist/Muslim who hates America. They'll Swift-Boat the hell out of her. I want a hero who DIDN'T get wounded! Truth means NOTHING to these people. And I use that last word rather loosely.
Click to expand...

Oh I don't doubt that, but as I said, it's VERY difficult to legitimately attack an individual who shows the scars of her heroic actions daily in the form of two artificial legs and a wheelchair and not be roundly criticized or even flat out verbally attacked by pretty much EVERYONE else on both sides of the political spectrum. I'm more than positive they could legitimately attack her voting record, and yeah, they'd probably go after her for being Asian American (although that is rather hard to make stick when, again, she's a disabled vet with TWO amputated legs, since there is little considered more American than fighting and being injured in war), but I would defy anyone to attack her for her military record and her disabled veteran status and NOT get their butt handed to them.

I really wish she would run; I think she's exactly what is needed. She's younger than most politicians, she's a war hero, she's a woman, and she's Asian American, any or all of which would be enough to rally Democrats to support her vigorously, and probably a decent percentage of Independents as well.
 
aleCcowaN said:
This time Trump will be able to campaign by using executive orders. Especially if the Democratic party took partial or total control of the Congress next November, even using for that independents and some rogue Republican elements.

Trump would declare that Dems stalled his initiatives and blame on them the incipient economical crisis that will begin by the end of this year owing to the way Trump screwed up every sane economical measure taken by Obama plus the short effect of protectionism and the like. Then he'll take some decisions by ukase, no matter those decisions will be reverted by the courts after the 2020 elections, and those ukases will have the great public singing "monorail! monorail! monorail!".

Never underestimate the ability of an authoritarian leader to use the machinery of the government itself to win a campaign, no matter what solid and noble national traditions you may think there are in place.
Click to expand...

He's gonna try and blame the Democrats. Hell he's been doing that non-stop. And you make some valid points. But I am convinced that crazy isn't elected a second time. Trump has ZERO credibility with 50 percent of America and is adored by 28 to 35 percent. Trump on his best day is a 40 percent President.

Now, can he find a way to rig the election? We will see. I'm optimistic that while he might try, he will fail.
 
Stacyhs said:
I like Elizabeth Warren and Corey Booker.
But I can see the whole "Pocahontas" bit blow up again.
Click to expand...
From what I've seen, I like Booker myself (seems well spoken, while he holds left wing views he recognizes the importance of business). But, he is also unmarried, and I can see the Republican/Russian spin machine suggesting that his lack of a spouse is because he is gay (which of course would be used as a distraction during any election.) Unfair, but that's politics.
 
aleCcowaN said:
I'd love I could share your optimism. So far it's Ronald McDonald the one most likely to take Trump out of the way.
Click to expand...

I understand the pessimism. We are 3 months away from the mid-terms. We can cut our wrists together after then.
 
Segnosaur said:
From what I've seen, I like Booker myself (seems well spoken, while he holds left wing views he recognizes the importance of business). But, he is also unmarried, and I can see the Republican/Russian spin machine suggesting that his lack of a spouse is because he is gay (which of course would be used as a distraction during any election.) Unfair, but that's politics.
Click to expand...

I like both of them. A lot. But I'm a little concerned about running a minority in the next election. Some of my favorite candidates are just getting too long in the tooth. I saw Kerry on Face the Nation and he still seems sharp and I thought he would destroy Trump. But he's 3 years older than Trump. Warren Biden, Clinton Sanders are all in their mid 70s by that time.

We could really use some youth. It would be a stark contrast. But then you are battling the experience question. Booker, Duckworth, Joe Kennedy, Kane, I want articulate, smart and vibrant. Kane doesn't seem to be a killer campaigner but he's smart. Kennedy would be 38. He could run laps around Trump until Trump had a heart attack.
 
Segnosaur said:
From what I've seen, I like Booker myself (seems well spoken, while he holds left wing views he recognizes the importance of business). But, he is also unmarried, and I can see the Republican/Russian spin machine suggesting that his lack of a spouse is because he is gay (which of course would be used as a distraction during any election.) Unfair, but that's politics.
Click to expand...

The right would just spotlight their homophobia by doing that. They could no longer deny it if they made an issue of it.
 
Stacyhs said:
From what I've seen, I like Booker myself (seems well spoken, while he holds left wing views he recognizes the importance of business). But, he is also unmarried, and I can see the Republican/Russian spin machine suggesting that his lack of a spouse is because he is gay (which of course would be used as a distraction during any election.) Unfair, but that's politics.
Click to expand...
The right would just spotlight their homophobia by doing that. They could no longer deny it if they made an issue of it.
Click to expand...
Ummm... we're talking about republicans here... The party of the evangelical Christians (and all the lying that comes with that). The party headed by Donald "Grab 'em" Trump. I'm sure they have absolutely no problem with any sort of Bigotry (including homophobia).

Plus, I'm sure the republicans/Russians would do their best to provide at least some plausible deniability. Russian spam-bots would bring up the suggestion of homosexuality, and Trump would make statements that were veiled enough ("Who's Booker going to take to state dinners?") without outright using the word "gay".

End result: Much like Trump managed to get the support of bigots on his side (without them claiming "we're supporting Trump because we're bigots"), the end result will be plenty of people letting their bigotry guide them in their votes.
 
acbytesla said:
We could really use some youth. It would be a stark contrast. But then you are battling the experience question. Booker, Duckworth, Joe Kennedy, Kane, I want articulate, smart and vibrant.
Click to expand...
They need someone in the "Obama zone".... someone with ~1 term in congress (or as a gov) with some knowledge and experience in how government works (so they don't foul the bed if/when they get elected) but with a short enough history that they won't have a ton of political baggage that the Republicans can use against them.
 
Segnosaur said:
They need someone in the "Obama zone".... someone with ~1 term in congress (or as a gov) with some knowledge and experience in how government works (so they don't foul the bed if/when they get elected) but with a short enough history that they won't have a ton of political baggage that the Republicans can use against them.
Click to expand...

Joe Kennedy would have had 4 terms in Congress by 2021. He's smart, articulate, good looking and the name to go with it. And he would be be 4 years younger than JFK was in 61.
 
acbytesla said:
Joe Kennedy would have had 4 terms in Congress by 2021. He's smart, articulate, good looking and the name to go with it.
Click to expand...
Having "the name" might actually be a detriment when fighting Trumpsters. "Politics as usual" and all that junk. Plus I'm sure they'll find a way to tie him to Chappaquidick (sp?).
 
Segnosaur said:
Ummm... we're talking about republicans here... The party of the evangelical Christians (and all the lying that comes with that). The party headed by Donald "Grab 'em" Trump. I'm sure they have absolutely no problem with any sort of Bigotry (including homophobia).

Plus, I'm sure the republicans/Russians would do their best to provide at least some plausible deniability. Russian spam-bots would bring up the suggestion of homosexuality, and Trump would make statements that were veiled enough ("Who's Booker going to take to state dinners?") without outright using the word "gay".

End result: Much like Trump managed to get the support of bigots on his side (without them claiming "we're supporting Trump because we're bigots"), the end result will be plenty of people letting their bigotry guide them in their votes.
Click to expand...

Many Republicans claimed they weren't homophobic but only against legalized same-sex marriage. due to religious beliefs. I think many of them simply lie (or lie to themselves) about their homophobia just like people do about racism. So going after Booker for being gay, even though there's no evidence at all supporting that, would be proving that excuse a lie.
 
Stacyhs said:
Many Republicans claimed they weren't homophobic but only against legalized same-sex marriage. due to religious beliefs. I think many of them simply lie (or lie to themselves) about their homophobia just like people do about racism. So going after Booker for being gay, even though there's no evidence at all supporting that, would be proving that excuse a lie.
Click to expand...
But they wouldn't be going after him because he was gay. They would go after him because "Gee, we need a president to be married to be a good role model" (or insert any other excuse that is given).

The Russian spam-bots would probably crank up the gay allegations (and Trump supporters would gladly repeat any such allegations they hear), but they won't explicitly say they were being homophobic... they're just "passing along jokes", or "raising questions".

And since when have Trump supporters actually been bothered by lies in the first place?
 
Segnosaur said:
Having "the name" might actually be a detriment when fighting Trumpsters. "Politics as usual" and all that junk. Plus I'm sure they'll find a way to tie him to Chappaquidick (sp?).
Click to expand...

It might, but I think the Kennedy name is more of an asset than a knock.

Tie him to Chappaquidick? That's even a reach for Trumpsters given that happened to his great great uncle more than a decade before he was born. Yeah, that might be a stretch.

Where were you Joe on July 18th 1969? Well sir, I doubt I was even a sperm cell in my father's loins.


Yea, I know...you were just joking..I hope.;).
 
acbytesla said:
aleCcowaN said:
I'd love I could share your optimism. So far it's Ronald McDonald the one most likely to take Trump out of the way.
Click to expand...

I understand the pessimism. We are 3 months away from the mid-terms. We can cut our wrists together after then.
Click to expand...

I wanted to be clear I was talking of sodium, saturated fat and cholesterol.

I'm sure I won't cut my wrists from something happening in the USA, but I'm worried that the Ocasio-Cortezes would multiply and finally the Democratic Party would shove out Trump by having a Trump-like candidate of their own, who in turn will be viciously defended here the same way some do regarding Trump.

My hopes are with a decent fellow of any party ... but that's not likely. I'm afraid we're up for half a century of indecent fellows.
 
aleCcowaN said:
I wanted to be clear I was talking of sodium, saturated fat and cholesterol.

I'm sure I won't cut my wrists from something happening in the USA, but I'm worried that the Ocasio-Cortezes would multiply and finally the Democratic Party would shove out Trump by having a Trump-like candidate of their own, who in turn will be viciously defended here the same way some do regarding Trump.

My hopes are with a decent fellow of any party ... but that's not likely. I'm afraid we're up for half a century of indecent fellows.
Click to expand...

I forgot. You're an Aussie or a Kiwi...right?

But I like the idea of Ronald McDonald or the Burger King clown taking him out. So a good old cardiac or stroke would be really good news. I would prefer a Democrat replace him, but at the moment there is almost nobody I wouldn't prefer and that includes half of America's prison population. Perhaps more. Mitt Romney sounds like manna from heaven

I wouldn't worry about the Ocasio-Cortezes. That's not very realistic.

Trump is far far worse than I thought he would be. I knew i wasn't going to like him as POTUS and I was afraid he was going to be horrible. But this moron has exceeded my worst fears and done it with room to spare.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom