President Trump

tim said:
irvinehomeowner said:
Can't wait until SNL lampoons that handshake thing.

I'm going to start doing that... Obama made the fist bump his, I'll make the Trump pull mine.

And make sure your hands are germy.
C4lONw5UYAAXblQ.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C4lONw5UYAAXblQ.jpg
rkp said:

Dang Tim, be careful what you read on the Internet.

Perfect example of how perception affects reality.

In one of those handshake links, they commented on how Trump is actually a germaphobe and it was difficult for him to have to shake hands during campaigning.

Maybe that's why he does it so awkwardly.
 
spootieho said:
Those are good points. 

What road should we take? 
- Escalate tension and push for mutually assured destruction? 
- Work with them and see if we can resolve issues peacefully?
- Shut them out and not listen to them at all? 
- ??? suggestions please ???

I don't know.

Many thought that taking out Saddam was a good idea because he was so evil.  It turns out that he also kept order in a place full of chaos.  I'm not saying that Putin does that, but think about the consequences of escalating tension.

The media in the US has been hiding and disregarding Russia tensions for a while.  This summer tensions were very high.  It's very scary.  Russia was/is preparing for war.  If you push a wild animal into a corner what do you think might happen?  What happens if we push too far?

The mainstream media has a long history of helping the Establishment trick the American people into unnecessary wars.  For all you old folks on this board, remember Bill Clinton's war on the Serbs?  All of the usual suspects, New York Times, Washington Post, Time Magazine, reported that we had to wage war on the Evil Christian Serbs because they were putting poor Muslims into Nazi style concentration camps?  It turns out the mainstream media fabricated that story to build up public outrage in support of Clinton's war:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xss0Ep1MJM

You should take what the mainstream media tells you about Putin with a grain of salt.
 
spootieho said:
Those are good points. 

What road should we take? 
- Escalate tension and push for mutually assured destruction? 
- Work with them and see if we can resolve issues peacefully?
- Shut them out and not listen to them at all? 
- ??? suggestions please ???

I don't know.

Many thought that taking out Saddam was a good idea because he was so evil.  It turns out that he also kept order in a place full of chaos.  I'm not saying that Putin does that, but think about the consequences of escalating tension.

The media in the US has been hiding and disregarding Russia tensions for a while.  This summer tensions were very high.  It's very scary.  Russia was/is preparing for war.  If you push a wild animal into a corner what do you think might happen?  What happens if we push too far?

I agree that it is hard to know what to do with Russia. Both GWB and BHO came into office saying they were going to improve relations with Russia. They both left office having met with hostility and frustration trying to do it. Maybe DJT will do it by giving Russia whatever it wants.
 
tim said:
I agree that it is hard to know what to do with Russia. Both GWB and BHO came into office saying they were going to improve relations with Russia. They both left office having met with hostility and frustration trying to do it. Maybe DJT will do it by giving Russia whatever it wants.
John McCain was ready to strike Russia due to it's actions in Georgia.  It's one reason I was happy he didn't win.  Not that I don't think Russia deserves it.  I am afraid of the consequences when striking a nuclear superpower.

I don't think BHO really tried to improve relations.  I think his approach was to punish Russia without escalating us to war with Russia.  His policy was basically insults and sanctions.  It's an improvement over McCain's plan, but it's not a move towards positive relations.  I don't disagree with the sanctions.  If put in the same spot, that's probably the route I would have taken.  The sanction extension in Obama's last week, though, seemed more like a political game and revenge move on both Trump and Russia.

The sanctions haven't been fulfilling their purpose as Russia is too stubborn.  Instead, they have been building tension.  In the last couple of years, tensions have been hitting a boiling point. 

 
I don't think Trump is going to make it through his 4-year term. There are a handful of ways for a President to stop being a President. His odds for each of them are higher than any President I have memory of. Impeachment, death, resignation, being found unfit. I don't know which one it will be.
 
tim said:
I don't think Trump is going to make it through his 4-year term. There are a handful of ways for a President to stop being a President. His odds for each of them are higher than any President I have memory of. Impeachment, death, resignation, being found unfit. I don't know which one it will be.

I actually agree with this... mostly being unfit.

President Donald is cray-cray.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
tim said:
I don't think Trump is going to make it through his 4-year term. There are a handful of ways for a President to stop being a President. His odds for each of them are higher than any President I have memory of. Impeachment, death, resignation, being found unfit. I don't know which one it will be.

I actually agree with this... mostly being unfit.

President Donald is cray-cray.

But I can argue we need that. No longer we will get pushed around. 
 
eyephone said:
irvinehomeowner said:
tim said:
I don't think Trump is going to make it through his 4-year term. There are a handful of ways for a President to stop being a President. His odds for each of them are higher than any President I have memory of. Impeachment, death, resignation, being found unfit. I don't know which one it will be.

I actually agree with this... mostly being unfit.

President Donald is cray-cray.

But I can argue we need that. No longer we will get pushed around. 

Prepare to go to war.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
eyephone said:
irvinehomeowner said:
tim said:
I don't think Trump is going to make it through his 4-year term. There are a handful of ways for a President to stop being a President. His odds for each of them are higher than any President I have memory of. Impeachment, death, resignation, being found unfit. I don't know which one it will be.

I actually agree with this... mostly being unfit.

President Donald is cray-cray.

But I can argue we need that. No longer we will get pushed around. 

Prepare to go to war.

Also, he's getting better deals cutting cost with the aerospace companies and others...
 
irvinehomeowner said:
eyephone said:
irvinehomeowner said:
tim said:
I don't think Trump is going to make it through his 4-year term. There are a handful of ways for a President to stop being a President. His odds for each of them are higher than any President I have memory of. Impeachment, death, resignation, being found unfit. I don't know which one it will be.

I actually agree with this... mostly being unfit.

President Donald is cray-cray.

But I can argue we need that. No longer we will get pushed around. 

Prepare to go to war.

Nope, few folks living in Irvine will have kids in the military exposed to war. We're just taxed excessively to pay for the military industrial complex both parties love to lavish.
 
Perspective said:
eyephone said:
tim said:
eyephone said:
irvinehomeowner said:
I actually agree with this... mostly being unfit.

President Donald is cray-cray.

But I can argue we need that. No longer we will get pushed around. 

Love the sarcasm!  ;)

Give me a break. Trump inherited a mess.

It's just too bad he didn't get the awesome economy Obama inherited. Oh well.

I thought your not an Obama fan, now you are.
 
eyephone said:
tim said:
eyephone said:
But I can argue we need that. No longer we will get pushed around. 

Love the sarcasm!  ;)

Give me a break. Trump inherited a mess.

And Donald is going to stop us from getting pushed around? Ha ha ha. The guy can't find his own ass. And his new national security advisor nominee, Harward, to replace the one that just resigned? He turned it down, saying the offer was a shit sandwich. Yeah, Trump's gonna do great.
 
eyephone said:
Perspective said:
It's just too bad he didn't get the awesome economy Obama inherited. Oh well.

I thought your not an Obama fan, now you are.

It doesn't take an Obama fan to notice that when Obama took office the country was in the middle of a financial meltdown. Remember when everyone was screaming bloody murder about that? I don't see that happening right now. If you don't see that the economy is in better shape now than in 2007/2008, I don't see how you have any credibility.
 
tim said:
eyephone said:
Perspective said:
It's just too bad he didn't get the awesome economy Obama inherited. Oh well.

I thought your not an Obama fan, now you are.

It doesn't take an Obama fan to notice that when Obama took office the country was in the middle of a financial meltdown. Remember when everyone was screaming bloody murder about that? I don't see that happening right now. If you don't see that the economy is in better shape now than in 2007/2008, I don't see how you have any credibility.

Look at the Dow...

Who's next and wants to test me?  ;)
 
"I thought your not an Obama fan, now you are."

I like Obama personally, but disagreed with many policy positions, mostly his interest in adding all new taxes on "rich" households making $250K annually (regardless of wealth). I appreciate Obama more every day listening to King Troll.
 
The Spectacle of Trump Acting Presidentialhttps://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-02-16/the-spectacle-of-trump-acting-presidential

Donald Trump's first presidential press conference today was ... something else. He ranted, he raved; he denied he was ranting and raving, which is even more bizarre than actually ranting and raving. He bragged again about his (unimpressive, flukish) 306 electoral votes. He repeatedly brought up, unsolicited, his election opponent and repeated his campaign points against her, something essentially unheard of among post-election, let alone sworn-into-office, presidents (they might, as Trump did, dwell on problems they inherited, but personal campaign attacks are normally immediately forgotten the second the networks call the election). He got major and minor factual things totally wrong.

Then there was the bit about how a "nuclear holocaust would be like no other." And the bit in which he awkwardly (to say the least) asked a black reporter to set up a meeting with the Congressional Black Caucus for him.

He gave incredibly convoluted answers about press leaks, news stories, and his firing of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn -- apparently we are to believe that the leaks were accurate, the news stories about them were not (something about the tone of reporters), and Flynn had to go because he didn't give an accurate answer to Vice President Michael Pence about something that didn't matter because Flynn didn't do anything wrong anyway. No, none of that makes sense.

Or, as British pundit Alex Massie put it:

None of us have ever seen anything like this before.

So what's going on here (and by the way, Trump does deserve credit for holding a proper and wide-ranging press conference; it's slightly late compared with other presidents, but add the bilateral opportunities and he's at or ahead of the pace recent presidents have set)?

For one thing, we're seeing something that isn't new, but that we haven't seen since Ronald Reagan: A president who has his own version of facts, a version which his staff can't or won't get him to give up, and so they have to clean up after him. That actually happened earlier today when UN Ambassador Nikki Haley corrected what the president said in his last press appearance, reassuring everyone that the United States still supported a two-state solution in the the Middle East.

The difference between Trump and Reagan is that Reagan had clear overall policy preferences, which everyone in his administration was well aware of, so when he got things wrong in public it didn't really lead to all that much internal confusion (and Reagan during most of his presidency had a solid White House staff structure available to translate for him). What does Trump really believe, if anything, on Russia and Israel and China? No one, including the State Department and other foreign policy and national security portions of the executive branch, has any idea. He keeps talking about "a deal" as if foreign policy was a one-time negotiation over a TV contract or bankruptcy procedure. Foreign policy isn't like that.

As far as Trump himself? It's a dangerous game to read into the president's moods and motivations and body language, but he's practically begging everyone to try. The striking thing about today's appearance was that Trump began with an uninspired reading of a prepared statement, but then really picked up steam during a (very long) back and forth with the press corps. It's hard not to imagine that this is how Trump always imagined the presidency. Indeed, it's hard not to imagine that Trump believes that the portions of the presidency that are for show, the meetings with CEOs and the Oval Office photos with foreign leaders and the press conferences, are the essential core of the job. Not, for example, carefully reading briefing papers in order to figure out what tough questions to ask those who are briefing him, or dealing with the details of policy choices.

Granted, that's all speculative and could easily be wrong. What is clear, however, is Trump is nowhere closer to demonstrating even vaguely adequate levels of knowledge of public policy and how the government works than he was during the campaign, which makes him a very dangerous man in the presidency.

Speaking of speculation: A lot of people are going to tell you either that today's wild press conference was a horror show that will destroy him with voters, or that no matter what the press thinks this was the Trump that people like and the reason he won the election. Try to ignore all of that. Single presidential appearances (in midday, when normal people are at work or otherwise occupied) don't change anything. In fact, even multiple presidential appearances don't do much; for the most part, those who don't like Trump won't like what they learn of today's press conference, and those who do like him will like it.

Given that he's unpopular (at record lows for a new president, but only modestly unpopular overall), more people likely will dislike than like what they see. Long-term change will happen based on events. It won't matter what kinds of nonsense Trump gives about the jobs situation he inherited or about what he's doing about it; what will matter is whether the job market stays strong, gets stronger, or reverses. The same with every other area of policy. And it won't matter whether or not Trump calls his White House a "fine tuned machine"; what will matter is whether it remains factionalized and each faction runs to the press with stories about their rivals and the president, or not. It will matter whether he sheds staff every few weeks.

And it will matter whether the scandals fizzle out or grow larger.

This part of the presidency? He can do some damage when he gets his own policies wrong, and he can probably remind some on-the-fence voters what they like about him, but it's the substance of the presidency which matters. For the former reality star, this was just more show business.
 
Perspective said:
"I thought your not an Obama fan, now you are."

I like Obama personally, but disagreed with many policy positions, mostly his interest in adding all new taxes on "rich" households making $250K annually (regardless of wealth). I appreciate Obama more every day listening to King Troll.

That's a bunch of ___ if you ask me.
 
Back
Top