POTUS Donald Trump

[TheLeviathan]

 

What he's saying is that if the situation weren't just a loss, but one involving a huge disparity in popular vote along with another country's involvement it would have been worse. What they did, the list you just gave, was after true loss, not a questionable one. I think there would have been a lot of threats of real violence if the situation were reversed here and not just mostly peaceful protests.

 

Threats?  Maybe, but stringer said rioting.  That's not their style.  

[ashbury]

Most of you don't know my wife. She's pretty conventional in most visible ways. But, had we not had a prior commitment today, she says she would have boarded the commuter train into Boston and taken part in the women's march held on the Common.

 

I often joke, and she agrees, that in so many ways she is Everywoman. When she decides to go to a sale or to an entertainment event, she encounters more crowds than she was led to expect, because everyone else winds up going too. You could do useful and helpful market research, by interviewing only her.

 

Donand Trump should learn the lesson I learned long ago, that one ignores Mrs Ash at one's own peril. He's wrong if he characterizes the participants as unrepresentative.

[Craig Arko]

If the shoe were on the other foot, what would Republicans be doing if the winner of the presidential election had almost three million fewer votes, there was evidence of foreign government(s) influencing the election and the victor was as ungracious as Donald Trump? I think there would be rioting in the streets for sure.

My fear is while the moderates and the left take to the streets, the right would be buying more guns and ammo.

[PseudoSABR]

 

My fear is while the moderates and the left take to the streets, the right would be buying more guns and ammo.

You bet they are.  The way my brother-in-law talks, had the election come out differently, many are eager to use them.

 

If there will ever be a violent coup in U.S. history, I think it will come from this same element that just 'elected' Trump.  

[TheLeviathan]

So a few protesters hurl bricks and destroy property and we are reminded not to hold all of them accountable for the extreme views of the few.  Which is true.  Flip side?  Hell no, by brother in law said he'd used his guns so now I can broaden that to all Trump voters.  We're not even trying anymore. 

 

Things are only going to get worse and it's not all Trump's fault.  (Though he will be top dog)

[PseudoSABR]

 

So a few protesters hurl bricks and destroy property and we are reminded not to hold all of them accountable for the extreme views of the few.  Which is true.  Flip side?  Hell no, by brother in law said he'd used his guns so now I can broaden that to all Trump voters.  We're not even trying anymore. 

 

Things are only going to get worse and it's not all Trump's fault.  (Though he will be top dog)

You're going to great lengths to find some moral or logical inconsistency. 

 

I'm not saying every Trump voter is armed and waiting for the revolution (obviously).  What I'm saying is the part of our population that mobilized Trump into a candidate (not all Trump voters) could become a dangerous minority in the near future.  

[TheLeviathan]

 

You're going to great lengths to find some moral or logical inconsistency. 

 

I'm not saying every Trump voter is armed and waiting for the revolution (obviously).  What I'm saying is the part of our population that mobilized Trump into a candidate (not all Trump voters) could become a dangerous minority in the near future.  

 

We're in a cushy little left-leaning political thread here and all of us are giving that benefit to each other when we criticize the right.  Criticize the left?  No such courtesy.  

 

So I knew what you meant.  I knew you weren't being inconsistent.  But if I wanted to mischaracterize what you wrote, it was pretty easy.  You didn't couch all of this in your first post, it was written incredibly hypocritically but for me giving you the benefit of the doubt about what you meant.

 

Rather than leap to mischaracterizations, tt's sort of nice when we just give each other the benefit of the doubt...no?  

[kydoty]

After seeing Sean Spicer's first press conference today, am I crazy to think that it's only a matter of time before the Trump administration starts revoking the White House press credentials of news organizations for no reason other than they are critical of him?

[TheLeviathan]

 

After seeing Sean Spicer's first press conference today, am I crazy to think that it's only a matter of time before the Trump administration starts revoking the White House press credentials of news organizations for no reason other than they are critical of him?

 

Other than the coming catastrophe that is Betsy Devos, this was by far the scariest thing so far.  He has been taking shots at the media throughout the last two days too.

 

And he'll have broad support on the right for doing it.  

[drjim]

I assume they'll just stop with the White House briefing.

 

Probably better for the press in the long run in dealing with this Administration.

[kydoty]

[drjim]

[drjim]

[drjim]

[DaveW]

 

Other than the coming catastrophe that is Betsy Devos, this was by far the scariest thing so far.  He has been taking shots at the media throughout the last two days too.

 

And he'll have broad support on the right for doing it.  

I don't think he will at all actually. The majority of the right has NEVER "gone to war" with the mainstream press, a true patriot/republican/sane person realizes the importance of the first amendment, Trump is basically going to war with it.

His approval rating last week was 32%, after this bull**** today? I bet it's down to 25% or lower next poll, once that happens you will definitely see the right distance themselves more and more from  him.

[TheLeviathan]

I hope you're right Dave, but the rhetoric on the right sure sounds supportive.

[DaveW]

I hope you're right Dave, but the rhetoric on the right sure sounds supportive.

It's a very very very vocal minority.

 

IMO of course

[TheLeviathan]

At least our memes are going to be awesome until the apocalypse!

[DaveW]

At least our memes are going to be awesome until the apocalypse!

#makepunkrockgreatagain

[drjim]

I'm still going with the Administration being fundamentally too inept, combined with general government inertia, for anything all that bad to actually happen.

 

There are competent, patriotic people at Defense and Homeland Security, so that will also help avoid a catastrophe.

 

And the Rs won't go along forever.

[stringer bell]

The dance between the Rs and Trump is going to be very interesting. While there are huge differences in their views on trade and "the little guy", there is much agreement on slashing regulations, limiting abortion and putting a hard-line right-winger on the Supreme Court, to name a few. The isolationism that Trump emphasized in his inauguration speech isn't standard Republicanism.

 

On a different tangent, from my cave in SE Minnesota where I didn't see the news and catch up on social media until later, was this "Women's Day March" thing as big a deal as it looks like? From what I've seen, it hit all the right notes and millions participated. Where was this enthusiasm and fervor before the election?

[TheLeviathan]

From what I've seen, it hit all the right notes and millions participated. Where was this enthusiasm and fervor before the election?

Good question. Let's hope it's still around at the midterms, it's desperately needed.

[Squirrel]

The dance between the Rs and Trump is going to be very interesting. While there are huge differences in their views on trade and "the little guy", there is much agreement on slashing regulations, limiting abortion and putting a hard-line right-winger on the Supreme Court, to name a few. The isolationism that Trump emphasized in his inauguration speech isn't standard Republicanism.

 

On a different tangent, from my cave in SE Minnesota where I didn't see the news and catch up on social media until later, was this "Women's Day March" thing as big a deal as it looks like? From what I've seen, it hit all the right notes and millions participated. Where was this enthusiasm and fervor before the election?

I think there were a lot of people in denial who thought it couldn't/wouldn't happen and let others be their voice and now realize they can't do that. I hope this momentum keeps up, but the cynical me doubts it. People will go back to their mode of letting someone else do the work for them.

 

Of all the millions world wide who participated in the over 600 different sister marches, I have yet to read of many (any?) major instances of violence. I've read some isolated instances of some unfriendly verbal exchanges, but no major instances of violence or vandalism. I think that's kind of impressive considering the number of events and participants. And especially since many of the events hugely exceeded their planned expectations of participants.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

From what I've seen, it hit all the right notes and millions participated. Where was this enthusiasm and fervor before the election?

I think it was a mixture of two things:

 

1. Hillary Clinton was a boring, unrelatable candidate. She'd be a fine president but just that, fine. It was hard to rally around a dry, policy wonk candidate whose platform largely consisted of "let's do more of the same!"

 

2. Some people need to be punched in the face before they realize they should probably do something about that person who is standing in front of them, threatening to punch them in the face.

[gunnarthor]

I'm really glad that CNN is accurately reporting on Spicer's press conference.  If the media keeps fact checking Trump rather than going with a "he said/she said" narrative, a lot of his **** could be DOA.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/21/media/sean-spicer-press-secretary-statement/index.html

[TheLeviathan]

 

I think it was a mixture of two things:

 

1. Hillary Clinton was a boring, unrelatable candidate. She'd be a fine president but just that, fine. It was hard to rally around a dry, policy wonk candidate whose platform largely consisted of "let's do more of the same!"

 

2. Some people need to be punched in the face before they realize they should probably do something about that person who is standing in front of them, threatening to punch them in the face.

 

Apathy is not exactly a new thing for the Democratic voting base.  Some of us in the election thread were calling it the biggest X factor in the election, simply because turnout from the right is pretty consistent, but the left is erratic.

 

So yeah, maybe this is the punch in the face the left needs to try and get that turnout more consistent. To get people involved so that we're not electing people like Trump and, even more importantly, actually electing people at local levels and in Congress.  Like drjim, I think there is enough sane infrastructure at the executive level to keep things in check, but at the smaller levels of government we're getting killed by a lack of involvement by left-leaning voters.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Like drjim, I think there is enough sane infrastructure at the executive level to keep things in check, but at the smaller levels of government we're getting killed by a lack of involvement by left-leaning voters.

Absolutely. I believe the extreme right-leaning nature of most of our state/local governments is at least as big of a problem as Trump, maybe more so.

 

Even Minnesota has fallen prey to the extreme right's idiocy, as evidenced by the completely bat**** crazy legislation that has been proposed over the past few weeks.

[Squirrel]

 

Apathy is not exactly a new thing for the Democratic voting base.  Some of us in the election thread were calling it the biggest X factor in the election, simply because turnout from the right is pretty consistent, but the left is erratic.

 

So yeah, maybe this is the punch in the face the left needs to try and get that turnout more consistent. To get people involved so that we're not electing people like Trump and, even more importantly, actually electing people at local levels and in Congress.  Like drjim, I think there is enough sane infrastructure at the executive level to keep things in check, but at the smaller levels of government we're getting killed by a lack of involvement by left-leaning voters.

You'd think they'd get and be more involved ... but the ones who I call pseudo-intellectual liberals who are supposedly part of the base but not part of the party do everything to point fingers elsewhere. "Well, if you had given me a 'better' candidate ..." "Well, if you had given me a candidate who supported [insert this specific care here] in the way I think it should be ..." "Well, if you had given me someone inspiring ..." "Well, if you had given me the only candidate worthy of my vote ..." There are many so-called liberals who find all kinds of excuses who just can't be bothered to vote if the candidate doesn't meet fully with their issues or who doesn't meet their lofty, intellectual ideal. And it's a problem, because they will continue doing that and it won't be their fault. They won't get involved to help shape the party into what they feel it should be, because they have difficulties compromising their ideals one iota for the greater good and if that one candidate they would support doesn't win the nomination, they stay home or vote alternatively, and claim the party 'ignored' them because they can't lower themselves to support anyone but. There is never going to be a candidate that supports everything I think they should as I think they should, and some less so than others, but I don't 'poo poo' the process if it doesn't work out the way I think it should or point fingers at a majority and say they just don't know better. But that's what happens with many so-called liberal voters. Conservative voters vote no matter what, even if it's in protest to the other candidate, they hold their noses if they must, but they vote. Yeah, there are flaws with that, too ... but unless our two-party systems changes, this is what it is.

[TheLeviathan]

I agree Chi and yesterday when you didn't like my phrasing of "start a movement", that's sort of what I was talking about.  Left-leaning groups are around, and have been around, for awhile.  And there are a lot of them.But they suck at generating any actual movement as a group.  They are more likely to splinter and less likely to actually make a difference.

 

Especially in terms of turning out voters.  I hope yesterday's wonderful protest becomes a movement that makes a difference on actual issues and on ballots in two years.  At the end of the day, that's what makes a real difference.  It sure seemed like they were hoping to do that, time will tell.

[kydoty]

Two days in, and the Trump administration is now using the term " alternative facts".

 

Are we living in hell yet?