The Trump Administration (just Trump) Thread

[Cavatt]

I'd say that as a politician, he was pretty successful week of November 7-11, 2016.

Much easier to win after you change the rules to benefit your party.

View: https://twitter.com/DKElections/status/920863445809029120

 

[Whittaker]

Isn't it interesting how the partisan left mind works?
Republicans who become President(Reagan, Bush, Trump) are slow-witted and clueless as to how to govern.
Dems who become President(Clinton, Obama) are smart, articulate policy wonks.
Dems win on a unifying uplifting message.
GOPer's win on a divisive message of fear.

This narrative is absurd but has been peddled by the liberal media for more than 30 years.
Otherwise intelligent people are buying the propaganda and taking ridiculous positions.
Forget the media for a moment and look at some facts:
1) Trump, with no political experience, just won the highest political office in the world.
2) In the primary he beat a large field of experienced political contenders and he did it without the support of his party's establishment.
3) In the general he beat an experienced political titan who was hyped as the most qualified candidate in history.

We can draw a few conclusions with high confidence:
1) Trump is not a political failure.
2) Trump is not a moron.
3) Trump saw and tapped into a disgruntled populace and won an election that most "experts" said he couldn't win.

Its fair to say he's an ass, un-presidential, even somewhat dishonest(what politician isn't?). Its fair to question his temperament, his policies foreign and domestic, his effectiveness as President.
But to state that Trump is a moron, a rapist, a political failure or a white supremacist is to leave the sphere of fact-based discussion and join the extreme partisan hyperbole crowd. That's the mirror image of the crowd that claimed Obama was a closet militant Muslim and Hillary was a murderer.

 

[-Akronite-]

Its fair to say he's an ass, un-presidential, even somewhat dishonest(what politician isn't?). Its fair to question his temperament, his policies foreign and domestic, his effectiveness as President.
But to state that Trump is a moron,

I wouldn't go as far as stating he is a straight up moron. Intelligence shows itself in a lot of different ways. It's blatantly obvious though that the man doesn't know much about our political system and doesn't understand details about a lot of things (from the economy to healthcare to foreign policy).

If the election were about who was smarter/who knew more about shit that mattered, he would have lost by a mile. But that's not how elections work.

a rapist,

1) Who said that beyond his first wife?

2) What does ANYTHING you said before do to combat this claim?

a political failure

One of the biggest issues with American politics today is that winning elections is more important than the work done AFTER the election. Trump is still consumed with his victory, which remains his most major accomplishment. The Supreme Court nom was only possible because of obstruction by the GOP. The travel ban keeps getting blocked, Mexico isn't paying for the wall, healthcare hasn't passed, and we are waiting on the tax plan. So while I wouldn't call him a failure (from a conservative perspective obviously) just yet, things aren't going nearly as well as he likes to claim (or as he claimed in his campaign).

I do agree that calling someone without political experience winning the highest office a political failure is silly. It can be argued that he is a presidential failure though.

or a white supremacist

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

1) He's a racist. This much is known whether people here want to accept that or not.

2) He pushes racist policies and scapegoats minorities.

3) He has on multiple occasions sympathized with white supremacists.

He's not an avowed Klan-member, but his rhetoric and policies get a consistent stamp of approval from that ilk. I don't think he works every day explicitly thinking his work is to promote the white race, though.

is to leave the sphere of fact-based discussion and join the extreme partisan hyperbole crowd. That's the mirror image of the crowd that claimed Obama was a closet militant Muslim and Hillary was a murderer.

Some of it is a mirror, but he's far closer to all those things you mentioned than Obama or Hillary are to those conspiracy theories. That is, assuming you mean Hillary actually killed someone herself, cause she did vote for Iraq and help facilitate plenty of awful shit.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Much easier to win after you change the rules to benefit your party.

View: https://twitter.com/DKElections/status/920863445809029120

I see...Trump beat Hillary because of gerrymandering.

So who do you think we'll elect as our next U.S. Supreme Court Justice?

 

[Nathan S]

Isn't it interesting how the partisan left mind works?
Republicans who become President(Reagan, Bush, Trump) are slow-witted and clueless as to how to govern.
Dems who become President(Clinton, Obama) are smart, articulate policy wonks.
Dems win on a unifying uplifting message.
GOPer's win on a divisive message of fear.

This narrative is absurd but has been peddled by the liberal media for more than 30 years.
Otherwise intelligent people are buying the propaganda and taking ridiculous positions.
Forget the media for a moment and look at some facts:
1) Trump, with no political experience, just won the highest political office in the world.
2) In the primary he beat a large field of experienced political contenders and he did it without the support of his party's establishment.
3) In the general he beat an experienced political titan who was hyped as the most qualified candidate in history.

We can draw a few conclusions with high confidence:
1) Trump is not a political failure.
2) Trump is not a moron.
3) Trump saw and tapped into a disgruntled populace and won an election that most "experts" said he couldn't win.

Its fair to say he's an ass, un-presidential, even somewhat dishonest(what politician isn't?). Its fair to question his temperament, his policies foreign and domestic, his effectiveness as President.
But to state that Trump is a moron, a rapist, a political failure or a white supremacist is to leave the sphere of fact-based discussion and join the extreme partisan hyperbole crowd. That's the mirror image of the crowd that claimed Obama was a closet militant Muslim and Hillary was a murderer.

But you're ignoring the proud American tradition of voting for morons, rapists, and white supremacists

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Isn't it interesting how the partisan left mind works?
Republicans who become President(Reagan, Bush, Trump) are slow-witted and clueless as to how to govern.

That's only true when they're in office, though. After they leave, they really weren't all that bad. It's the guy running now who really is the antithesis of those reasonable Republicans of yesteryear.

Romney was a right-wing extremist until 2016.... And lots of Democrats who absolutely despised Reagan as an arch-conservative have tried to hijack his legacy by claiming he really wasn't that conservative at all.

 

[David.]

I see...Trump beat Hillary because of gerrymandering.

So who do you think we'll elect as our next U.S. Supreme Court Justice?

Id love your opinion on gerrymandering, I know nothing about it

 

[Whittaker]

That's only true when they're in office, though. After they leave, they really weren't all that bad. It's the guy running now who really is the antithesis of those reasonable Republicans of yesteryear.

Romney was a right-wing extremist until 2016.... And lots of Democrats who absolutely despised Reagan as an arch-conservative have tried to hijack his legacy by claiming he really wasn't that conservative at all.

Exactly. That's how we know the narrative is political BS, when it purports to be personal but is common to every Republican Presidential candidate in the general.
I'm old enough to remember that Reagan was mercilessly attacked as a bumbling moron.
It is a political fact that any nominee of the Republican Party will be portrayed as some combination of Stupid, Racist, Sexist, Fearmonger, Hater of the poor and women and minorities. It is built into the cake. It is a time-tested narrative deliberately advanced by the left and most of the major media at any and all Republican candidates who look like they have a chance to win.

 

[-Akronite-]

Exactly. That's how we know the narrative is political BS, when it purports to be personal but is common to every Republican Presidential candidate in the general.
I'm old enough to remember that Reagan was mercilessly attacked as a bumbling moron.
It is a political fact that any nominee of the Republican Party will be portrayed as some combination of Stupid, Racist, Sexist, Fearmonger, Hater of the poor and women and minorities. It is built into the cake. It is a time-tested narrative deliberately advanced by the left and most of the major media at any and all Republican candidates who look like they have a chance to win.

Do you have a point though?

It's not as if Democratic nominees are treated with respect. I'm not saying you're wrong but this is hardly a tactic unique to the left.

EDIT: Like I said previously, this president is a nice case study in reciprocal hypocrisy. We are definitely seeing some outrages over issues that may have been overlooked during Obama's tenure. We're also seeing vast amounts of awful behavior that if applied to Obama would have spelled his political doom.

 

[Tlyons]

Do you have a point though?

It's not as if Democratic nominees are treated with respect. I'm not saying you're wrong but this is hardly a tactic unique to the left.

EDIT: Like I said previously, this president is a nice case study in reciprocal hypocrisy. We are definitely seeing some outrages over issues that may have been overlooked during Obama's tenure. We're also seeing vast amounts of awful behavior that if applied to Obama would have spelled his political doom.

"Political doom" is an understatement.

 

[gourimoko]

Isn't it interesting how the partisan left mind works?
Republicans who become President(Reagan, Bush, Trump) are slow-witted and clueless as to how to govern.
Dems who become President(Clinton, Obama) are smart, articulate policy wonks.
Dems win on a unifying uplifting message.
GOPer's win on a divisive message of fear.

There's no historical context or fact here; it's just an appeal to the emotional strings of conservative posters.

Reagan was not a policy wonk; if you read anything about the man, that'd be obvious. Half-way through his Presidency, people are still questioning whether or not he was suffering from dementia. He was elected because Jimmy Carter was exceptionally unpopular largely due to the Iran Hostage Crisis and the on-going recession and economic downturn. When Reagan asked the nation "are you better off now than you were 4 years ago" polls showed that the momentum of that race shifted massively in his favor.

You skipped George H.W. Bush, whom Democrats never called a "moron" and he was a policy wonk and a brilliant man.

George W. Bush was not very bright -- I mean, nothing you've said suggests he was. He was elected in a contested election that had a highly partisan judicial outcome. He had no mandate coming into office, and ran the country (as Trump attempts to) as a CEO, with Dick Cheney and his cabinet having broad authority to enact policy that Bush wasn't necessarily keen on understanding.

Trump does not understand policy.... How are you honestly arguing that he does?

Does anyone argue that Clinton or Obama aren't smart, articulate, policy wonks?? Is that really a credible argument made by anybody?

I mean, you may not like the reality that Trump is what he is, or that GWB is what he is, but that is the reality... Was Reagan an idiot? No. Was GHWB? The opposite....

So not only is your description of history wrong contextually, but the premise of the complaint is as well; it's just .. made-up.

And it's sad that people actually liked your post because it questions whether or not they understand Presidential history at all, or are they just jumping for joy for a liberal-bashing post, even if it's completely farcical.

 

[Maximus]

Isn't it interesting how the partisan left mind works?
Republicans who become President(Reagan, Bush, Trump) are slow-witted and clueless as to how to govern.
Dems who become President(Clinton, Obama) are smart, articulate policy wonks.
Dems win on a unifying uplifting message.
GOPer's win on a divisive message of fear.

This narrative is absurd but has been peddled by the liberal media for more than 30 years.
Otherwise intelligent people are buying the propaganda and taking ridiculous positions.
Forget the media for a moment and look at some facts:
1) Trump, with no political experience, just won the highest political office in the world.
2) In the primary he beat a large field of experienced political contenders and he did it without the support of his party's establishment.
3) In the general he beat an experienced political titan who was hyped as the most qualified candidate in history.

We can draw a few conclusions with high confidence:
1) Trump is not a political failure.
2) Trump is not a moron.
3) Trump saw and tapped into a disgruntled populace and won an election that most "experts" said he couldn't win.

Its fair to say he's an ass, un-presidential, even somewhat dishonest(what politician isn't?). Its fair to question his temperament, his policies foreign and domestic, his effectiveness as President.
But to state that Trump is a moron, a rapist, a political failure or a white supremacist is to leave the sphere of fact-based discussion and join the extreme partisan hyperbole crowd. That's the mirror image of the crowd that claimed Obama was a closet militant Muslim and Hillary was a murderer.

Nailed it.

 

[BimboColesHair]

And it's sad that people actually liked your post because it questions whether or not they understand Presidential history at all, or are they just jumping for joy for a liberal-bashing post, even if it's completely farcical.

They're just rooting for their team, Gouri.

 

[gourimoko]

Timing is perfect no?

Former U.S. President George W. Bush speaks at a forum sponsored by the George W. Bush Institute in New York on Thursday. | Seth Wenig/AP

George W. slams Trumpism, without mentioning president by name
'Bigotry seems emboldened. Our politics seems more vulnerable to conspiracy theories and outright fabrication,' Bush declared.


By EDWARD-ISAAC DOVERE


10/19/2017 12:06 PM EDT


Updated 10/19/2017 12:39 PM EDT

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Former President George W. Bush offered an unmistakable denunciation of Trumpism Thursday without mentioning the president by name, urging citizens to oppose threats to American democracy.

“Bigotry seems emboldened. Our politics seems more vulnerable to conspiracy theories and outright fabrication,” Bush warned in remarks at the Bush Institute’s Spirit of Liberty event in New York.

By chance, Bush was standing in the same spot at the Time Warner Center where former President Barack Obama made a similar plea for democracy and American leadership in late September, shortly after President Donald Trump had finished a belligerent, isolationist speech to the United Nations General Assembly.

But unlike Obama, who campaigned intensely against Trump and has been taking sideways swipes at him since leaving office, Bush has said very little publicly about the current president, or about American politics at all. Thursday's speech, in which he detailed what he sees as the causes for democratic collapse, the path forward and what were obvious references to Trump — even though, like Obama, he did not utter the president's name — was a major departure in a speech that called on a renewal of American spirit and institutions.

"Bigotry in any form is blasphemy against the American creed and it means the very identity of our nation depends on the passing of civic ideals to the next generation. We need a renewed emphasis on civic learning in schools," Bush said. "And our young people need positive role models. Bullying and prejudice in our public life sets a national tone, provides permission for cruelty and bigotry, and compromises the moral education of children."

"The only way to pass along civic values is to first live up to them," he said.

This “unique moment,” Bush said, includes described a threat that he sees as worldwide, and pervasive throughout American society and politics.


.......lol.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Does anyone argue that Clinton or Obama aren't smart, articulate, policy wonks?? Is that really a credible argument made by anybody?

Where is the evidence that Obama was a policy wonk? Smart, articulate guy? Sure. Policy wonk? Nah -- I don't see that at all. He punted the details on the ACA, on the Stimulus bill....All the things that a true policy wonk like Clinton would have jizzed over, he punted on. he wanted other people to do all the wonkery, then bring it to him for a celebratory signing ceremony.

Frankly, I think Reagan was more involved in policy than was Obama. He had very clear ideas and goals, and fought like hell for them. Massive revamping of tax code, along with huge tax cuts. Massive rebuilding of the military. Standing up to those godless Commies....Didn't really care who he pissed off, either.

I think Obama went through all 8 years somewhat mystified that everyone just wouldn't come together in agreement at a consensus he thought reasonable.