Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon
- Thread starter kithnou
- Start date
- Status
dholliday
deconstructed rep
He's deffo winding people up on his twitter. He also means most of what he says, but his chaotic halfway-senile brain sometimes can't keep up, hence the contradictions.
Check out Trump interviews from the 70's & 80's, he was really switched-on back then. I think age has taken away some of his balance and intellect.
I still maintain he's not all bad and some of his tweets have been very positive, but these don't get reported in the biased media who only care for reporting stuff which feeds their narrative.
Also check out comments on every Trump tweet from the anti-Trump obsessives, regardless of the content of his tweet these people will, often quite nastily, lay into Trump, telling him quite aggressively he's basically the worst person ever. I note this abuse also goes unreported by the mainstream, the same mainstream which hound out Milo Yiannopoulos for cracking a sexist joke which a Frankie Boyle would get a pass for.
Double standards and rank hypocrisy are rife among the chattering classes. We should at the very least be aware of this.
Another example of the double standards at work here.
These ridiculous figures have been pilloried everywhere, I'm surprised you're taking them seriously, maybe because it fits the narrative that Trump is bad and Obama was not? See for example:
https://theintercept.com/2016/07/01...inally-releases-its-dubious-drone-death-toll/
See also good ol' Wikipedia which is very careful in which sources it will use for such serious topics, add the numbers together and you will come away with exactly what I said: Trump has killed less Arabs than Obama so far:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_from_U.S._drone_strikes#Total_numbers
I agree he's changing the game, making up the rules anew as to how a President conducts himself and how he communicates with his people. I like how he's using a platform previously-considered a bastion of leftist hack-journalism to reach out to his people (and his critics). I cringe with the rest of you at some of his posts, but the key is not what Trump is saying, it's how we react to what he's saying. By hanging on his every word we are giving him exactly what he wants (attention). Every mainstream online newspaper in the Western world invariably leads with 2 or 3 Trump stories, most of which are based on whatever he's tweeted. The ones that allow comments are filled with hateful posts, it's become a game for commenters to see who can make the most incredulous bile-filled comment on how much they hate Trump in order to rack up 'recommended/thumbs-up' points.
Nuanced debate? Not a bit of it.
History may judge Trump critically, but it will almost certainly be very damning in our role in this two-minute-hate marathon.
dholliday
deconstructed rep
@LinekersLegs @DanEFC92 @abelard I notice yous (among others) post a lot in this thread and it's always negative towards Trump. Have any of you also pro-actively posted about the above story? Or do you have any comment on it?
I think he is exhibiting signs of dementia tbh
Probably not, but this is a Trump thread D, all our Hillary chat could technically be deemed irrelevant to the thread. I think the problem most people find with ardent Trump supporters, is that any defence of him is usually some favourable comparison to something a Democrat did, rather than a defence of Trump's actions themselves. So Trump made some terrible comments about women? Whaddabout Anthony Weiner? Trump's hires all seem to have dubious connections to Russia? Whaddabout the DNC??
Debate seems to be dead. Nobody seems willing to accept their man/woman's failings and instead of trying to make things better, are focusing on what the other side is doing worse. The difference here is that Hillary lost the election and is essentially a political non-entity, Trump is the President of one of the most powerful countries in the world.
dholliday
deconstructed rep
Yes Prev, this is my biggest bugbear and it's a recent thing. I blame the concept of recommended/thumbs-up points (making acidic one-liners more popular than long reasoned posts) and generally the twitterisch concept of limiting oneself to very short sentences. Nuance has no chance. Add to that how much hate is out there (from all sides) which cause overzealous moderation of more reasonable, but perhaps controversial, comments, and we're left with debate of a very poor quality.
Also going back to the 70's/80's and compare TV discussion panels with those now...back then people would not hectically talk over each other so much, and there'd be more time and space to make one's argument. There was less oneupmanship, less tribalism, it was more about real debating.
I think I should point out, I openly supported a Trump presidency for various reasons. I'm not a leftie at all costs, but it is clear the man doesn't have the emotional IQ for office, failed to live up to his promises and is doing a fair bit of damage, I can't see how it could be assessed otherwise even by people who support him.
abelard
Player Valuation: £35m
Extensively. Why not look for yourself first?
Been banished for WUMming in the Ale House again? ; )
dholliday
deconstructed rep
Emotional IQ for office: ideally I'd agree but he's changed the game, now you don't need emotional IQ for office.
Failed to live up to promises: he's not a year in yet, he needs time (we gave Obama time after all). Or, he's being prevented by the unstoppable machine of government (that was a popular excuse for Obama & Bush too). Saying that, I also agree Trump himself is too Obama-fixated in many of his outbursts, he's defining himself by how he defines his predecessor and that's also not helping.
Doing damage: debatable, what are your specific examples? I'd agree his stance on for example the *takeaknee campaign was damaging, causing yet more division in what is a minefield topic these days. It remains to be seen whether his macho rhetoric against North Korea was any more damaging than previous sanctions have been.
dholliday
deconstructed rep
You've identified the problem, abe: different opinions are considered wumming rather than being actual different opinions. It's as if the WUM-accuser simply can't otherwise fathom how another person could have a different opinion.
Echo chambers have a lot to answer for...
You can blame Clinton or Sanders or the DNC or Jill Stein or the electoral college or Facebook or the Russians or the major media networks and sure, maybe all these things each played a small part, but the main reason Trump is in power is because a small group managed to harness the power of the racial hatred generated by the Obama election in '08. They took this fervor, dressed it in a flag and gave it a bible.
Im sure compromise can be reached at the judicial and legislative branches but the executive branch is a lost cause and I think that could be a first.
Im sure compromise can be reached at the judicial and legislative branches but the executive branch is a lost cause and I think that could be a first.
abelard
Player Valuation: £35m
Nobody has ever accused mezzrow or even TX bill of WUMming though...
I am skeptical of all reporting of civilian deaths from both Obama's and Trump's administration as they both have very significant motives to under-report. That is why I used airwars which I believe has less motive to fudge the numbers and as I understand it don't just use figures provided by the DoD but from a wide variety of sources in their reporting. Given the change in type of fighting against ISIS that is happening (urban centres) I'd be very surprised if the civilian death toll wasn't going up whoever was the Commander in Chief, that isn't a political assessment but one based on the military situation.
I used your own data source for the Afghanistan attacks to compare from 2017 to previous years, yet when it shows an increase in frequency of attacks under Trump you ignore that information, switch to Wikipedia (which unless I'm missing it doesn't have anything on 2017 figures) and then accuse me of being the one selectively looking for data!
As for the narrative, I believe that Obama was awful wrt drone strikes and their resultant civilian casualties but the intial indications are that Trump with be at least as bad if not worse (especially if the CIA get involved as rumored https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/trump-admin-wants-increase-cia-drone-strikes-n802311)
Indeed his campaign comments were that
Given all that I think that even if you are supportive of Trump expecting a reduction in deaths due to drone strikes under his admin an unusual one contradicted by his rhetoric and actions to date, as we get further data I guess we'll see.
dholliday
deconstructed rep
Disagree it's anywhere close to being a "main reason", considering how many voted for Trump who wouldn't consider themselves rightwing or racist.
Your opinion is a popular one but it's a race card view. You even say yourself it's "a small group" so how could it be "the main reason"?
lol
Challenge for you: quote a post of mine which you consider wumming.
- His failure to staff government departments, in particular the state department, is doing damage. He's visiting S.Korea but hasn't appointed an ambassador there yet.
- His EPA appointments are doing damage, there is a completely demoralized department and big business is calling the shots.
- His appointment of Betsy DeVoss is doing damage
- His targeting of Sanctuary cities is doing damage as undocumented victims of crime no longer go to police.
- His foreign policy stances are affecting the tourism industry.
- His lack of action on the LV shooter who shot over 500 people is causing damage.
- His stance on trans soldiers before talking to anyone in the military caused damage
- His disclosure of sensitive Israeli military information to Kislyak in the oval office caused damage.
- Rolling back his own condemnation on the Charlottesville attack caused damage.
- His failure to negotiate a suitable replacement and subsequent efforts to suffocate the ACA have caused damage.
- His continuing divisive attacks on Obama/Clinton/dems cause damage
- His firing of the head of the FBI and admitting on TV that it was an obstruction of justice caused damage
- His hamfisted handling of the deaths of 4 Soldiers in Niger caused damage
- His calling for the death penalty in the NY attack as well as Bergdal comments caused damage to any prosecution case
- His appointment of an AG who lied under oath at a Senate hearing caused damage
- His hiring and firing of his own senior WH staff causes damage
I could go on....
dholliday
deconstructed rep
Good reply, Legs.
It shows an increase in frequency of attacks, but so far the total death toll isn't as massive as under Obama. Granted, Trump is still only in his first year, and as you say later the indications are he will trump Obama in this horrible number, but until then it remains accurate (if arguably disingenuous) to say Trump has killed less Arabs than Obama.
I'm sure we're of the same opinion in that we want these strikes to end immediately. Killing unknown people without trial is wrong, full stop.
It shows an increase in frequency of attacks, but so far the total death toll isn't as massive as under Obama. Granted, Trump is still only in his first year, and as you say later the indications are he will trump Obama in this horrible number, but until then it remains accurate (if arguably disingenuous) to say Trump has killed less Arabs than Obama.
I'm sure we're of the same opinion in that we want these strikes to end immediately. Killing unknown people without trial is wrong, full stop.
- Status