Donald Trump

[Karl]

Hi Karl

Just as during the campaign, Trump would regularly proclaim that when he became president, terrorist attacks wouldn't happen. It's all of a piece with man's self-deluded, limited, and mistaken view of the world. I feel we are handing the governance of the country to an eight year old.

Best regards

Chris

I would say my belief is that he won't last the full term, but I almost daren't hope so - wouldn't want to jinx it.

I don't know what's more scary, though - that he is about to enter the White House or the fact that he was voted in. What I do know is that statistically, we are about due for another major war in the West, and tensions - which simmered down since the last cold war - are mounting again. Hopefully that's just the pessimist in me.

[Pcdunn]

Scenarios...

I would say my belief is that he won't last the full term, but I almost daren't hope so - wouldn't want to jinx it.

I don't know what's more scary, though - that he is about to enter the White House or the fact that he was voted in. What I do know is that statistically, we are about due for another major war in the West, and tensions - which simmered down since the last cold war - are mounting again. Hopefully that's just the pessimist in me.

A British poster on my other forum asked us if we thought any of these scenarios for removing Trump from office were likely to happen:

-- Impeachment for malfeasance or criminal doings with his businesses. Pence takes over.
-- Trump gets bored with the job and hands the reins over to Pence.
-- Americans revolt against his administration and demand his removal from office, perhaps due to the concerns over the Russian hacking scandal.
-- Trump dies in office, whether by assassination or natural causes. Pence again would take over, at least for awhile.

I think all are plausible, except for the third one. The first and last have happened before, after all. The second could be more plausible than we think, given that Trump wants to win, and does seem to move from project to project like a child trying different hobbies.

I think Trump throwing away the rule book as far as usual Presidential etiquette is entertaining to some people, but damaging to him in the long run. An example is his retort to the elderly black Congressman John Lewis, who was a civil rights activist in the front lines back in his youth. He stated he wouldn't attend the Inaguration, as he doesn't believe the election was legitimate. A fair opinion.
Trump responded with an insulting Tweet about how Lewis should be concerned about his district's "burning cities and rising crime rates" instead of challenging Trump's victory.
That shows our President-Elect's lack of current knowledge of what African-American neighborhoods are like, as well as invalidates a man's whole career.

[Karl]

A British poster on my other forum asked us if we thought any of these scenarios for removing Trump from office were likely to happen:

-- Impeachment for malfeasance or criminal doings with his businesses. Pence takes over.
-- Trump gets bored with the job and hands the reins over to Pence.
-- Americans revolt against his administration and demand his removal from office, perhaps due to the concerns over the Russian hacking scandal.
-- Trump dies in office, whether by assassination or natural causes. Pence again would take over, at least for awhile.

I think all are plausible, except for the third one. The first and last have happened before, after all. The second could be more plausible than we think, given that Trump wants to win, and does seem to move from project to project like a child trying different hobbies.

I agree with that assessment. The third one is not an option, because while he did lose the popular vote, the divide is still roughly 50/50 - and although plenty of those who voted for Trump would have preferred a better candidate, they aren't likely to revolt against him, either. As for hacking scandals and such-like: scandals only really matter when it happens to someone you don't like. If it's someone you like, scandals are much more forgivable. This election has been proof positive of that.

I think it's going to be one of the first two. I have also considered the possibility of Trump getting bored with his job as president and stepping down, though he would need an excuse to do so.

I think Trump throwing away the rule book as far as usual Presidential etiquette is entertaining to some people, but damaging to him in the long run. An example is his retort to the elderly black Congressman John Lewis, who was a civil rights activist in the front lines back in his youth. He stated he wouldn't attend the Inaguration, as he doesn't believe the election was legitimate. A fair opinion.
Trump responded with an insulting Tweet about how Lewis should be concerned about his district's "burning cities and rising crime rates" instead of challenging Trump's victory.
That shows our President-Elect's lack of current knowledge of what African-American neighborhoods are like, as well as invalidates a man's whole career.

That sort of behaviour doesn't even raise an eyebrow anymore, coming from Trump. He is incapable of letting a slight go unaddressed; he has to retaliate. Just like with Meryl Streep recently: "the most overrated actress ever", I believe his words were. Most people would simply have ignored Meryl's defaming speech. Or they would only address it on prompting from the press. But Trump needs no prompting, because he is an absolute child: he immediately lashes out, with what boils down to "no, you're stupid!" In all honesty, I do not believe I have ever seen a public figure more petty than Trump. Diplomatically, he is a consummate disaster. And unbelievably his die-hard supporters embrace that as if it were a good thing.

[Mayerling]

I agree with that assessment. The third one is not an option, because while he did lose the popular vote, the divide is still roughly 50/50 - and although plenty of those who voted for Trump would have preferred a better candidate, they aren't likely to revolt against him, either. As for hacking scandals and such-like: scandals only really matter when it happens to someone you don't like. If it's someone you like, scandals are much more forgivable. This election has been proof positive of that.

I think it's going to be one of the first two. I have also considered the possibility of Trump getting bored with his job as president and stepping down, though he would need an excuse to do so.



That sort of behaviour doesn't even raise an eyebrow anymore, coming from Trump. He is incapable of letting a slight go unaddressed; he has to retaliate. Just like with Meryl Streep recently: "the most overrated actress ever", I believe his words were. Most people would simply have ignored Meryl's defaming speech. Or they would only address it on prompting from the press. But Trump needs no prompting, because he is an absolute child: he immediately lashes out, with what boils down to "no, you're stupid!" In all honesty, I do not believe I have ever seen a public figure more petty than Trump. Diplomatically, he is a consummate disaster. And unbelievably his die-hard supporters embrace that as if it were a good thing.

Hi Karl,

I think the idea of a people's revolt is not as far-fetched as the expression sounds. The fact that this greedy, crooked loud-mouth got the nomination and won the election (with foreign assistance) has his supporters enraptured because it is topsy-turvy in terms of the normal rut (and it is a rut) of politics. He was new and brash (unless you had followed his career in business, in the courts, and his television crap), and different. So they cheered him on. One hundred years ago, a nation tired of world shakers like Theodore Roosevelt (who had just died) and Woodrow Wilson (who was a broken invalid in the White House, recovering from a stroke) chose good ole' Warren Harding to be our leader. By 1924 (after Harding's death) they realized he wasn't a good President - it took Teapot Dome and a few other scandals to show that. Coolidge was a far better President, although he lacked an imagination in some respects as to economy (but in his defense, few politicians at that time looked deeply into economics). Coolidge was able to cut the budget fairly (quite an accomplishment actually) and preside over a apparently strong economy. But his successor Hoover (who actually was an abler man than Coolidge) became the third Republican President in a row in 1928, within the first year of his administration we had the Wall Street Crash, and soon the Great Depression. It's amazing how quickly all those avid supporters of the Republicans turned on them, and voted for more and more Democrats from 1930 forward.

In this case a people's "political" revolt is inevitable. Those clowns who supported Trump will be the first to feel the miserable results of his and the Republican policies in the next four years. Just start watching how many of those "Red" States he had turn "Blue". This not optimism (who wants the political and economic monstrosity he and his party are in power at all - really!). It's inevitable. In fact, since Hillary is now a spent force, the Democrats will have to produce more innovative leadership. I'm not sorry to see her go (this back and forth dynasty building, first Bushes and then Clintons, is a bit much). I'm sure it will prove better than Trump, McDonnell, and Ryan. Anything is better than those three clowns.

By the way, it comes with the office - criticism of the job you're doing. Every President gets it (Washington, Jefferson, the Roosevelts, Truman, Eisenhower, Reagan - all of them got it). Trump should have thought of that. No doubt he figures that his "tweeting" garbage about various critics is sufficient to silence them. It won't - it will goad them into saying worse things, and demanding worse treatment of Trump and his family and his administration. He doesn't know what a whirlwind he's opened. If he approached his foes with a sense of humor (FDR demonstrated this towards the Republicans on many occasions, when he laughed at them for spreading a story about a destroyer being sent to pick up his dog Fala for example), the humor would deflate the attack a bit, and everyone would be willing to forgive it a bit. But to attack Streep as an overrated actress (who does he favor - some chippy from a porn movie he saw?) or a leading African American Congressman for not attending the most boycotted inauguration in our history (really, the Congressman is not interested in the crimes statistics of his own district? How does the great toupee head know this?) is to invite trouble.

For me, this administration and it's allies (including the Tea Partyists) as supporters of "the art of the steal" which is the proper name of any book by Donald Trump.

Jeff
Jeff

[Patrick S]

I think we've handed out a few too many participation trophies over the past few decades. Thus, we have kids....uh...I mean "adults" who just can't accept when losing feels like, you know, ACTUAL losing. So they are left to invent dream scenarios in which their fantasies become reality and their loss turns into one big, final, ultimate victory!

"Trump's going to get impeached.....and we'll win!" He hasn't taken office yet, right? Ah, whatever! We miss Obama already and we don't like Trump and imagining him being humiliated by impeachment makes us SO happy! And we like being happy! We DESERVE to be happy. So, impeachment! It's going to happen.

"Trump is going to just quit and leave office....and we'll win!" Yeah, okay. Well, he's STILL not in office yet, but do we really think that would be reflective of his track record and his EGO? Ah, who cares!? We hate the guy so let's just make up stuff that makes us happy and content because it feels a lot like WINNING! And I really LIKE winning!

"There's going to be big revolt and "the people" are going to depose Trump, overthrow him and Pence.....and Paul Ryan is going to get #ucked to death by a Rhino horn just like Joss Whedon said would be so hilarious....and all the democrats are going to be in charge again and I'm going to get to go back to school for free and I'll get free healthcare and Wi-Fi and Xbox and Taco Bell for life and I'll be happy and a winner and everyone will love me because my social media rants are really funny and on-point and relevant and popular even though they're always between 10,000 and 150,000 words I know everyone reads every word because I'm a really great writer...which makes me a winner.

It would be hilarious if wasn't so pathetic.

[Pcdunn]

Thank to all for their interesting responses on this thread.

Here is a link to the Washington Post popularity poll for Trum as he is about to take office this week. He's the most unpopular President going into office in years.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-trump-draws-low-marks-for-transition-response-to-russian-hacking/2017/01/17/0926302a-dc25-11e6-ad42-f3375f271c9c_story.html?utm_term=.2d4181ff7c60

[Pcdunn]

Jeff: "But to attack Streep as an overrated actress (who does he favor - some chippy from a porn movie he saw?) or a leading African American Congressman for not attending the most boycotted inauguration in our history (really, the Congressman is not interested in the crimes statistics of his own district? How does the great toupee head know this?) is to invite trouble."

About Streep-- apparently Trump's "overrated actress" claim is in direct opposition to his once saying earlier that Meryl Streep was "one of his favorite actresses." What a liar the man is.

Still-- it is what it is, alas...

[ChrisGeorge]

In the interview Trump did with the London Sunday Times, just published, he was asked to name great heroes from history that he admired. His answer was that his father was a "great builder" . . . and then he went on to talk about all the great things he himself had done.

Meanwhile, the Democrats, in the following fundraising pitch I've just received, are predicting that Trump will eventually be impeached because of his business entanglements --

[Karl]

It would be hilarious if wasn't so pathetic.

I can't help but wonder... Would you be writing the same criticism if Hillary had won?

[Patrick S]

I can't help but wonder... Would you be writing the same criticism if Hillary had won?

Since I loath Trump and Clinton in equal measure, I absolutely would. I wasn't an Obama supporter but I was quick to accept reality, try and gain some sense of optimism, and, frankly, get over it. It's what an adults do, Karl. But, then I've never been one to strive for "likes" and "thumbs up" on social media and I don't strive to voice the "correct" opinion on message boards and - as Bill Belichick might call it - "Snapface". But, hey. Whatever floats your boat.

[Karl]

Since I loath Trump and Clinton in equal measure, I absolutely would. I wasn't an Obama supporter but I was quick to accept reality, try and gain some sense of optimism, and, frankly, get over it. It's what an adults do, Karl. But, then I've never been one to strive for "likes" and "thumbs up" on social media and I don't strive to voice the "correct" opinion on message boards and - as Bill Belichick might call it - "Snapface". But, hey. Whatever floats your boat.

I don't really get what you're driving at here - maybe because you're talking to someone who isn't even on Facebook. But I'm glad you brought up Obama's election: While you were a good boy and sucked it up, there were plenty who didn't - including Trump, who kept nagging about that birth certificate. And there was no shortage of people who kept insisting Obama was a Muslim, wasn't properly sworn in, not a US citizen (Trump was one of those), was unqualified, was corrupt etc. etc. - throughout his presidency.

So what's different now? Everybody who criticises Trump naturally believe that their criticism is well founded. Same thing with those who criticised Hillary thought that criticism well founded. And here again, Trump kept moaning about the election being rigged every time the polls were against him - he only stopped saying that when he got elected. Before the results were in, however, he said he would not accept a result which declared Hillary the winner. I could check to see if you made some disparaging remark about that somewhere within this thread, but frankly I don't think I'll find it.

Be that as it may, no matter who wins or loses there are always going to be people complaining, and every jack one of them believes that his or her complaints are valid. I believe my complaints against Trump are valid - and if you loathe Trump half as much as you say you do, you ought to have some complaints of your own. And the complaints levelled against Trump on this thread, even just the ones I've brought forward, are sufficient to believe that impeachment is a very real possibility - if the complaints are true. This you cannot deny. So in order for such prognosis to be invalid, the complaints must be at the very least blown out of proportion. We who make these complaints, however, obviously cannot see what's wrong with them. It is therefore up to you to point out in what way we are in error.

Unless, of course, all you intended was to bait the opposition by calling them childish (possibly an attempt to turn the very justified criticism against Trump on this score around on the people who spoke it?), without actually having any intention of participating in discussion?

[Patrick S]

I don't really get what you're driving at here - maybe because you're talking to someone who isn't even on Facebook. But I'm glad you brought up Obama's election: While you were a good boy and sucked it up, there were plenty who didn't - including Trump, who kept nagging about that birth certificate. And there was no shortage of people who kept insisting Obama was a Muslim, wasn't properly sworn in, not a US citizen (Trump was one of those), was unqualified, was corrupt etc. etc. - throughout his presidency.

So what's different now? Everybody who criticises Trump naturally believe that their criticism is well founded. Same thing with those who criticised Hillary thought that criticism well founded. And here again, Trump kept moaning about the election being rigged every time the polls were against him - he only stopped saying that when he got elected. Before the results were in, however, he said he would not accept a result which declared Hillary the winner. I could check to see if you made some disparaging remark about that somewhere within this thread, but frankly I don't think I'll find it.

Be that as it may, no matter who wins or loses there are always going to be people complaining, and every jack one of them believes that his or her complaints are valid. I believe my complaints against Trump are valid - and if you loathe Trump half as much as you say you do, you ought to have some complaints of your own. And the complaints levelled against Trump on this thread, even just the ones I've brought forward, are sufficient to believe that impeachment is a very real possibility - if the complaints are true. This you cannot deny. So in order for such prognosis to be invalid, the complaints must be at the very least blown out of proportion. We who make these complaints, however, obviously cannot see what's wrong with them. It is therefore up to you to point out in what way we are in error.

Unless, of course, all you intended was to bait the opposition by calling them childish (possibly an attempt to turn the very justified criticism against Trump on this score around on the people who spoke it?), without actually having any intention of participating in discussion?

What's the difference now (between those who never got over Obama's election and those - like you - whining about Trump and hoping for impeachment before he's even inaugurated)? None. Different ideologies, but ideologues all. You are the same. You should stop assuming that everyone not calling for impeachment before inauguration or standing on a street corner holding an anti-Trump sign is a "secret Trump supporter". That's childish.

I'm baiting the "opposition"? Which "opposition" is that? Radical Islam? North Korea? Iran? Syria? The Pittsburgh Steelers? The election is over, so I don't what you mean by "opposition"? See, I'm an American. So, even though I'm realistic about politicians, knowing their motivations are usually self-aggrandizing and ego driven, I always hope for some measure of success (unlikely as that usually is) in that I have a vested interest in it. So, who am opposed to? Trump? Well, no. He's going to be president in two days, no matter how many times you wet your bed and cry yourself to sleep. If I'm opposed to anything it's the state of our (U.S.) politics. If you recall, Obama ran on the (correct) premise that we change our politics, eliminate the "smallness" of it, the partisanship, unite as Americans. I was all in on that I was hopeful he could get that done. Of course, the first thing he did once in office was ram major legislation through congress without one Republican vote and then began vilifying the "opposition", making comments like "elections have consequence"....so....yeah. So much for that. And in the end, he further divided the nation. I'm sure Trump will do likewise. Yet, I HOPE not. As for me, what I do NOT do is pretend one is better than the other because I lean in whatever political direction they profess to represent, left or right. That would be silly, if not outright ignorant. It would mean I'm simply a tool, used by the Obamas, Clintons, Bushes, and Trumps of the world to further their agendas (most of which we simply don't know). That would make me like you, Karl. And let's face it, I don't want to be like you. No offense.

[Karl]

What's the difference now (between those who never got over Obama's election and those - like you - whining about Trump and hoping for impeachment before he's even inaugurated)? None. Different ideologies, but ideologues all. You are the same. You should stop assuming that everyone not calling for impeachment before inauguration or standing on a street corner holding an anti-Trump sign is a "secret Trump supporter". That's childish.

I agree, that would be childish. What makes you assume I am one? As I am not calling for impeachment, by your logic I must consider myself a "secret Trump supporter". I suspect you are projecting, here, and more than a bit.

I'm baiting the "opposition"? Which "opposition" is that?

The ones you were addressing in your post which ended with "It would be hilarious if wasn't so pathetic."

See, I'm an American. So, even though I'm realistic about politicians, knowing their motivations are usually self-aggrandizing and ego driven, I always hope for some measure of success

I really don't think that is peculiar to Americans.

So, who am opposed to? Trump? Well, no. He's going to be president in two days, no matter how many times you wet your bed and cry yourself to sleep. If I'm opposed to anything it's the state of our (U.S.) politics. If you recall, Obama ran on the (correct) premise that we change our politics, eliminate the "smallness" of it, the partisanship, unite as Americans. I was all in on that I was hopeful he could get that done. Of course, the first thing he did once in office was ram major legislation through congress without one Republican vote and then began vilifying the "opposition", making comments like "elections have consequence"....so....yeah. So much for that.

But you were not opposed to Obama? Shouldn't you have been opposed to him if you disagreed with him? Was the (Republican dominated) Congress "childish" for opposing Obama? It is not at all clear what you are saying here. On the one hand, it sounds as if we are supposed to stand by our leaders, come hell or high water. On the other, it seems you are implying that it is ok not to back them when they act contrary to your wishes.

And in the end, he further divided the nation. I'm sure Trump will do likewise. Yet, I HOPE not.

Surely you are not suggesting that anyone here hopes otherwise?

As for me, what I do NOT do is pretend one is better than the other because I lean in whatever political direction they profess to represent, left or right. That would be silly, if not outright ignorant. It would mean I'm simply a tool, used by the Obamas, Clintons, Bushes, and Trumps of the world to further their agendas (most of which we simply don't know).

What does that have to do with anything? I have never pretended one political leaning is better than the other either. Like most people, I have both conservative and liberal views. Get off your high horse.

That would make me like you, Karl. And let's face it, I don't want to be like you.

Man, that was random. How on earth would that make you like me? It's like you just entered this thread, not having read anything in it. No, it would not make you remotely like me, because I have not said anything which should make anyone think as much. This is just more of your projection: you assume, quite falsely, that because I am opposed to Trump, that I am anti-Republican, and that that is the reason I oppose Trump. Except, of course, none of my arguments against Trump have been based on his political ideology (I don't even know what his political ideology is, no one really does), but rather his criminal record, his lies, his immature (and dangerously undiplomatic) behaviour and cabinet selection.

No offense.

Indeed, it was so egregious that it was impossible to take offense. But you clearly did mean offense, because you went out of your way to thumb your nose at me - and you even had to lie in order to do it. I would like to think you are capable of better insults than that.

[Abby Normal]

Obama just commuted the sentence of a convicted traitor. and released more terrorists from Gitmo. wonderful.
so much for all the concern about security breaches.

what a joke.

[Abby Normal]

What's the difference now (between those who never got over Obama's election and those - like you - whining about Trump and hoping for impeachment before he's even inaugurated)? None. Different ideologies, but ideologues all. You are the same. You should stop assuming that everyone not calling for impeachment before inauguration or standing on a street corner holding an anti-Trump sign is a "secret Trump supporter". That's childish.

I'm baiting the "opposition"? Which "opposition" is that? Radical Islam? North Korea? Iran? Syria? The Pittsburgh Steelers? The election is over, so I don't what you mean by "opposition"? See, I'm an American. So, even though I'm realistic about politicians, knowing their motivations are usually self-aggrandizing and ego driven, I always hope for some measure of success (unlikely as that usually is) in that I have a vested interest in it. So, who am opposed to? Trump? Well, no. He's going to be president in two days, no matter how many times you wet your bed and cry yourself to sleep. If I'm opposed to anything it's the state of our (U.S.) politics. If you recall, Obama ran on the (correct) premise that we change our politics, eliminate the "smallness" of it, the partisanship, unite as Americans. I was all in on that I was hopeful he could get that done. Of course, the first thing he did once in office was ram major legislation through congress without one Republican vote and then began vilifying the "opposition", making comments like "elections have consequence"....so....yeah. So much for that. And in the end, he further divided the nation. I'm sure Trump will do likewise. Yet, I HOPE not. As for me, what I do NOT do is pretend one is better than the other because I lean in whatever political direction they profess to represent, left or right. That would be silly, if not outright ignorant. It would mean I'm simply a tool, used by the Obamas, Clintons, Bushes, and Trumps of the world to further their agendas (most of which we simply don't know). That would make me like you, Karl. And let's face it, I don't want to be like you. No offense.

good post Patrick
I for one am sick of the blind political party BS and do nothing politicians which has IMHO reached an all time low and am simply hoping that the new president can make a difference and be successful. so my country can be successful.

hope springs eternal*

*(usually followed by disappointment)
LOL.