The Trump Presidency

Well, since the last thread got terminated, I thought I'd open a new one as I think Trump's Presidency is potentially quite an important event (one way or the other), so we should talk about it.

Let's at least try to argue points raised rather than sling any personal insults (not that I mind).

To kick off, what on Earth is that Kellyanne Conway doing promoting Ivanka Trump's fashion line and does the Donald seriously think it's OK to weigh in as he's done??? With any luck, some legal eagles will tear Conway down somewhat and someone (anyone!) will convince Trump to stop tweeting. In fact, does anyone in the Administration know what they're doing? A less suitable press officer than Spicer is hard to imagine but to be fair to the guy, it must be difficult fielding media comments when he's having to make it up on the hoof.

I'll write this disclaimer now. You all know how you should behave. No insults, no wumming or this thread will be locked just like the others.

navyblueshorts wrote:Well, since the last thread got terminated, I thought I'd open a new one as I think Trump's Presidency is potentially quite an important event (one way or the other), so we should talk about it.

Let's at least try to argue points raised rather than sling any personal insults (not that I mind).

To kick off, what on Earth is that Kellyanne Conway doing promoting Ivanka Trump's fashion line and does the Donald seriously think it's OK to weigh in as he's done??? With any luck, some legal eagles will tear Conway down somewhat and someone (anyone!) will convince Trump to stop tweeting. In fact, does anyone in the Administration know what they're doing? A less suitable press officer than Spicer is hard to imagine but to be fair to the guy, it must be difficult fielding media comments when he's having to make it up on the hoof.

What a load of old............................................... great first few lines there.  In complete agreement.  The American Presidency - American politics in general - weaves into all our lives on a practical basis as much as an emotional and ideological one.  It must be talked about and discussed by all peoples in all forums - especially in the supposed 'Western World', where its real influence is most evident.

And yes too - a level playing field.  I couldn't care less about personal abuse, personally speaking; but when it's allowed too much rein it tends to intimidate some into modifying their opinions for an easier life - i.e. dissuades new voices or other posters from other parts of this site from dropping in and placing their opinions on record.
So let's all of us keep to the points we rise, let's debate them aggressively (as in not being afraid to challenge them or support them) and lets not preface all that with the smart'n'sneery personal stuff.

This posts advice and relevance will self-destruct after 20 posts.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Incidentally, is that popcorn you're eating produced in the USA or Russia, Top?

SecretFly wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Incidentally, is that popcorn you're eating produced in the USA or Russia, Top?

China...

Thought so... but wanted to be polite.

On the Trump Presidency issues you brought up, Navy - it's a whole new style, isn't it.  
He's been a shock to the old established political system (Democrat And Republican) since he first declared his candidacy and it was laughed at out loud by many mainstream news and entertainment outfits.
The election process was a shock to old conventional methods of discourse too - Trump shot from the hip even more than that pseudo cowboy GW Bush. The media (news and entertainment) had a field day there too.
And now as President, the completely new approach continues..as does the latent shock for the observers who don't appreciate that their version of political normality has been shelved for a few years.

His undermining of his own judiciary should be a huge worry to all Americans.

And his blatant conflicts of interests admonishing retailers for dropping his families clothing lines due to falling sales.

Pr4wn wrote:His undermining of his own judiciary should be a huge worry to all Americans.

Even the Democrats acknowledge that the great war developing between President Trump and the judiciary, concerning some of his policy promises to the electorate that voted for him and his implementation of them, IS a political game. They want him impeached. He wants his way.
So he and his people see the judiciary (a section of it) as undermining him and his role by stalling his implementation plans.

It'll continue I'm sure and even on to other aspects of Trump policy. Obama was clogged up by the Republicans. Trump will be stalled in everything he tries. Boys will be boys - politics will be politics. Trump will finally craft a sturdier (in his mind) vetting system for entry into the USA.

Yes, but by appearing foolish, he undermines himself.

He doesn't care, Julius.  That's a sensibility his detractors would love him to be more sensitive about so that they might have a weapon to prod him with.  He doesn't really care about the 'foolish' optics - if he did, he'd have cut some of that hair centuries ago .  And the important point is that the more his detractors attack every move he makes, everything he says etc - the more his backers get behind him.  
The many and diverse opposition forces, and their incessant pace, they're only serving to make him a martyr to those that support him.

He cares about getting what he wants, that's why he gets so angry when he can't get it.

Both his lack of ability in some areas, and his response to setbacks will actually make it harder for him to get what he wants.

He may not care about appearing foolish per se, but appearing foolish lessens his chances of accomplishing what he wants.

The difference is that the judiciary are impartial, they uphold the rule of law. Politics is different.

Attacking them undermines his own efforts.

JuliusHMarx wrote:He cares about getting what he wants, that's why he gets so angry when he can't get it.

Both his lack of ability in some areas, and his response to setbacks will actually make it harder for him to get what he wants.

He may not care about appearing foolish per se, but appearing foolish lessens his chances of accomplishing what he wants.

We'll see. He gets angry. He wants his way. His ways are unconventional. No argument on any of that. We'll see though whether he gets to do some practical work that he could put a success tag on after four years. The point that his many critics fail to acknowledge and I think overlook all too casually, is that he has a powerful swathe of people behind both his unconventional approach and behind many of his plans. He isn't unpopular. The media will try and try to suggest he is - but no, he isn't.

Pr4wn wrote:The difference is that the judiciary are impartial, they uphold the rule of law. Politics is different.

Attacking them undermines his own efforts.

In theory, but how many times does the Supreme court split along party lines over the rule of law?
But having his own pick for the SC find his comments 'disheartening and demoralizing' doesn't bode well for him, should he pick a fight with the judiciary, using Twitter as his weapon of choice.

SecretFly wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:He cares about getting what he wants, that's why he gets so angry when he can't get it.

Both his lack of ability in some areas, and his response to setbacks will actually make it harder for him to get what he wants.

He may not care about appearing foolish per se, but appearing foolish lessens his chances of accomplishing what he wants.

We'll see.  He gets angry.  He wants his way.  His ways are unconventional.  No argument on any of that.  We'll see though whether he gets to do some practical work that he could put a success tag on after four years.  The point that his many critics fail to acknowledge and I think overlook all too casually, is that he has a powerful swathe of people behind both his unconventional approach and behind many of his plans.  He isn't unpopular.  The media will try and try to suggest he is - but no, he isn't.

He wasn't as popular as Hillary, and she was pretty unpopular!

Pr4wn wrote:The difference is that the judiciary are impartial, they uphold the rule of law. Politics is different.

Attacking them undermines his own efforts.

They're impartial in theory.  That's acknowledged - by the very people who criticise Trump

Did you listen in to the Senate debate on electing Sessions to the Attorney General role?  Many many commentators openly accusing him of bias and personal conviction informing his judgements through his long legal career.  These people, Democrats - a good number of them - even opened up by assuring the whole House that they regard Sessions as a friend and as a senator of high integrity.  But that didn't stop them doing their politics and accusing him of a partial execution of his duties in many of his legal positions.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:He cares about getting what he wants, that's why he gets so angry when he can't get it.

Both his lack of ability in some areas, and his response to setbacks will actually make it harder for him to get what he wants.

He may not care about appearing foolish per se, but appearing foolish lessens his chances of accomplishing what he wants.

We'll see.  He gets angry.  He wants his way.  His ways are unconventional.  No argument on any of that.  We'll see though whether he gets to do some practical work that he could put a success tag on after four years.  The point that his many critics fail to acknowledge and I think overlook all too casually, is that he has a powerful swathe of people behind both his unconventional approach and behind many of his plans.  He isn't unpopular.  The media will try and try to suggest he is - but no, he isn't.

He wasn't as popular as Hillary, and she was pretty unpopular!

He was more popular in more States.

SecretFly wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:He cares about getting what he wants, that's why he gets so angry when he can't get it.

Both his lack of ability in some areas, and his response to setbacks will actually make it harder for him to get what he wants.

He may not care about appearing foolish per se, but appearing foolish lessens his chances of accomplishing what he wants.

We'll see.  He gets angry.  He wants his way.  His ways are unconventional.  No argument on any of that.  We'll see though whether he gets to do some practical work that he could put a success tag on after four years.  The point that his many critics fail to acknowledge and I think overlook all too casually, is that he has a powerful swathe of people behind both his unconventional approach and behind many of his plans.  He isn't unpopular.  The media will try and try to suggest he is - but no, he isn't.

He wasn't as popular as Hillary, and she was pretty unpopular!

He was more popular in more States.

And less popular overall.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

And less popular overall.

Thus why it's The United States of America - not The States of New York, California and Florida plus 47 Others

The Big Population States don't get to lord it over the small ones. That would be more a Dictatorship than a Democracy.

That's not my point though, is it?

You were saying he isn't unpopular. It would certainly be difficult to claim he's popular. But those who do like him, really like him.

Pr4wn wrote:The difference is that the judiciary are impartial, they uphold the rule of law. Politics is different.

Attacking them undermines his own efforts.

 You're only saying that because you are a moderator, all your bunch stick together.

 But seriously if Judges want to be politicians, then they should discard the robes.

The only things left on his 'to do' list are build the wall and put Hilary in jail, once those are done then he can put his feet up for the next three and a half years.

..and play golf. He misses the golf. But he knows that if the 'media' get to take a picture of him on a golf course within the first six months, that'll be the impeachment proceedings started.

Poor bugg-er, the eyes of the Righteous are upon him. He even has to put down the lid on the White House toilet seats lest they accuse him of being a typical red-neck, non-house-trained genetically un-fluid man!

JuliusHMarx wrote:That's not my point though, is it?

You were saying he isn't unpopular. It would certainly be difficult to claim he's popular. But those who do like him, really like him.

He is popular. How many million people do you need to vote for you to prove popularity? He is popular. His attitude is popular. His proposed policy on many different fronts is popular. His single finger to the big punchers of both Parties (Republican and Democrats) is popular. Certain media outlets want to give the feeling that American who voted for him now want to get rid of him as quickly as possible after realising their terrible mistake (much the same approach used as the anti-Brexit media use).

But it isn't so. No they don't.

.. or he could go back part time to construction. for a 70 year old he's got a good motor.

He's got a great motor and the boys on the building sites love him

YMCA, YMCA!

SecretFly wrote:He's got a great motor and the boys on the building sites love him

YMCA, YMCA!

 And the cops not so sure about the Indians, but they will come round if he slips them a few beers for any oil pipelines going over Res land, then it"ll be back to "Young Man...."

I'm always on the Indians side of things in a war against the palefaces so that's one policy I ain't on point with Trump on. He better get his act together of I'll be putting on the warpaint.

I agree with you there fly.

SecretFly wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:That's not my point though, is it?

You were saying he isn't unpopular. It would certainly be difficult to claim he's popular. But those who do like him, really like him.

He is popular.  How many million people do you need to vote for you to prove popularity?  He is popular.  His attitude is popular.  His proposed policy on many different fronts is popular.  His single finger to the big punchers of both Parties (Republican and Democrats) is popular.  Certain media outlets want to give the feeling that American who voted for him now want to get rid of him as quickly as possible after realising their terrible mistake (much the same approach used as the anti-Brexit media use).

But it isn't so.  No they don't.

Fair enough then. He just wasn't as popular overall as Hillary (who by all accounts was unpopular, but turned out to be popular - go figure).

Go figure indeed!  Nobody wanted her until Trump did the impossible - then she became a Saint.  You only have to look at how that lovely man Michael Moore started out lambasting Clinton and then pleading and almost crying for Americans to vote for her.

Like I've said many times - the kind of people that have popped up in almost neurotically fierce opposition to Trump makes me feel that Trump is on the right track overall.

SecretFly wrote:Go figure indeed!  Nobody wanted her...

No-one at all? Must have been embarrassing to get 0 votes in the election.

Yeah, Bernie was embarrassed that she was more 'popular' than him at the convention 'election' ..........................

She was right popular - when the system got behind her....including the poor eejit Bernie! Like I said, when you see the people that ended up supporting her, you know Trump was on the right track.

And when I see the people that are supporting Trump, I know he's on the wrong track.

Of course you do. I hope you didn't expect me to think otherwise, Julius.

We talk for ourselves. However, it gets tiring when you have to keep popping in the "in my opinion" - so let's just accept that's a given in debates.

SecretFly wrote:However, it gets tiring when you have to keep popping in the "in my opinion" - so let's just accept that's a given in debates.

That's just your opinion

BTW, do racist, xenophobic, sexist, misogynist, homophobes put down the seat or leave it up?

I haven't read the latest edition of GC magazine so I'm not sure - but feel I'll need to know over the next four years.

This Flynn stuff could be tricky. Can't see that one simply being swept under the rug

GSC wrote:This Flynn stuff could be tricky. Can't see that one simply being swept under the rug

Trump doesn't wear a rug - it's his own hair.

Should be plenty of room to sweep it under then, carry on

...and Flynn falls on his sword. This is getting funny now. Almost feel sorry for Trump now (nah, not really), but now people want to know what the President knew and when he knew it...

Wonder what the odds on impeachment are.....??

Officials in Obama's administration warned the incoming administration about this apparently.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Wonder what the odds on impeachment are.....??

According to Paddy Power

Year that Trump is Impeached  
Tuesday 28th February 2017, 00:00
Applies to the year in which it is impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump are brought to the House of Representatives.


2017

4/1  
 

2018

9/1  
 


2019

16/1  
 

I wish SecretFly were here, but he's vacationing at Mar-a-Lago.

He probably is here. It just takes some time to draft 5 paragraphs of wannabe Russel Brand bunkem.

More time than I spend reading it