U.S. Politics: "Trump Is Dumber Than A Bag Of Hair"

[Maithanet]

35 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'm of the same mind as Mexal. I agree with you that Trump often times tries to distract the media when things are going poorly for him, and that attacking the media is one of the main ways he tries to do it, but I don't think this is an example of that. But I don't think this is an example of it. When Trump attacks women, especially based on their looks, he's just being himself, i.e. a sexist pig who can't control himself. 

I feel like this entire thread is selling Trump's political acumen short.  One does not simply fall into the Presidency by good luck.  Trump and his team crafted a strategy which fit his personality and style.  Aggressive, personal tweets to dominate the news cycle and piss off liberals is part of that strategy.  If Trump and team had embraced a more traditional campaign style, his lack of disciple on twitter would have destroyed him long ago. 

It doesn't matter that this particular tweet was sent because Trump was just lashing out, rather than an artful attempt to distract from health care.  Trump's unhinged tweeting fits into the larger strategy they've crafted around him. 

[Fez]

Speaking of health care, I've seen the argument that the reason Johnson came out against the bill, surprising nearly everyone, is that he's pulling a Lieberman. His election campaign was given up for dead back in October by senate Republican leadership and the various fundraising organizations they control, and he ended up going it alone. And then he won; and not only won, he got 74,000 more votes than Trump did in Wisconsin, so he wasn't riding Trump's coattails.

So now he's pissed and he doesn't feel that he owes senate Republican leadership anything, and this is his chance at getting back at them and being ideologically pure in the process.

[DMC]

8 hours ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

I'm not sure the anger of someone on an internet forum is sufficient to cause him alarm - maybe hold off on the empty threats?

Pretty sure the intent was meant to be more playful than truly threatening (especially referencing Hulk), but I'm not sure, was very drunk.  Anyway, ridiculing an entire polity due to their electoral history is throwing stones in glass houses.  Further, it's one of the few double standards conservatives whine about that actually has merit.  If I attacked the (repeated) election of, say, Silvio Berlusconi - and Italy's ludicrously volatile electoral system for twenty years in general - and an Italian poster responded in the same way I did, he would be applauded rather than dismissed, and I would be accused of - at best - ethnocentrism.

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I think the mistake you're making is that you believe this was done with tactical intent. It wasn't. It's just his typical lashing out at women who criticize him. He's done this for years, long before he ever had a taste for political life. 

 

1 hour ago, Ormond said:

I just don't buy that he is doing that rationally and deliberately in a manipulative sense. He is always making outrageous tweets, and almost all weeks there would be something more important going on that the tweets deflect coverage from. This is an accidental correlation caused by his uncontrollable impulsive narcissism, not a deliberate strategy. Of course the media needs to learn better how to put more attention on what's really important, but it's hard for most people, even those who understand we really shouldn't, not to be gawkers at the train wreck of Trump's media presence.

P.S. Now having read the whole thread I see I am agreeing with several other posters. I just can't keep up with you all any more.

Yeah, I agree with Ormond that it's virtually impossible to distinguish intent due to the possibility of accidental correlation.  However, while that's a pointless argument, I will assert it's clear Trump does do this at times.  As @Maithanet said, it's apparent that this is one of his only strategic moves that has successfully been used as a distraction and a way to gin up his base in the past.  Hand waving and underestimating Trump as entirely irrational is the same type of mistake liberals made with Dubya, and we got eight years of him in return.

6 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The most plausible explanation is that he or another staffer tuned in, saw Mika attacking him on his fake  Time covers, and got pissed. More often than not his angry tweets are a direct result of a cable show at or near that time. 

I think they were more likely pissed at the entire panel (and specifically Joe) repeatedly deriding Kushner based on the topics of discussion during yesterday morning's program.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

36 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I feel like this entire thread is selling Trump's political acumen short.  One does not simply fall into the Presidency by good luck.  Trump and his team crafted a strategy which fit his personality and style.  Aggressive, personal tweets to dominate the news cycle and piss off liberals is part of that strategy.  If Trump and team had embraced a more traditional campaign style, his lack of disciple on twitter would have destroyed him long ago. 

It doesn't matter that this particular tweet was sent because Trump was just lashing out, rather than an artful attempt to distract from health care.  Trump's unhinged tweeting fits into the larger strategy they've crafted around him. 

I have to disagree with the first part. Outside of knowing how to construct a narrative, Trump doesn't really have a political acumen. Practically everything that's gone wrong for him has been a self inflicted wound. It's quite possible that Republicans would have gotten a lot more done by now if he had kept a lower public profile and stuck to back room dealings. I guess one could argue that he's intentionally distracting everyone to give them cover, but the lack of accomplishments kind of undercuts that argument. 

That said, the last point you made is an interesting one and could very well be correct. 

[maarsen]

Trump's tweets only have any real powered because of the office he holds. As long as people hold back because of respect for  the office,  he will continue to be his usual stupid and belligerent self. 

The boss gets away with a lot more than the peons do. In a case like this,  do what peons have done since the beginning of time. Push his buttons until he goes off the deep end with a completely stupid comment that nobody can shrug off. 

[DMC]

26 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Outside of knowing how to construct a narrative, Trump doesn't really have a political acumen.

His consistent ability to target issues/subjects that garner him support and enthusiasm says otherwise, as does him winning the presidency with minimal institutional support.  He knows how to preserve support from his base, and he knows exactly the right way to push the media's buttons.  It may be a uniquely specific type of political acumen, but dismissing his actions as an unhinged cheeto-eater is exactly what he wants.

26 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Practically everything that's gone wrong for him has been a self inflicted wound. It's quite possible that Republicans would have gotten a lot more done by now if he had kept a lower public profile and stuck to back room dealings.

Now, for another example of this aspect of his presidency in which his Washington naivete and ability to be manipulated through sycophantic praise is crippling, he's now on board with the "repeal now, replace later" crowd:

Quote

The conservatives say their repeal now and replace later plan is a way to make sure the GOP keeps its promise to repeal the law before worrying about the harder task of replacement. It's likely a nonstarter with moderate Republicans, however, who fear it would leave too many without coverage.

This is something someone with no understanding or regard for the legislative process would suggest - namely Rand Paul.  He's been pushing it the past couple days, kissed Trump's ass in doing so, and now Trump thinks it's a good idea.  Except it's laughably unrealistic when one considers the Democrats would have to willfully play a part in dismantling a policy they worked 70 years to enact.

[S John]

Sometimes I wonder how much of Trump's entire agenda, such as it is, hearkens back to the time Obama roasted him at the White House Correspondents Dinner.  Like, I'm not even sure that Trump thinks universal healthcare coverage is a bad thing - maybe he just wants to undo everything with Obama's name on it because Obama once had a room full of powerful people laughing at Donald.  

[DireWolfSpirit]

Its possible the Trump admin is using the Presidential Twitters the way the Bush admin used those color coded terror warnings in the months after 9/11. FAIR (the fairness and accuracy media watchdog) did a study of every terror warning during those years and determined the vast majority of the terror warnings coincided with negative media cycles and it seems likely they were designed to change media narratives during the news cycle the warnings were issued. It worked very well for the Bush team. It wouldnt surprize me if thats a strategy the Trump people would try to employ. The media is very much a group prone to the herd mentality when trying to get access to the White House. 

I think Amy Goodman did a piece recently on how the Press fails in covering the White House/administration. I need to check that article out when I get a minute.

[KingintheNorth4]

15 minutes ago, S John said:

Sometimes I wonder how much of Trump's entire agenda, such as it is, hearkens back to the time Obama roasted him at the White House Correspondents Dinner.  Like, I'm not even sure that Trump thinks universal healthcare coverage is a bad thing - maybe he just wants to undo everything with Obama's name on it because Obama once had a room full of powerful people laughing at Donald.  

I wouldn't put it past. He's shown time and time to possess a fragile ego. Sad!

[Zorral]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'm of the same mind as Mexal. I agree with you that Trump often times tries to distract the media when things are going poorly for him, and that attacking the media is one of the main ways he tries to do it, but I don't think this is an example of that. But I don't think this is an example of it. When Trump attacks women, especially based on their looks, he's just being himself, i.e. a sexist pig who can't control himself. 

Figures like Mika 'n Joe have stated in public they deliberately say things knowing he can't resist responding, because he is so thin-skinned.  In response to his ugliness

Quote

Brzezinski responded to Trump’s insult by posting a photograph of a Cheerios box that included the phrase “made for little hands”. People looking to get under the president’s skin have long suggested that his hands appear small for his frame.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/30/mika-brzezinski-joe-scarborough-donald-trump

There is ample reason to believe that these responses and blatherings are both strategy and lack of self control - conditioned response.

 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

Does Eric Holder have some inside info?

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/06/former-ag-eric-holder-sends-mysterious-3-a-m-tweet-telling-doj-staff-to-be-prepared-be-strong/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=im&utm_tracker=1737131x84899

[maarsen]

1 minute ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Does Eric Holder have some inside info?

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/06/former-ag-eric-holder-sends-mysterious-3-a-m-tweet-telling-doj-staff-to-be-prepared-be-strong/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=im&utm_tracker=1737131x84899

You all know that Trump's tenure will eventually end in tears for him and his hangers on. Timing is the problem. Does he destroy himself, or the country first?  

[Fez]

1 hour ago, dmc515 said:

This is something someone with no understanding or regard for the legislative process would suggest - namely Rand Paul.  He's been pushing it the past couple days, kissed Trump's ass in doing so, and now Trump thinks it's a good idea.  Except it's laughably unrealistic when one considers the Democrats would have to willfully play a part in dismantling a policy they worked 70 years to enact.

It also probably kills any attempt to even try tax reform until after the midterms, when it may very well be too late (if Democrats do retake the House). If Republicans use the FY2017 reconciliation to just repeal the ACA, then they'll need to use the FY2018 reconciliation on 'replace' (unless Democrats cave; which, on this, seems unlikely); meaning they'd need to wait until the FY2019 reconciliation becomes available on October 1, 2018 to start on tax reform. And no major legislation is getting passed a month before the midterms; everyone's too busy campaigning anyway. 

Also, if the House and Senate cannot pass budget bills (not the actual appropriations bills, just the budget guideline bills) for FY2019 they don't even get the option of having a reconciliation bill for that fiscal year. Its looking increasingly likely that'll happen too.

[Red Tiger]

A guy from another forum I visit wrote up a theory for what's going on.

 

Quote

I honestly think he had no intention on winning, meaning he didnt and doesnt understand the full scope of what he says and does, and the ramifications of it.

His people used him to get what they want, and ran a very successful election. But I think even they were shocked at how good a job they did to get him his victory.

I dont think his people took into account, how severely the mental health issue in this country, truly is.

Anyways, its exhausting. So I'll boil down my theory to this, Trump is the "everyman" the GOP lost touch with over the years, and couldnt get back via stiffs like Rubio, Jeb, and Cruz.

The GOP used the "Trump train" to get their way back into the white house, and get what they needed out of him, a puppet to do THEIR bidding.

Reason why the GOP doesnt really care or seemingly doesnt seem to really care about Trumps antics his twitter, his dopey process of thinking, is because they dont care. He is their pet.

No one likes it when their dog starts licking its own ass, but at the end of the day, you put up with it because it is a dog, and and youre still its owner.

Once they have exhausted themselves and gotten what they wanted into place via Trump, he is going to be in big trouble, cause at that point they wont need him anymore, and they will simply dispose of him via impeachment or lose of support for him.
Pence will take over, Ryan will become VP, and Oren Hatch (god help us all) will be the third man in line of power.

Honestly, I do think Trump will get impeached, and its going to be over something so stupid and out of left field, none of us will see it coming.
I say that because, simply put, he cant help himself. HE is a child, and will eventually find himself doing something so damn stupid, he might as well just quit.

I agree with Trevor Noah. He is soooo like an African President in how obscenely corrupt he is.

The difference is, the "checks and balances" of Washington run a far tighter game, than those of countries withen the African continent.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, dmc515 said:

His consistent ability to target issues/subjects that garner him support and enthusiasm says otherwise, as does him winning the presidency with minimal institutional support.  He knows how to preserve support from his base, and he knows exactly the right way to push the media's buttons.  It may be a uniquely specific type of political acumen, but dismissing his actions as an unhinged cheeto-eater is exactly what he wants.

I have to disagree. First, while Trump did run an unorthodox campaign, he also did get a lot of support from the RNC. They basically ran his ground game, and that's nothing to scoff at. Second, Trump doubling down with his base is a sign that he is not politically astute. Practically every politician works diligently to expand their support, while Trump on the other hand is actively constricting his. And considering that he didn't even win a plurality of the popular vote, that seems like a sign of a man who has no idea what he is doing. Lastly, I'll concede that he knows how to push the media's buttons, but in turn they know how to push his too, so at best it's a wash in my eyes. Trump may have some narrow political acumen in a few areas, but overall he is absolutely incompetent and it seems pretty clear to me that he is jackknifing from event to event rather than executing a coherent strategy. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Fez said:

It also probably kills any attempt to even try tax reform until after the midterms, when it may very well be too late (if Democrats do retake the House). If Republicans use the FY2017 reconciliation to just repeal the ACA, then they'll need to use the FY2018 reconciliation on 'replace' (unless Democrats cave; which, on this, seems unlikely); meaning they'd need to wait until the FY2019 reconciliation becomes available on October 1, 2018 to start on tax reform. And no major legislation is getting passed a month before the midterms; everyone's too busy campaigning anyway. 

Also, if the House and Senate cannot pass budget bills (not the actual appropriations bills, just the budget guideline bills) for FY2019 they don't even get the option of having a reconciliation bill for that fiscal year. Its looking increasingly likely that'll happen too.

Solid summary Fez, but I thought they couldn't do a full repeal through reconciliation. Do I have that wrong, or are they just going to repeal most of it and let the rest collapse in on itself? 

[S John]

8 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I have to disagree. First, while Trump did run an unorthodox campaign, he also did get a lot of support from the RNC. They basically ran his ground game, and that's nothing to scoff at. Second, Trump doubling down with his base is a sign that he is not politically astute. Practically every politician works diligently to expand their support, while Trump on the other hand is actively constricting his. And considering that he didn't even win a plurality of the popular vote, that seems like a sign of a man who has no idea what he is doing. Lastly, I'll concede that he knows how to push the media's buttons, but in turn they know how to push his too, so at best it's a wash in my eyes. Trump may have some narrow political acumen in a few areas, but overall he is absolutely incompetent and it seems pretty clear to me that he is jackknifing from event to event rather than executing a coherent strategy. 

When I read what his supporters say on this topic it seems that they believe that the Democrats and media attacking Trump constantly, or "liberal hysteria" as they'd put it, is only going to work to the end of pushing RealAmericans^TM who are fed up with this crap further and further away from the Democrats.  

I have never been a Trump supporter and the only way Trump could've won me over would be by completely ignoring everything he said he was going to do during his campaign, rounded off by a complete 180 in his personal demeanor.  At this point I am certainly hopelessly biased against him and I don't think there is really anything he could do for me to want to vote for him in 2020.  So my personal read of the situation would be the opposite of my first paragraph - that if Americans are going to be fed up with anything in 2020 it is going to be Trump and that he has to be sloughing off support at a steady rate to the point where he'll have his base in 2020 but nobody else.. because he just has to be losing people, right?  right?!?! - but that isn't the way his supporters see things and I can't tell if my own bias is clouding my read on the situation.  

I just don't really know.  Polls would seem to bear out that Trump is in fact not very popular, but will that actually translate to votes when people who voted for him the first time are faced with voting for a Democrat or staying at home?  And who are the Democrats going to put against him who can withstand how nasty the campaign is going to be?

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Red Tiger said:

A guy from another forum I visit wrote up a theory for what's going on.

 

 

All of that has been said here, on this forum, before, often.

[Kalbear]

41 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I have to disagree. First, while Trump did run an unorthodox campaign, he also did get a lot of support from the RNC. They basically ran his ground game, and that's nothing to scoff at. Second, Trump doubling down with his base is a sign that he is not politically astute. Practically every politician works diligently to expand their support, while Trump on the other hand is actively constricting his. And considering that he didn't even win a plurality of the popular vote, that seems like a sign of a man who has no idea what he is doing. Lastly, I'll concede that he knows how to push the media's buttons, but in turn they know how to push his too, so at best it's a wash in my eyes. Trump may have some narrow political acumen in a few areas, but overall he is absolutely incompetent and it seems pretty clear to me that he is jackknifing from event to event rather than executing a coherent strategy. 

On this base vs. expansion: one thought here is that as long as Trump has the base behind him, he is never going to get impeached, much less actually found guilty and removed from office. It also helps tremendously with him having leverage with congressmen - so long as the base is behind him, them opposing his actions gets them in trouble, not the other way around.

It's not the traditional way that people go for getting re-elected, but it's a very solid strategy for ensuring that he doesn't have to resign. It was Clinton's strategy as well - to make sure that whatever the trial was like, it was always framed in a partisan way, and his presidential status had little to do with his trial. This isn't quite the same, as much of what Trump's incompetence and issues do have direct bearing on his actual presidency - but it's close.

[Red Tiger]

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

All of that has been said here, on this forum, before, often.

Right, but I don't really come here that often.