Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Reporting so people don't miss this: http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-weekly-crime-list-aliens-2017-1 A certain German political party used to love doing this to my ancestors........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Just now, Notone said: That's working under the assumption you get to whisper in its ear. And I really don't see where you'd get that idea. Why would it abandon Bannon and listen to some hippie shit about human rights and stuff? No, not going to happen. I don't think so. You would have no chance of getting in his ear if he had any actual strongly held beliefs in any of these policies. i don't think he does. But we're going in circles now. Quote About the cost-utility analysis point. Well, the quesiton boils down on how much value you put on your soul/conscience/whatever you want to call it. Indeed. My conscience would not be appeased if I were to stand on principle in this situation, when i could have been pragmatic and actually more effectively governed. YMMV. Painting in an overly simplistic hypothetical, if a lawmaker is required to attend the inauguration and avoid direct criticism of him as part of a larger effort to ingratiate themselves to Trump, but the trade off is that they get in his ear and influence him away from some of these policy decisions, then that is what i would expect them to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felice Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 14 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: You're fake news Kal! The difference being the left quickly self-corrects when it discovers a claim is inaccurate, while the right (including the President!) continues to propagate obvious nonsense in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Sorry @Swordfish I don't think your argument flies. First of all. That thing in the Oval Office does not need the Democrats to govern effectively. It has a majority in the house and in the senate. So you can be ruled quite effectively. You didn't get that thing into office. Bannon, Coulter, Hannity and all those other *explicit* did. So why would you realistically hope to gain any influence whatsoever. If you had a senate majority to bargain with, maybe. So you are imho basically giving up principle for a very vague hope. Especially given the context of the cabinets appointments. So, no. I don't think this was an option at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 1 hour ago, Swordfish said: She may have the right of it. I don't think that Trump has any particularly deep seated moral imperatives in any of his policies, he seems to mostly want to have his ring kissed, but I suspect that once you've kissed it, he can be influenced. Counterargument: Chris Christie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 17 minutes ago, Notone said: Sorry @Swordfish I don't think your argument flies. First of all. That thing in the Oval Office does not need the Democrats to govern effectively. It has a majority in the house and in the senate. So you can be ruled quite effectively. it's really hard to take you seriously when you use terms like 'that thing in the oval office'. Sorry. Quote You didn't get that thing into office. Bannon, Coulter, Hannity and all those other *explicit* did. So why would you realistically hope to gain any influence whatsoever. If you had a senate majority to bargain with, maybe. Again, we're going in circles now. Perhaps I'm not being sufficiently clear, but we can simply agree to disagree at this point. 4 minutes ago, mormont said: Counterargument: Chris Christie. Touche...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaircat Meow Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 4 hours ago, Toth said: The problem is: Teaching their wrongdoings is one thing. Teaching the circumstances which enabled them to rise to power is another. And this is the crucial point. I might be biased because I'm a history student/teacher. So there is a definite bias about the people I'm surrounded with. But I also think that it is a part of our German history, the fact that we are constantly working through it and have a high emphasize on Hitler's rise in history classes. With all these factors, nearly everyone I know is terrified by Trump, the ideas he's promoting and the rhetoric he uses. This is not Godwin's Law, this is history. There is country devided after an economic recession and political change having been halted by the deadlock the democratically elected parties created for themselves, leaving people disillusioned with the people working within the democratic system. Then comes a demagogue who claims to oppose the system and yet works with the conservative. Who uses a rhetoric of hatred and fear that sides with the working class, paints an 'acceptable' enemy that needs to be defeated and offers seemingly simple, clearly populist solutions to make his country 'great again' by feeling superior again. He is hostile to the other parties, free speech and factual evidence, an advocate for economic protectionism, military rearmament and careless threats, he is ridiculed for being a political moron and not being taken seriously at all. And yet the disillusioned masses are craving for change, no matter how destructive it may be. So he gets elected. And from day one starts to shut down government institutions and replaces important positions with his own incompetent and corrupt lackeys. Of course this doesn't mean that Trump is the next Hitler. It could just mean that he and his Council of Supreme Evil are just clever tricksters, a thoroughly rotten and corrupt bunch that is going to leech off the US for the next few years and then dash off laughing their asses off, leaving the country in ruins and the people hopefully a little wiser. That's my most optimistic take on things right now. The pessimist take however... This post suggests that a little knowledge might be as bad as none. You can certainly draw some similarities between Trump and Hitler, but there are legions of differences too. I'm not sure what sense it makes to say someone could be the next Hitler if they are not even Austrian/German, running for office in Germany and facing a similar historical/geostrategic situation. Why not fear Trump will be the next Louis XIV or Napoleon Bonaparte (although I guess there was actually another one of those). Or, is the 'Trump could be the next Hitler' just a way of saying that Trump could be the next demagogue to bring down a democratic system and replace it with a tyranny (there are plenty of other examples of this)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zelticgar Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 1 minute ago, mormont said: Counterargument: Chris Christie. It is true that there is a limited shelf life for how long a person can remain in good graces with Trump. If the Dems were savvy they would tone down the opposition, bide their time for the the inevitable rift that will open between cabinet members and/or GOP lawmakers and Trump. I have no idea what they could ultimately gain but they may just be able to save a few things by cutting deals with Trump simply by flattering him. It will probably never happen but if I were in the Democrat leadership i'd give it a shot. When dealing with President Trump you will gain far more by flattery and compliments than you will with opposition. It is counter intuitive to how things are normally done in politics but it is the right path to follow with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 42 minutes ago, Notone said: That's working under the assumption you get to whisper in its ear. And I really don't see where you'd get that idea. Why would it abandon Bannon and listen to some hippie shit about human rights and stuff? No, not going to happen. I don't think so. About the cost-utility analysis point. Well, the quesiton boils down to on how much value you put on your soul/conscience/whatever you want to call it. There's no point, unless you want what he's flimflaming, because the only way you get his ear is by bending over and kissing etc. No. Frackin'. Way. Just NO. There's nothing, not a thing, about him and his so-called policies and his people that doesn't make me sick to my stomach. Moreover, you can bend over and kiss and all the rest just as much as you want, but in a single second it's off with your head because something or somebody else got him worked up. That is not a government -- that's tyranny in spades, tyranny, moreover, of a deranged individual. But that's why for the nonce, David Brooks, that a$$Hat, thinks that the repugs are going with him and not objecting at this time. Let him pass all the stuff they want such as the massive tax cuts and so on, and then they'll cut him loose. That's what David Brooks thinks anyway. However, he's been wrong far more often than he's been righta about anything, and I've certainly never had any respect for him or his opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 56 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Reporting so people don't miss this: http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-weekly-crime-list-aliens-2017-1 A certain German political party used to love doing this to my ancestors........ This is chilling. Is there another country right now that also does this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 27 minutes ago, zelticgar said: It is true that there is a limited shelf life for how long a person can remain in good graces with Trump. If the Dems were savvy they would tone down the opposition, bide their time for the the inevitable rift that will open between cabinet members and/or GOP lawmakers and Trump. I have no idea what they could ultimately gain but they may just be able to save a few things by cutting deals with Trump simply by flattering him. It will probably never happen but if I were in the Democrat leadership i'd give it a shot. When dealing with President Trump you will gain far more by flattery and compliments than you will with opposition. It is counter intuitive to how things are normally done in politics but it is the right path to follow with him. I disagee. I believe it is very important that Democrats and democratic leadership and progressives and liberals and, yes, even those on the right who can see the forest for the trees, continue to put pressure on any and all items coming from the White house and Congress. Perhaps they cannot stop everytjing, but by just pitting pressure on Trump, the cracks will still come. They're already there. Pressure will widen them, particularly if they continue to cause Trump to thrash about widely while trying to defend items that have nothing to do with what he was elected to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 31 minutes ago, zelticgar said: It is true that there is a limited shelf life for how long a person can remain in good graces with Trump. If the Dems were savvy they would tone down the opposition, bide their time for the the inevitable rift that will open between cabinet members and/or GOP lawmakers and Trump. I have no idea what they could ultimately gain but they may just be able to save a few things by cutting deals with Trump simply by flattering him. It will probably never happen but if I were in the Democrat leadership i'd give it a shot. When dealing with President Trump you will gain far more by flattery and compliments than you will with opposition. It is counter intuitive to how things are normally done in politics but it is the right path to follow with him. Problem is all of his EOs are the antithesis of everything they believe in. Leave him and the Republicans alone long enough on the off chance there is a rift and what is left for them to influence at that point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 5 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said: I disagee. I believe it is very important that Democrats and democratic leadership and progressives and liberals and, yes, even those on the right who can see the forest for the trees, continue to put pressure on any and all items coming from the White house and Congress. Perhaps they cannot stop everytjing, but by just pitting pressure on Trump, the cracks will still come. They're already there. Pressure will widen them, particularly if they continue to cause Trump to thrash about widely while trying to defend items that have nothing to do with what he was elected to do. We've been hearing about these eventual cracks leading to his demise for about a year now. Might be time to revise the game plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 5 minutes ago, Swordfish said: We've been hearing about these eventual cracks leading to his demise for about a year now. Might be time to revise the game plan. It depends on what he actually plans to do. If he plans to attempt the mass round up and deportation of 20 million people it should probably be opposed. There is no way that can be done in short order, due to the logistics, without killing people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: It depends on what he actually plans to do. If he plans to attempt the mass round up and deportation of 20 million people it should probably be opposed. There is no way that can be done in short order, due to the logistics, without killing people. I'm not suggesting that kind of thing should not be opposed, and i have no idea where you got the impression that I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 8 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said: The problem is that there's a world of difference between campaigning and governing. Trump could appeal directly to his supporters while he was campaigning, but this ability becomes less effective once those supporters start ignoring the hum-drum tediousness of having to govern. I don't even know what you mean by this. He's already president. He doesn't even really need his rank and file supporters anymore, but i think your optimism that they will at some point stop supporting him is deeply flawed, just as it was during the primaries. How are 'cracks appearing' suddenly going to put him in check? I just don't follow this logic at all. You guys seem to believe that what you see as cracks are enough to sap his support, but I just don't think that's the way this has been going. That's just more status quo thinking, but the status quo does not appear to apply to him. Help me understand specifically how you see this playing out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 54 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said: I disagee. I believe it is very important that Democrats and democratic leadership and progressives and liberals and, yes, even those on the right who can see the forest for the trees, continue to put pressure on any and all items coming from the White house and Congress. Perhaps they cannot stop everytjing, but by just pitting pressure on Trump, the cracks will still come. They're already there. Pressure will widen them, particularly if they continue to cause Trump to thrash about widely while trying to defend items that have nothing to do with what he was elected to do. I agree with this. Prez Orange Shit Thing needs his ego constantly stroked, and he's finding out that as Prez that doesn't happen. People on seven continents opposed him the day after the coronation inauguration, Obama really did bring out a bigger crowd in '09, and he lost the popular vote. Plus headlines in the NYT stated 'he lied' (several headlines) and on NPR they constantly mention his falsehoods. (where the fuck was NPR and NYT before the f'n election) Pushing back on Prez Thing is exactly what the D's and the populace should be doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 So the EO that Trump signed tonight prioritizes Christians over Muslims while also banning refugees. Add in multiple videos of Trump saying they should have taken the oil in Iraq and this definitely won't be used to recruit more people to ISIS. Absolutely no chance of that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 11 minutes ago, Mexal said: So the EO that Trump signed tonight prioritizes Christians over Muslims while also banning refugees. Add in multiple videos of Trump saying they should have taken the oil in Iraq and this definitely won't be used to recruit more people to ISIS. Absolutely no chance of that... It was noted this morning on NPR that the Muslim countries he didn't ban refugees and immigrants from, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Turkey and Azerbaijan are the ones he has his son's have his businesses in. So terrorists and corruption. Quite the cocktail. Speaking of corruption, Quote Is your country experiencing overwhelming social inequality? Do you and your fellow citizens think it’s because of government corruption? Congratulations! You’re likely to elect a populist leader. That, at least, is what most nations do, according to Transparency International’s 2016 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI)........... The 2016 report pays special attention to the global rise of populism in the West. It argues that populism is caused by social inequality, which is then exploited by politicians. Taking aim at U.S. President Donald Trump by name, Transparency International notes that, while populist leaders and movements are on the rise in part in response to corruption, they will likely only exacerbate widespread corruption as it continues to seep into democratic institutions. Rah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 Quote 100% agree, but you missed a huge component: cyber warfare could easily lead to nuclear warfare, among several other horrible outcomes, it's far more likely to occur in the modern era. I didn't even consider that. Excellent point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.