U.S. Politics: If Trump Is In Attendance, The Next Protest Should Be A Roman Salute

[Errant Bard]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

This is why trade is one of the few issues where Trump is getting some push back because they know it will hurt them, not that Trump cares.   

 

Shouldn't he? Those policies are obviously set to show Trump voters that voting for Trumpers will hurt them, and they should vote for the other side next time. But maybe Trump voters will not be swayed.

Quote

Yes Trump can hurt you, but if nations bind themselves together against the U.S., you can hurt us more than we can hurt you. And even if the economic damage would be greater for you, the long term damage to the U.S. on the international stage would be far worse for us. We’ve been clinging to power for a long time, and it’s slowly slipping away. We’ll go through what the British did in the past, though I doubt we’ll handle it as well as they did.   

Indeed, it has been slipping since, heh, the 90's I would say, but not unlike Russia, even after your peak, you still have a lot of people, resources, networks and humongous mitary power. That counts. UK was much smaller.

This being said, it's obvious that Trump's stance is indeed really eroding your international prestige fast, and the very idea of bilateral deals leaves you open, alone, against potential alliances from groups bound by multilateral agreements (like Europe I guess), and both China and Russia seems to have some superiority over the US in economy and politics, respectively.

 

The only government in the world with unconditional approval seems to be Israel, and I'm more worried about that country as decades go by, that does not seem to be an efficient ally on the world scene.

[DMC]

12 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Graft!

?  If you're referring to you saying something similar, yeah, Trump not having an agenda stopped being an original thought exactly two minutes after he entered politics.

[Mexal]

25 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Trump doesn't have an agenda.  His trade policy is predicated on his narcissistic need to "make deals" on his own and tout them as political wins, even  when they're the furthest thing from it.  The whole ZTE quagmire makes that clear.

Sure, but within the ZTE quagmire, you have $500 million from the Chinese government to one of the Trump Org projects in Indonesia and a whole lot of trademarks granted to Ivanka Trump that she couldn't get before. So it's not just about political wins, but what he can extract as part of the negotiations for him and his family.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

42 minutes ago, Errant Bard said:

Europe has traditionally (it happened before) targeted products from states that elected governors hostile to our interests. Not certain where soya falls, but oranges (florida?), harley davidson (texas?), etc, are definitely on the list.

I think Whiskey/Bourbon (Kentucky) deserves a mention of its own. As that is deep red Trump territory, and they are particularly unhappy with the tariffs, esp. after they invested heavily in their brew.

43 minutes ago, Errant Bard said:

This being said, Trump can hurt us (directly) more than we can hurt th US: we indeed export to the US more than we import from it. Yet, maybe our overlords are prepared to suck it up to at least have the US lose its centrality, and balance their commerce better in the world.

Yes, however you mustn't forget the Iran nuclear deal, there Trump directly attacked European security interests.

45 minutes ago, Errant Bard said:

Germany is afraid for its car industry and is not too hot on being hostile here, too, it seems. 

Italy... is a mess currently, with their new xenophobic, populist, euro-skeptikal leaders, not sure if they will have a backbone.

That's how/why Macron is atm leading and not Merkel the indecissive. The EU needs reform this obvious in lieu of Italy and their debt crisis. I wish Macron the best of luck in his attempt to build alliance against Trump. But for the reasons you mentioned, it doesn't look like the most likely outcome. Also don't forget that Lega (Italy) is one of those right wing groups that suck up to Putin.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Mexal said:

So it's not just about political wins, but what he can extract as part of the negotiations for him and his family.

Granted.  And can you blame him?  If you're already flagrantly corrupt with impunity, might as well capitalize on it.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

?  If you're referring to you saying something similar, yeah, Trump not having an agenda stopped being an original thought exactly two minutes after he entered politics.

You didn’t get the Mr. Smith Goes To Washington reference.  

Trump doesn’t have much of an agenda, and certainly not when it comes to policy, but there are a few things he does want, namely to use his office to enrich his family. I guess you can also say he’s been consistent on immigration and trade policy, though he’s never really thought about them in any substantive way, so like you said he’s more interested in looking like he’s doing something rather than actually accomplishing a premeditated goal.

Oh there’s also revenge. Trump clearly is settling scores. Just look at the NFL.

Everything else is just random nonsense that’s probably motivated by trolling.

[DMC]

13 minutes ago, Errant Bard said:

Shouldn't he? Those policies are obviously set to show Trump voters that voting for Trumpers will hurt them, and they should vote for the other side next time. But maybe Trump voters will not be swayed.

Trump voters are not going to be swayed by his trade policies.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You didn’t get the Mr. Smith Goes To Washington reference.  

Sorry no I didn't.  Haven't seen it since I was a kid.  Still don't get the reference?

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Oh there’s also revenge. Trump clearly is settling scores. Just look at the NFL.

While he clearly is still peeved about the owners not letting him into their treehouse, his anthem bullshit is more about galvanizing racial resentment.

[Mexal]

9 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Sorry no I didn't.  Haven't seen it since I was a kid.  Still don't get the reference?

While he clearly is still peeved about the owners not letting him into their treehouse, his anthem bullshit is more about galvanizing racial resentment.

This. He sees it as a winning issue for his base. It's not really about settling scores.

[Fragile Bird]

46 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Trump doesn't have an agenda.  His trade policy is predicated on his narcissistic need to "make deals" on his own and tout them as political wins, even  when they're the furthest thing from it.  The whole ZTE quagmire makes that clear.

He does have an agenda, I'm convinced of that.

Trump has been interested in politics for 30 years. He's often been interviewed about his politics. He had thoughts about what he would do if he was president and he's carrying those thoughts out. It's not a traditional political agenda, it's more self-centered, but it's still an agenda.

And I just turned on CNN and Trump is doubling down on demanding Russia be added back to make it the G-8. WTF? Russia was booted out for Crimea, what have they done to be allowed back in? Interfere with US and other elections? Poison defectors?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

26 minutes ago, Errant Bard said:

Shouldn't he? Those policies are obviously set to show Trump voters that voting for Trumpers will hurt them, and they should vote for the other side next time. But maybe Trump voters will not be swayed.

 

You give American voters too much credit. Trump is nearing all-time highs in terms of popularity with his base. If he lead them to the edge of a cliff and send jump, they’d gladly plummet to their deaths.

Quote

Indeed, it has been slipping since, heh, the 90's I would say, but not unlike Russia, even after your peak, you still have a lot of people, resources, networks and humongous mitary power. That counts. UK was much smaller.

This being said, it's obvious that Trump's stance is indeed really eroding your international prestige fast, and the very idea of bilateral deals leaves you open, alone, against potential alliances from groups bound by multilateral agreements (like Europe I guess), and both China and Russia seems to have some superiority over the US in economy and politics, respectively.

 

The only government in the world with unconditional approval seems to be Israel, and I'm more worried about that country as decades go by, that does not seem to be an efficient ally on the world scene.

I’d say it really begun more in the mid 2000’s once it became clear that Bush was dead wrong about Iraq and that his Administration lied to their allies to get them to go along with it. But you’re right, it’s our military power and wealth that keeps us a top the mountain. That can only carry you so far though when the rest of the world starts to hate you. The surprising thing is that Trump supporters think Trump is improving our standing in the world while President Obama destroyed. What fools they are.

As far as Israel goes, that’s a whole other can of worms, and as a Jew, I’m deeply concerned about the health of the state. The comparisons to apartheid South Africa are accurate and fair.

[DMC]

11 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

He does have an agenda, I'm convinced of that.

Ok, beyond advancing his personal interests, describe Trump's political agenda.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

31 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Sorry no I didn't.  Haven't seen it since I was a kid.  Still don't get the reference?

While he clearly is still peeved about the owners not letting him into their treehouse, his anthem bullshit is more about galvanizing racial resentment.

Senator Smith kept referring to corruption to steal government money as “graft.” I figured you would have been a fan of the film. Oh well.

As far as the NFL goes, it’s both. He knows it’s a winning issue to demonize wealthy black men by saying they’re unpatriotic, but we know that Trump is also an extremely vindictive person, and he is absolutely getting his pound of flesh from the owners. He loves showing them that he’s in charge after they said thanks but no thanks when he tried to buy the Bills in 2014. And his anger with the NFL goes three decades back when he tried to become an owner after the USFL failed, which, if you listen to other owners, was entirely Trump’s fault. By Trump’s own words, he has a long memory and never forgets a slight.

[DMC]

24 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Senator Smith kept referring to corruption to steal government money as “graft.” I figured you would have been a fan of the film. Oh well.

Considering I obsess about US politics both as a job and as a political junkie, plus my penchant for studio-era films, this was actually a very very safe assumption.  Just hit one of my blindspots, sorry.  OTOH, I'm happy to know "graft" isn't some newfangled jargon the kids use to describe someone reinforcing someone else's point.  That terminology would be..perplexingly medical based.

27 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

As far as the NFL goes, it’s both.

Ok, but it's much more so using it to gin up his base.  I'm sure in his head he's already "beat" the owners - because he has - the only reason to make the Eagles thing into a (fake) story is to perpetuate racial resentment.

[Kalbear]

3 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

The Polls Are Swinging to the Democrats

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/the-midterm-polls-are-swinging-to-the-democrats-again.html

 

One poll is interesting but not a trend. 

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

One poll is interesting but not a trend. 

It's not one poll, it's a series of polls.  At this moment, 538 has the generic ballot up to Dem +8, whereas it was at 5.5 on June 3rd, or five days ago.  I assume RCP is showing similar type of movement, albeit they don't weight polls like Silver does.  However, just as I would say I don't think this is a big deal if (and when) it was trending the other direction, I don't think it is now.  The generic ballot becomes decreasingly interesting as the election approaches anyway.  The Dems had about a 60% chance of taking the House a couple months ago, and they still have a 60% chance today.  As for the Senate, meh, that's more complicated - and much less tied to the generic ballot.

[Kalbear]

Just now, dmc515 said:

It's not one poll, it's a series of polls.  At this moment, 538 has the generic ballot up to Dem +8, whereas it was at 5.5 on June 3rd, or five days ago.  I assume RCP is showing similar type of movement, albeit they don't weight polls like Silver does.  However, just as I would say I don't think this is a big deal if (and when) it was trending the other direction, I don't think it is now.  The generic ballot becomes decreasingly interesting as the election approaches anyway.  The Dems had about a 60% chance of taking the House a couple months ago, and they still have a 60% chance today.  As for the Senate, meh, that's more complicated - and much less tied to the generic ballot.

I was specifically talking about the quoted one, which is the NBC/WSJ 25 point check on power thing. 

[Mexal]

Mueller just indicted Konstantin Kilimnik along with adding Obstruction of Justice charges to Manafort. The noose gets tighter.

 

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

I was specifically talking about the quoted one, which is the NBC/WSJ 25 point check on power thing. 

Oh, gotcha.  Couldn't see that quote in your reply.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Mexal said:

Mueller just indicted Konstantin Kilimnik along with adding Obstruction of Justice charges to Manafort.

Man the spellcheck for political journalists is about to crash.