Announcement

Collapse
See more
See less

TRUMP....Or, How Insane (or Great) is our President?

Collapse

Get Away Today

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Whipland
    replied
    Originally posted by PhotoMatt View Post

    As an admin, I probably should probably refrain from posting personal opinions whenever I can, but I just can't resist right now.

    The Democratic Party rigged the nominating process in her favor. I don't think they should have had to rig anything. It's their party and they can do what they want. The issue I have is that they fostered an illusion that the process was democratic. It clearly was not.
    I agree with this. And I think that also may have played into the result last November with people who saw how Sanders was treated either stayed home or possible even switched sides.

    Originally posted by PhotoMatt View Post
    The two political parties are two sides of the same coin. They are both ultimately controlled by the same people, and the parties exist to foster the illusion that the general population actually has a choice. They do not.
    My view on that is yes and no. I agree with this at it applies to some candidates and where their power comes from. I believe the best example of what you are saying would be the Kennedy's and the Bushes; two powerful families who's ideologies are probably closer than most people would think, and who are perfectly fine trading power back and forth like it is some kind of club. I believe that Mitt Romney and John Kerry are also examples of this same establishment club too.

    But then every few years there are populist figures who upset the apple cart. I believe that was true of Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan originally to some degree, and last year Donald Trump AND Bernie Sanders. People who are not inside their respective power clubs, but who capture the attention of the people. I believe Bill Clinton too was once that, although Hillary is an establishment figure now (or was last year), however only be default. And with Hillary the default was that Obama could not run for a 3rd term--- AND the thinking is that a party usually doesn't win a 3rd administration in a row. Do you recall how back in 2008 Ted and Caroline Kennedy came out and endorsed Barrack Obama over Hillary? Bill Clinton was livid over that decision, but I believe it just goes back to what I said about the Kennedy's and the Bushes; they are the establishment and populists are only tolerated to a certain degree, usually only as much as they can be controlled.

    Do you remember how many Reagan supporters were shocked at the convention in 1980 after Reagan won the nomination and then came out and selected George H.W. Bush as his V.P. choice? The populist (Ronald Reagan) elected to include the establishment (George H.W. Bush) in his administration in a move to appease the establishment.

    Originally posted by PhotoMatt View Post
    Hillary was nominated because it was easier for the ruling class to rig the election for Trump. With a Trump/Clinton matchup and the electoral college, voting machines in the least number of precincts would have to be manipulated. Granted, they had to do this in three states, but it was obviously still done.
    I don't think I buy that, but I do believe that the Clinton's were very tactical in sopping up vast amounts of money with their "Clinton foundation" and created a daunting and formidable show of force which kept Warren out of running and caused Joe Biden to think better of running. The thorn in the Clinton side continued to be Sanders, and the further in the year it went made Hillary appear vulnerable and weak. But I strongly believe that had Joe Biden decided to run, Obama would have been out campaigning for him and the rest of the DNC establishment would have tipped toward Biden too/ I don't think everyone really understands how much the Clintons and the Obamas despise each other. Yes DESPISE. The only reason Obama included Hillary in his administration as Secretary of State is because I believe that after Obama beat HRC for the nomination the Clintons made a deal to be "good soldiers" for Obama if Obama gave HRC a high ranking cabinet level position for her resume.

    Originally posted by PhotoMatt View Post
    Think about this. Trump received between two and three billion dollars worth of free media coverage. Why, and how?
    Yes Trump got tons of free media but he did that on his own by being as outspoken and controversial as he is. Trump is good at tapping into that P.T. Barnum sort of media thing. But it isn't a different formula that many celebrities do to get free media attention. A few years ago Kim Kardashian was the queen of controlling free attention and turning to her financial bottom line. For over a year everyone was tuning in to see/hear "what is Trump going to say today" and it worked for him.


    Originally posted by PhotoMatt View Post

    Who controls the media, and who benefited from what happened today? What was the result of so many Republicans running for the nomination? It's simple. It diluted the base. By diluting the base and giving insane amounts of free coverage to Trump, it allowed him to quickly become the front-runner.
    The full Republican field was a joke, but understand that 95% are in that for personal interests other than winning, and the real scary person in that was Jeb Bush, the one true establishment person who god forbid this country should end up with.


    Originally posted by PhotoMatt View Post
    His platform of hate and false patriotism appealed to people who might normally sit out the primary process. By running so many other people, the religious right's power was weakened.
    I didn't vote for him but I didn't vote for HRC either. And being I live in California it didn't matter if I didn't vote for Trump because HRC was going to take all of California's electoral votes anyway. If I lived in Florida or Ohio, I guess I might have voted for Trump, but mostly because I believe Hillary is ROTTEN to the core. Had Biden run, I think he would have won and I think many of those people you believe voted for Trump on "hate and false patriotism" would have voted for Biden too. I just don't think what you are claiming is the simple answer there. Trump made a LOT of Republicans, Independents and blue dog Democrats very uncomfortable. I just continue to believe that HRS unlikability factor tipped the scale. Hillery is not Bill, she is not Obama, not Reagan, just not liked by many people. She rubs people the wrong way, and so does Trump. But Hillary rubs people the wrong way MORE than Trump in the larger picture I believe.

    Originally posted by PhotoMatt View Post
    Our democracy is fake news. It always has been. It's just more obvious now that we can watch it all in real time. We sit here bickering over which politician is less corrupt, but it's pointless. The choice is not ours, and it never has been.
    I have no illusions that either side a hero or a villain. I just don't like Hillary and never have. She is phony, condescending, and I can't think of anything either in public or private life that she accomplished. Her husband yes, but her, I can't think of anything.

    Oh and remember how Hillary was so against gays in the militarily, gay marriage, and other social issues. Hillary's position on social issues blows wherever she thinks the votes are and I have a problem with that. With Sanders you know exactly what he stands for, but Hillary who was for the Iraq war more than even Trump (as a private citizen) was back in the day. Hillary NEVER tells the truth, with her the truth will change to whatever fits. You have to admit that Trump was never anti gay as a private citizen and he was vocally against the Iraq war.

    Anyway, I appreciate the exchange Matt. I think we agree on some things here and probably aren't polar opposites on other things either. I think we both share a mistrust for government and politicians which is probably healthy.

    Leave a comment:


  • PhotoMatt
    replied
    Originally posted by Whipland View Post

    Because of course the Clinton's are squeaky clean, right? Um, does somebody remember something called "the Clinton foundation"?
    I'm sure Dr. Lorich remembers. Who's Dr. Lorich? Let's find out. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.3689775

    What does he have to do with the Clinton Foundation? Hmm, let's check his emails. https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/3852

    Now, let's check what Snopes has to say. https://www.snopes.com/surgeon-clint...ruption-haiti/

    Hmmm, I guess Snopes didn't bother checking Wikileaks.

    What does all this tell us?

    Hmmm?

    Note: I have to remember this is MiceChat, so I really can't get into more detail. I will probably have to stop after this, but it won't hurt to post a few times. If I'm wrong, there's always the Litter Box.

    Leave a comment:


  • PhotoMatt
    replied
    Originally posted by Whipland View Post
    I believe the dems got browbeat into nominating Hillary,
    As an admin, I probably should probably refrain from posting personal opinions whenever I can, but I just can't resist right now.

    The Democratic Party rigged the nominating process in her favor. I don't think they should have had to rig anything. It's their party and they can do what they want. The issue I have is that they fostered an illusion that the process was democratic. It clearly was not.

    The two political parties are two sides of the same coin. They are both ultimately controlled by the same people, and the parties exist to foster the illusion that the general population actually has a choice. They do not.

    Hillary was nominated because it was easier for the ruling class to rig the election for Trump. With a Trump/Clinton matchup and the electoral college, voting machines in the least number of precincts would have to be manipulated. Granted, they had to do this in three states, but it was obviously still done.

    Think about this. Trump received between two and three billion dollars worth of free media coverage. Why, and how? Who controls the media, and who benefited from what happened today? What was the result of so many Republicans running for the nomination? It's simple. It diluted the base. By diluting the base and giving insane amounts of free coverage to Trump, it allowed him to quickly become the front-runner. His platform of hate and false patriotism appealed to people who might normally sit out the primary process. By running so many other people, the religious right's power was weakened.

    Our democracy is fake news. It always has been. It's just more obvious now that we can watch it all in real time. We sit here bickering over which politician is less corrupt, but it's pointless. The choice is not ours, and it never has been.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr Wiggins
    replied
    While Trumpists whine about the Evil Hillary, a Disney heir is speaking out against the corruption and hyprocrisy of Trump's presidency:

    This heiress did the right thing on Trump's tax plan

    An excerpt:

    It would be comical if it weren't so tragic: Donald Trump, brought to power by the votes of white men casting their ballots out of economic insecurity, is poised to sign a tax bill that takes from the poor and middle class to give to the richest of the rich.

    The few who stand to gain handsomely from this bill are mostly staying quiet, but a vocal handful of America's super-wealthy are speaking out, including Abigail Disney in a viral Facebook video. She points out that she did nothing to earn her money other than have the good luck to be born into a wealthy family. And her grandfather and great uncle, who cofounded the Walt Disney Company, couldn't have done so without the distinctly American promise of social mobility -- a promise that seems to slip away day by day as the social safety net is ripped apart and a small few hoard their increasing resources....

    As Disney says in her video, if we want to live in a functional democracy, we must accept that the greater good is more important than personal gain. More of America's wealthiest should be raising their voices against this tax coup for people like them.


    Leave a comment:


  • Whipland
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr Wiggins View Post

    It's ironic how the increasingly shrinking minority of people who get their worldview in the propaganda echo chamber of Faux News remain in denial that some of Trump's cabinet picks are the rottenest apples that DC has seen in decades. Not to mention the corruption of the President of the United States using his position to profiteer his personal businesses and those of his immediate family.

    Oh the real irony!!

    Because of course the Clinton's are squeaky clean, right? Um, does somebody remember something called "the Clinton foundation"? Those two were selling ticket books to our nation for profit. Some of the worst nations were even earning 'E-ticket rides'.

    Fact remain, had the dems had Biden as the nominee they would have won. I never said Trump was a great choice, I only said Hillary was obviously a worse choice... it's that simple.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jim in Merced CA
    replied
    Trump is to Washington and the Presidency what Schwarzenegger was to California and the Governorship.

    Once the novelty wears off it will be back to the Status Quo.

    I don’t mind someone trying to ‘shake up’ Washington politics, but Trump is the equivalent of a twelve year old in the back of the classroom who screams ‘boobs!’

    Glad Trump was able to get a tax break for him and his rich cronies while also sticking it to California and New York.

    Can’t wait for him to lose in 2020. He can suck it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr Wiggins
    replied
    Originally posted by Whipland View Post
    Personally I think Trump says more than he needs to, but I appreciate how has upset the rotten apple cart in DC.
    ...Who knows, next time another businessman with actual "skin in the game" will be the nominee for the democrats rather than these corrupt people who's only motivation is to sell influence to the highest bidder.
    It's ironic how the increasingly shrinking minority of people who get their worldview in the propaganda echo chamber of Faux News remain in denial that some of Trump's cabinet picks are the rottenest apples that DC has seen in decades. Not to mention the corruption of the President of the United States using his position to profiteer his personal businesses and those of his immediate family.


    Leave a comment:


  • Whipland
    replied
    Personally I think Trump says more than he needs to, but I appreciate how has upset the rotten apple cart in DC. I didn't vote for him, but I also didn't vote for Hillary with her long crooked and corrupt history. I believe the dems got browbeat into nominating Hillary, and had Biden run for President he would have won. I don't agree with Biden either, but at least he is a guy I could sit down and have beer with and talk sports; Hillary is the most entitled elitist politician I have ever seen, and she is no Bill Cllinton either. Hillary couldn't edge out a jr Senator from Illinois for the nomination 9 years ago, and if the DNC hadn't stacked the deck for her this time, grandpa Bernie stood a good chance of being the nominee. Hillary is just a dour and bad person; the sooner she fades away the better for this country.

    For now I think Trump is good for America because he has changed BOTH parties forever. The idea that career politicians should ONLY be our leaders hopefully is over. That isn't the way it started out in this country; citizens came to Washington and served for a short time and then went back to their private careers and businesses. Who knows, next time another businessman with actual "skin in the game" will be the nominee for the democrats rather than these corrupt people who's only motivation is to sell influence to the highest bidder. Of that ilk Hillary was among the worst but not the only one.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr Wiggins
    replied
    Trump's behavior raises questions of competency

    A quote:

    Donald Trump potentially has millions of lives in his hands as the threat of a devastating war with North Korea swiftly escalates. Yet the President of the United States is raising new questions about his temperament, his judgment and his understanding of the resonance of his global voice and the gravity of his role with a wild sequence of insults, inflammatory tweets and bizarre comments.

    On Wednesday Trump caused outrage and sparked fears of violent reprisals against Americans and US interests overseas by retweeting graphic anti-Muslim videos by an extreme far right British hate group. Earlier this week he used a racial slur in front of Native American war heroes. He's attacked global press freedom, after cozying up to autocrats on his recent Asia tour.

    And now there are reports that the President has revived conspiracy theories about former President Barack Obama's birthplace and is suggesting an "Access Hollywood" video on which he was heard boasting sexually assaulting women, and for which he apologized last year, had been doctored.

    In normal times, it would be a concern that the President is conducting himself in a manner so at odds with the decorum and propriety associated for over two centuries with the office he holds. But the sudden escalation of the North Korean crisis, following the Stalinist state's launch of its most potent ever missile on Tuesday, takes the world across a dangerous threshold....

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr Wiggins
    replied
    Two new reports suggest Trump has come unhinged. The truth is worse.

    A quote:

    The [Washington] Post reports today that Trump has taken to privately questioning the authenticity of the “Access Hollywood” tape of him repeatedly boasting about his affection for sexual assault. The Post also reports that when things are going particularly badly, he calls confidantes to “boast about his successes.”

    Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that Trump regularly brags to people about winning a majority of women — he didn’t — and has even reverted to questioning the authenticity of Barack Obama’s birth certificate. Trump’s advisers sometimes even steer him away from areas where he is prone to dabbling in “manufactured facts.”

    To date, Trump has made over 1,600 false or misleading claims as president.



    Leave a comment:


  • Jim in Merced CA
    replied
    You see what you look for.

    Leave a comment:


  • Whipland
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr Wiggins View Post

    You hope. Trump has given legions of psychiatrists around the world copious evidence to the contrary.
    Maybe, and yet the other choice was and still is so far off the reservation of reality that no wonder the winner was not as expected.


    Originally posted by Mr Wiggins View Post

    Um... meaning no disrespect, you might want to consider reading up on how the electoral college elected Trump even though Clinton beat him in the popular vote. (Hint: temperament was not a factor.)
    Popular vote doesn't decide who becomes president any more than it apparently decided who would be the democratic candidate (i.e., super-delegates)

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr Wiggins
    replied
    Originally posted by Whipland View Post
    I responded to the OP's original post by suggesting that whatever kind of "crazy" people think Trump is (which isn't mental illness, just temperament)...
    You hope. Trump has given legions of psychiatrists around the world copious evidence to the contrary.


    Originally posted by Whipland View Post
    In other words: Hillary must of seemed a lot more of some kind of negative temperament than Trump or Trump would not have beaten her by such a HUGE electoral vote majority.
    Um... meaning no disrespect, you might want to consider reading up on how the electoral college elected Trump even though Clinton beat him in the popular vote. (Hint: temperament was not a factor.)

    Leave a comment:


  • Whipland
    replied
    Originally posted by Jim in Merced CA View Post

    So, your position is that President Trump is the same type of person with a similar temperament as Hillary Clinton?

    And while one is male and one is female, they’re the same?
    Not what I said. I responded to the OP's original post by suggesting that whatever kind of "crazy" people think Trump is (which isn't mental illness, just temperament); whatever he is is LESS than whatever kind of "crazy" people think Hillary is---- IMHO.

    In other words: Hillary must of seemed a lot more of some kind of negative temperament than Trump or Trump would not have beaten her by such a HUGE electoral vote majority.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jim in Merced CA
    replied
    Originally posted by Whipland View Post

    Only a little less crazy than the other choice I think.
    So, your position is that President Trump is the same type of person with a similar temperament as Hillary Clinton?

    And while one is male and one is female, they’re the same?

    Leave a comment:


  • Whipland
    replied
    Originally posted by PanTheMan View Post
    Hello again Mice Chat. So... How crazy is this guy?
    Only a little less crazy than the other choice I think.

    Leave a comment:


  • PhotoMatt
    replied
    RPaul was not banned for this post.

    Leave a comment:


  • Greg Lee
    replied
    Originally posted by RPaul View Post
    The man knows what the people want. He knows exactly what to say. Majority of America isn't considered with social justice. They're concerned about jobs being shipped overseas due to stronger government regulations on American businesses. They're concerned with Islamic terrorism after seeing what it has done to places like Germany, Sweden, England, and France in Europe. They're concerned with how Obamacare has stripped them of their healthcare. And so much more than he understood which is why he won.

    My problem with him has mostly been he hasn't really followed up on a lot of things. I'm still waiting on Obamacare to be given a clean repeal. I want to see that border wall start to go up before the end of the year. I want to see more laws put in place to protect our freedoms (such as one allowing for concealed carry licenses to be protected across state lines). Truthfully, I wish the ban on immigration from predominately Muslim nations included more countries and trade with countries such as Saudi Arabia would cease. I wish we wouldn't get involved with Syria and hope he stays out of Middle Eastern, and other country's, affairs, with the exception of ISIS as they are a threat to the US.

    By no means is he the best option, I know there were others I'd rather have had, but the worst thing he's done, in my opinion, is fail to do a clean repeal on Obamacare considering the House and Senate are both Republican at the moment.

    While his attitude and behavior isn't exactly "presidential," policies are a greater concern to me than that, and if he's benefiting the lives of millions of Americans in ways of increasing jobs, keeping them safe, and in other such ways with his policies, then I can look past his inappropriate comments.
    Sad to see you got banned for expressing your support for the president. I agree with everything you said here. Hope to see you again soon.

    Leave a comment:


  • Meville
    replied
    I've said it before and I'll say it again. The people of your country deserve better.

    I was lucky enough to travel to Florida, New York and Anaheim this summer and met so many fantastic people from all walks of life that are being done a disservice by the people who are supposed to be representing them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr Wiggins
    replied
    How insane is Trump? It's a question that increasingly is asked, even by his supporters.



    ...Such chaos and confusion at the highest level of American government hadn’t been seen since, well, the day before.

    Even Trump’s close advisers seem to have little knowledge of, much less control over, what he says and does.

    One imagines a future scene in the Situation Room:

    The president: Why don’t we bomb Guam so the North Koreans can’t?

    The secretary of state: That’s part of our country, sir.

    The secretary of defense: We have thousands of troops there.

    The national security adviser: And 150,000 innocent civilians.

    The chief of staff: It would be a humanitarian and strategic catastrophe.

    Ivanka Trump: Please don’t do this, Dad.

    Jared Kushner: [Silence.]

    The president: It’s settled. We begin bombing in five minutes. Let’s hit Hawaii, too. But not my hotel in Waikiki.


    From "Nobody knows what Trump is doing. Not even Trump."
    Dana Milbank
    The Washington Post
    September 6, 2017

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X