Purgatory: Oops - your Trump presidency discussion thread.

13132343637168

Comments

  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    From what I've read, Trump's base* voters don't seem to give a stuff what evils he may have perpetrated, from adultery to treason and all stops in between - they'll vote for him (or his odious party) anyway.

    Considering that they're the ones paying for his ludicrous tax-cuts, golf trips and whatnot, I can't understand why, but what would I know?

    * in every sense of the word.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    Trump's Fox News interview was essentially an admission of guilt. He seems not to appreciate the significance of the cover up.

    Just heard an ex Tea Partier and right wing radio talk host - Joe Walsh - say he's lost all belief in Trump since Helsiki, is disgusted by his lying, and even more disgusted by Fox News and fellow travelers colluding with his lies and misleading his loyal supporters. The guy wants a wall, tighter immigration control over Muslims and the abolition of Obamacare. He just doesn't believe in Trump any more.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    Piglet wrote: »
    From what I've read, Trump's base* voters don't seem to give a stuff what evils he may have perpetrated, from adultery to treason and all stops in between - they'll vote for him (or his odious party) anyway.

    Considering that they're the ones paying for his ludicrous tax-cuts, golf trips and whatnot, I can't understand why, but what would I know?

    * in every sense of the word.

    From The Atlantic:
    Cohen’s admission highlights one of the enduring riddles of the Trump era. Trump’s supporters say they care about corruption. During the campaign, they cheered his vow to “drain the swamp” in Washington, D.C. When Morning Consult asked Americans in May 2016 to explain why they disliked Hillary Clinton, the second-most-common answer was that she was “corrupt.” And yet, Trump supporters appear largely unfazed by the mounting evidence that Trump is the least ethical president in modern American history. When asked last month whether they considered Trump corrupt, only 14 percent of Republicans said yes. Even Cohen’s allegation is unlikely to change that.

    The answer may lie in how Trump and his supporters define corruption. In a forthcoming book titled How Fascism Works, the Yale philosophy professor Jason Stanley makes an intriguing claim. “Corruption, to the fascist politician,” he suggests, “is really about the corruption of purity rather than of the law. Officially, the fascist politician’s denunciations of corruption sound like a denunciation of political corruption. But such talk is intended to evoke corruption in the sense of the usurpation of the traditional order.”
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    Excellent analysis. Explains a lot.
  • Belle RingerBelle Ringer Shipmate Posts: 23
    Officially, the fascist politician’s denunciations of corruption sound like a denunciation of political corruption. But such talk is intended to evoke corruption in the sense of the usurpation of the traditional order.”

    Usurpation of the White Protestant right to rule the country. PBS recently ran a 3-part film on Prohibition, the parallels in thought were striking, including "drys" voting against booze the the afternoon and drinking booze the same evening at a party.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    I'm hoping Shipmates outside the UK can read this. An insight into the mindsets of some Trump loyalists. Who seem to have lost faith in the value of the rule of law, compared with their beliefs in the policies of their man.

    As Croesos' link suggests, truth is about a different kind of "purity". In my mind, a very "impure" kind of "purity", but then I don't have to be convinced about Trump's grievous faults.
  • BoogieBoogie Heaven Host
    When did politics become about ‘faith’? 🤔
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    Trouble is, Boogie, there is an element of 'true believer' at work in those linked comments.
  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    Simon Toad wrote: »
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    Simon Toad wrote: »
    While we are all distracted with Brennan, Military Parades, Omarosa et al, is Trump pushing Turkey into the arms of the Russians, potentially gifting Putin the greatest strategic coup since he pinched the Crimean Peninsula?

    Was this one of the things they talked about privately in Helsinki?

    I too am concerned about Turkey's turn toward Russia, but I have to also acknowledge the current Turkish regime has its own problems. With other normal administrations, though, the US response would have been more measured. However, Trump is an impulsive bully.

    The US response to what?

    The whole Turkish affair. It seems that Trump doesn't care that Turkey is, in effect, the Southeastern flank of NATO and an essential check to Russia's increased involvement in the Middle East. We have relied on Turkey to protect the rebels in Northern Syria. They have allowed us to use their airbases to create no-fly zones over Syria and Iraq when it was under Saddam We need those bases to cover the Persian Gulf.

    We have had disagreements with Turkey before, but we kept them in NATO. Trump does not know what he is doing.

    OK, I misinterpreted you I think. I didn't think you meant that US Pastor that Pence is crapping on about, but I was wondering whether I had missed something else.
  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    edited August 2018
    We have a wonderful political assassination gone wrong situation in Australia, with the conservatives tearing themselves apart. The PM pulled a beautiful set of moves today to stave off an attack from the hard right, giving his allies time to organise an alternative candidate and do some numbers. It is beautiful to watch the other side self-destruct so comprehensively. Consequently, I have been gleefully dancing around the television letting out admiring 'ooohs' and 'aaahhhs' and have barely caught up with the American news.

    Ahhh, the Westminster system. It can be so bloody at times :smiley:

    I also hear that Assange is going to be kicked out of the Ecuadorian Embassy. Lock him up! Lock him up! Damn Putin patsy.

    On the subject of Trump losing support, the writers and Editors of the American Conservative have been lukewarm at best. They are ready to peel off. Mind you, I've decided that the page is lacking in quality. They do that undergraduate thing of quoting large chunks of someone else's opinion (with credit) as evidence that their argument is right. Very poor.
  • mousethiefmousethief Deckhand, Styx
    Boogie wrote: »
    When did politics become about ‘faith’? 🤔
    1980, when Reagan directly courted the Evangelical vote, and created the current uneasy alliance between the religious right and the megacorporate right.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    Simon Toad wrote: »
    We have a wonderful political assassination gone wrong situation in Australia, . . .

    When I hear the term "political assassination" I think of John Wilkes Booth or Lee Harvey Oswald, not a series of parliamentary maneuvers. "[P]olitical assassination gone wrong" makes me think of "Squeaky" Fromme and John Hinckley. Maybe a different term would be more appropriate?
  • I see the latest reason not to impeach Trump is that it would make everybody very poor.
  • Belle RingerBelle Ringer Shipmate Posts: 23
    Eutychus wrote: »
    I see the latest reason not to impeach Trump is that it would make everybody very poor.

    Last I heard few "normal people" invest in stocks. (Is that wrong?)
  • mousethiefmousethief Deckhand, Styx
    Eutychus wrote: »
    I see the latest reason not to impeach Trump is that it would make everybody very poor.

    Last I heard few "normal people" invest in stocks. (Is that wrong?)
    From what I have read, the vast vasty vast majority of stocks are held by a very small number of people, all of them ridiculously rich.
  • Don't you have mutual investment funds or pension funds over there? They invest in stocks.
  • mousethiefmousethief Deckhand, Styx
    And they are a drop in the bucket of all stocks owned.
  • Perhaps, but unfortunately it would be misleading to suggest that the stock market tanking would have no effect on people who don't directly own stock.

    Before the 2009 crash, I know for a fact that at least one UK local education authority put all its current accounts to near zero on a Friday to speculate all its cash in hand on the stock market over the weekend.
  • Is nobody going to comment on the utter arrogance of him thinking that his impeachment would in fact cause a stock market crash? His attitude shows a profound lack of understanding as to what motivates the market. "Surprises" can cause a sell off, which is why the Fed leaks anticipated interest rate hikes months in advance--so nobody is caught by surprise. The very nature of an impeachment trial is so prolonged, that there would be little surprise and, thus, very little effect on the stock market. If imposing tariffs and getting involved in a trade war doesn't significantly affect the stock market, a trivial thing like impeaching a president will have close to zero effect. Politicians do not actually affect the economy as much as they would have us believe.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    For historical context, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was 8,903.63 on 18 December 1998, the day before the House of Representatives impeached Bill Clinton. On 7 January 1999, the day the Senate trial started, the DJIA was 9,537.76. On 16 February 1999, the first trading day after Clinton's acquittal, the DJIA stood at 9,297.03. Over the length of the impeachment process the Dow fluctuated between a low of 8,903.63 and a high of 9,643.32, a fluctuation of about 8% over the course of approximately two months.

    All data from the SEC website.
  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    Thanks, Croesus and B62 for your explanations. They sort of make sense*, but they don't make the possible outcome of the mid-term elections look very promising.

    * although I wonder how well the man in the street will fare when T's millionaires' tax cut has to be paid for, and he sends prices sky-rocketing by falling out with all his best trading allies.
  • Crœsos wrote: »
    For historical context, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was 8,903.63 on 18 December 1998, the day before the House of Representatives impeached Bill Clinton. On 7 January 1999, the day the Senate trial started, the DJIA was 9,537.76. On 16 February 1999, the first trading day after Clinton's acquittal, the DJIA stood at 9,297.03. Over the length of the impeachment process the Dow fluctuated between a low of 8,903.63 and a high of 9,643.32, a fluctuation of about 8% over the course of approximately two months.

    All data from the SEC website.

    That's all very well but you're forgetting that Trump is the Bigliest, Greatest President EVER and only he can make America Grrrrrrreeeeaaaaattttt. (Yes, I did just compare the President of the United States to a Breakfast Cereal cartoon character....)

    As Hedgehog put it; Stunning arrogance.

    AFZ
  • BoogieBoogie Heaven Host
    It seems to me that trump says ‘no collusion’ publicly at least four times a day. Does he think repeating it will make it so?
  • Hey, I'd vote for Tony the Tiger any day over the current occupant of the White House.

    Trivia: The voice of Tony the Tiger was an actor named Thurl Ravenscroft, who was also the uncredited singing voice for "You're a Mean One, Mr. Grinch" in How the Grinch Stole Christmas (Boris Karloff, who couldn't sing, was the speaking voice).

    Trivia but appropriate somehow.
  • Boogie, he thinks, knows, in fact, that saying it will make his followers believe it is so.
  • One can only hope that his eventual fall from grace will be as spectacular as that of Lucifer.

    And that his toupee falls off in mid-descent.

    IJ
  • Ooh, even Sessions is showing a bit of backbone.
  • jay_emmjay_emm Kerygmania Host
    Eutychus wrote: »
    Don't you have mutual investment funds or pension funds over there? They invest in stocks.

    Here (Uk) we've had a 5% tax go towards the stock exchange for the last few years, so I think nearly everyone young now has three months salary directly in. And obviously those on old systems will have lots in but on a less individualistic measure.
    So as a percentage of assets, it might well be similar.
  • I reckon there is probably an argument that people shouldn't equate membership of a pension fund with share ownership when thinking about their wealth until they are actually on the cusp of retirement. There are too many contingencies involved. Our Super funds have an insurance component for income protection, total and permanent disability and death. They are not at all linked to the market, unless of course the insurer falls over, and its that component which is probably of more value to someone in their twenties and thirties.

    I rather think that Trump's 'everybody' is a reference to himself, his companies and his family.

    I was watching Jim Jeffries talk to Conan O'Brien about masturbation in specific terms on you-tube when ad came on for a Franklin Graham tour of Australia.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/mar/15/donald-trump-adds-1-trillion-national-debt-14-mont/

    With regard to The Yam's impeachment vs. staying in office through 2020 and either's effect on ordinary people's fiscal well-being, we're in a heads-he-wins-tails-we-lose situation.
  • NicoleMR wrote: »
    Boogie, he thinks, knows, in fact, that saying it will make his followers believe it is so.

    Yep. This is not and either/or but a both/and.

    Over the last couple of weeks, I've been watching Trump's tweets with interest. I think the incessant NO COLLUSION rants are both part of his delusional narcissism and on-going conditioning of his base.

    That's my take, FWIW.

    AFZ


  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    Trump uses memorable slogans in his propagandist tweets and speeches. Crooked Hillary. Fake News. No Collusion. Angry Dems. Thugs. They tickle the prejudices of the loyal faithful and so become true.

    I note that Sessions turned yesterday. Riposted re the attacks on him and the DoJ. In contrast, with a few exceptions, GOP spokespersons aren't saying much.

    To quote Carl Bernstein from CNN last night, what continues to pour out of the White House has the stench of the sewer. Now that's a phrase that deserves repetition. As does Truth is not Truth.

    Crooked Donald! He Stinks! Lock Him Up!



  • Interview this morning on BBC Radio 4's Today programme with one of Trump's advisers, sorry didn't get the name: Michael Cohen was a dangerous loose cannon working on Trump's team, we all knew to avoid him, he's just accusing Trump to avoid prosecution. There's no evidence of Russian payments, other those payments to Hillary Clinton.
  • So NBC News is reporting that Pecker, the publisher of the National Inquirer, has been granted immunity from prosecution by the prosecutors working on the Cohen matters.

    This excites me. But then I think, so why would you give Cohen et al a custodial sentence for a breach of Campaign Financing laws, unless it was a stupendously egregious breach? What do people think? Is it a stupendously egregious breach warranting jail time, or is a whopping great fine a suitable penalty. I can't think of someone going to jail for such a breach in Australia, although jail is a potential penalty I believe.

    Why does it matter so much that the President has broken the law here?

    Please note that my preferred outcome for the termination of this Presidency remains the Ariel Sharon option.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    edited August 2018
    You can take it as read that the Cohen allocution is part of the plea bargain with the prosecution (which does NOT involve talking to Mueller). Cohen would not have confessed to the crime of breaking campaign financing laws unless there was a crime.

    And paying over a quarter of a million dollars to keep the stories of Stormy Daniels and Karen MacDougal out of the public domain was not a trivial or inadvertent abuse. That's serious money in the cause of a serious hush.

    Punishment? In Cohen's case, that's a matter for the judge. In Trump's case, it's a matter for the House whether it crosses the threshold of impeachment. I think everyone should wait for the Mueller report on that one. However, if Trump pardons Manafort, or gets a new AG to fire Mueller, I think even this supine GOP-controlled Congress might find those actions a stench too far to ignore the smell. Even worms turn.
  • Pangolin GuerrePangolin Guerre Shipmate
    edited August 2018
    As to the equity market, in Canada and the US, if you have a pension plan through your employer, you're exposed. Period. Mutual fund, whatever. How do you think it's funded? The money doesn't just sit there. There's a whole industry to grow the money that you've dedicated to your retirement. (Doesn't mean that you'll see all that growth! People have to be paid, share holders in the fund management have to be paid, etc.) Back in the day, I had a Registered Retirement plan. Equity/bond. (bonds are soooooo passe). I saw it shrink by, I think, 20% in two weeks (there was a capital weighting deformity in the Canadian equity market at the time). Even if you don't have your own portfolio, you're exposed directly via your pension plan. Indirectly by secondary and tertiary waves. If you participate in the economy in any way, you're exposed.

    All that said, I think Trump is playing "Fire me, and the dog gets it" (For those who remember The National Lampoon cover). Thing is, enough people are so mesmerised by this circus of clowns in mini-cars that they'll believe anything. I wonder whether Trump's threat about the market drop might actually have some electoral traction. I fear it might.
  • Barnabas62 wrote: »
    I think everyone should wait for the Mueller report on that one.

    If we don't die of old age first.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    :mrgreen: I don't think he is much given to worshiping these mysteries! Remembering another case, I think he is moving with all deliberate speed.
  • mousethiefmousethief Deckhand, Styx
    Michael Cohen was a dangerous loose cannon working on Trump's team, we all knew to avoid him, he's just accusing Trump to avoid prosecution.
    Avoid what prosecution? The prosecution is over. He pleaded guilty.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    mousethief wrote: »
    Michael Cohen was a dangerous loose cannon working on Trump's team, we all knew to avoid him, he's just accusing Trump to avoid prosecution.
    Avoid what prosecution? The prosecution is over. He pleaded guilty.

    Thus avoiding prosecution. :smiley:
  • mousethiefmousethief Deckhand, Styx
    Crœsos wrote: »
    mousethief wrote: »
    Michael Cohen was a dangerous loose cannon working on Trump's team, we all knew to avoid him, he's just accusing Trump to avoid prosecution.
    Avoid what prosecution? The prosecution is over. He pleaded guilty.

    Thus avoiding prosecution. :smiley:
    Yes but Curiosity was speaking in the present tense not the past.
  • I was trying to post a verbatim account of an interview from this morning and I almost certainly garbled it. I'll see if I can find it
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    It looks as though Cohen's behaviour may be pre-sentencing and maybe a form of advertising that he could be useful.

    I doubt whether there any guarantees that it will do him good at sentencing time, but it may.
  • Interview was with Corey Lewandowski, about 1:35 in. I suspect Lewandowski is giving the spin that will be given to the voters. Corey said he knew Michael was a person not to be trusted, he was a rogue employee, he had many clients and was involved in many problems. Now he is facing significant jail time he will say anything. Asked about Russia, his reply was that we have not seen one scintilla in evidence, but there is evidence the Clinton campaign paid 5 million to a British spy to dig up that dossier, which is riddled with mistakes.
  • Interview was with Corey Lewandowski, about 1:35 in. I suspect Lewandowski is giving the spin that will be given to the voters. Corey said he knew Michael was a person not to be trusted, he was a rogue employee, he had many clients and was involved in many problems. Now he is facing significant jail time he will say anything. Asked about Russia, his reply was that we have not seen one scintilla in evidence, but there is evidence the Clinton campaign paid 5 million to a British spy to dig up that dossier, which is riddled with mistakes.

    Yep and it's all bollocks. Obviously.

    I think this from Slate is pertinent to understanding Trump supporters.

    AFZ
  • mousethiefmousethief Deckhand, Styx
    Interview was with Corey Lewandowski, about 1:35 in. I suspect Lewandowski is giving the spin that will be given to the voters. Corey said he knew Michael was a person not to be trusted, he was a rogue employee, he had many clients and was involved in many problems. Now he is facing significant jail time he will say anything. Asked about Russia, his reply was that we have not seen one scintilla in evidence, but there is evidence the Clinton campaign paid 5 million to a British spy to dig up that dossier, which is riddled with mistakes.

    Yep and it's all bollocks. Obviously.

    I think this from Slate is pertinent to understanding Trump supporters.

    AFZ
    If I had five dollars for every article that explains why Trump supporters think the way they do, I'd be a hell of a lot closer to the down payment on my next car than I am now. But alas these stories are a dime a dozen.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    Interview was with Corey Lewandowski, about 1:35 in. I suspect Lewandowski is giving the spin that will be given to the voters. Corey said he knew Michael was a person not to be trusted, he was a rogue employee, he had many clients and was involved in many problems. Now he is facing significant jail time he will say anything. Asked about Russia, his reply was that we have not seen one scintilla in evidence, but there is evidence the Clinton campaign paid 5 million to a British spy to dig up that dossier, which is riddled with mistakes.

    Yep and it's all bollocks. Obviously.

    I think this from Slate is pertinent to understanding Trump supporters.

    AFZ
    If I had five dollars for every article that explains why Trump supporters think the way they do, I'd be a hell of a lot closer to the down payment on my next car than I am now. But alas these stories are a dime a dozen.

    Fair point. But I quite liked the simplicity of this one.

    For me, I am increasingly convinced that Mueller will be so damning even a Republican Senate would convict. This is way beyond Watergate.

    But Trumps core base (Sorry tautology) will still believe in him. And that's where it gets really interesting...

    AFZ
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    mousethief wrote: »
    Interview was with Corey Lewandowski, about 1:35 in. I suspect Lewandowski is giving the spin that will be given to the voters. Corey said he knew Michael was a person not to be trusted, he was a rogue employee, he had many clients and was involved in many problems. Now he is facing significant jail time he will say anything. Asked about Russia, his reply was that we have not seen one scintilla in evidence, but there is evidence the Clinton campaign paid 5 million to a British spy to dig up that dossier, which is riddled with mistakes.

    Yep and it's all bollocks. Obviously.

    I think this from Slate is pertinent to understanding Trump supporters.

    AFZ
    If I had five dollars for every article that explains why Trump supporters think the way they do, I'd be a hell of a lot closer to the down payment on my next car than I am now. But alas these stories are a dime a dozen.

    Well, there has to be SOME explanation, though I think the simplest is probably the best...

    Most of Trump's voters are just diehard Republicans who have would have voted for whomever the nominee was. A minority were swing voters in the Rust Belt who believed he could save their jobs.

    I don't think there's anything much deeper than that going on. You can talk about the politics of white-male resentment if you want, but that applies to Republican politics generally, not just Trump.

  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    This from a Trump supporter and juror in the Manafort case.

    Paul Manafort ("he's a good man") was lucky just to get convicted on 8 out of 18. Interesting that the jury decided to discount Rick Gates' testimony and instead concentrated on the documentation. Maybe "turned" witnesses for the prosecution are not such a good idea?

    Whatever makes this juror a Trump supporter doesn't seem to have fried her brain. Clearly she was amenable to reason despite her loyalty. Did her "due diligence". I hope there are more like her.

    I saw her being interviewed by Anderson Cooper. Amongst other things, she talked about the Trump baseball caps and the "Make America Great Again" slogan. She said she'd like to see the wide distribution of a baseball cap which says "Make America Kind Again". Reckoned this to be the real need today.

    I really hope there are more like her in the Trump supporter ranks.
  • me too Barnabas. Hate hate hate the idea of Jurors doing media interviews.
This discussion has been closed.