'It's Trump's party now' and U.S. Republicans could pay in November

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, Monomial said:

 

Let's get one thing straight. Nobody likes Trump. Few of the people who voted for him actually like Trump. Of course they will disapprove of him. The problem is that they hate the establishment even more. Approval ratings are always relative.

 

People keep getting distracted by the wrong thing. It isn't how great a job Trump is doing, it is the failure of those who have held the reins for the last century to recognize their mistakes and accept that they need to change.

 

Trump is a demagogue and a psychopath. He is dangerous. Nobody likes him. He is also going to win unless the media stops trying to demonize him and instead starts focusing on the problems that put him in charge.

 

 

 

We'll have to disagree on "nobody likes Trump". There are hardcore fans who actually do buy into his sales pitch, and I don't think it's just a "few".

 

And sure, the focus being more on Trump, rather than on constructive ways to alter the circumstances and conditions that led to his nomination and election does serve him, to a point. Got bashed when pointed that out a while back, right after Trump won the elections. Doesn't seem like much changed on that front. A shame, really.

 

But, and that's quite a but, Trump can easily overplay his "hand". That's to say, assuming that people will put up with any outrageous nonsense he pulls up, just to avoid some imagined "status quo", doesn't necessarily reflect reality. So while at some level, or pace, Trump's ways get "normalized" (whether some care to accept it or not), overdoing it, (especially near election time), could generate a different effect.

 

It still remains to be seen what candidates and what agenda the opposition will field. IMO, despite there being quite a few Sanders fans on this forum, he'll be an easy rival for Trump. 

 

 

[bristolboy]

7 minutes ago, Monomial said:

 

I agree people regret it. They had hope that he would be better than he is. Knowing that won't change anything though. Given the same options, they will still vote for him, because Hillary was worse.

 

If you think people aren't angry, go to flyover country and talk to them. They may not like Trump, but he will win by default unless something is done about the rest of Washington.

And what exactly do you mean by doing something? 

Putting a rein on wall street? Trump is doing the opposite

Raising taxes on the rich? Trump is doing the opposite

Giving better healthcare options? Trump is doing the opposite.

Defending Medicare and Medicaid? Trump's latest proposals for Medicaid are doing the opposite.k And he hasn't said a word about the House proposal to slash Medicare and Medicaid funding.

 

The bedrock of Trump's appeal isn't issues Congress can do anything about. It's the fact that white people, particularly white men, are afraid of the changing status quo.

Oh, and there's the religious right who want special privileges for religions (except Islam).

[lannarebirth]

 

8 minutes ago, Morch said:

It still remains to be seen what candidates and what agenda the opposition will field. IMO, despite there being quite a few Sanders fans on this forum, he'll be an easy rival for Trump. 

 

 

 

I understand the thinking that leads to that assessment but bear in mind, most of the people Trump has ripped up so far were pretty awful in their own right.

 

Bernie understands New York rules. I think he could hold his own. Trump can't make a radical socialist label stick. After that, what else has he got?

[mtls2005]

11 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

The bedrock of Trump's appeal isn't issues Congress can do anything about. It's the fact that white people, particularly white men, are afraid of the changing status quo.

 

Non-college edumacated, rural older white males to be specific.

[lannarebirth]

13 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

And what exactly do you mean by doing something? 

Putting a rein on wall street? Trump is doing the opposite

Raising taxes on the rich? Trump is doing the opposite

Giving better healthcare options? Trump is doing the opposite.

Defending Medicare and Medicaid? Trump's latest proposals for Medicaid are doing the opposite.k And he hasn't said a word about the House proposal to slash Medicare and Medicaid funding.

 

The bedrock of Trump's appeal isn't issues Congress can do anything about. It's the fact that white people, particularly white men, are afraid of the changing status quo.

Oh, and there's the religious right who want special privileges for religions (except Islam).

From Trump's Minnesota Rally this evening:

"You ever notice they always call the other side ‘the elite.’ The elite! Why are they elite? I have a much better apartment than they do. I’m smarter than they are. I’m richer than they are. I became president and they didn’t.”

President Donald Trump

[Berkshire]

41 minutes ago, Monomial said:

 

Trump is a demagogue and a psychopath. He is dangerous. Nobody likes him.

 

 

What many don't realize is the ones who dislike Trump the most are the "true conservatives."  Like veteran GOP strategist Steve Schmidt.  Here's another guy quitting the GOP because of Trump...and the spineless Republicans who blindly support him:

 

[Veteran GOP strategist Steve Schmidt renounced his Republican Party membership on Wednesday and pledged to vote for Democrats in an effort to preserve “what is right and decent” in the United States.]

[In a series of scathing tweets, Schmidt blasted the GOP as “corrupt, indecent and immoral” and “fully the party of Trump.”]

[“It is filled with feckless cowards who disgrace and dishonor the legacies of the party’s greatest leaders,” tweeted Schmidt, an MSNBC political analyst who has been an outspoken critic of President Donald Trump. “Today the GOP has become a danger to our democracy and our values.”]

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-strategist-quits-apos-corrupt-135557288.html

 

 

 

[Rhys]

The bigots manage a way to come out and influence the votes...

[Morch]

11 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

 

I understand the thinking that leads to that assessment but bear in mind, most of the people Trump has ripped up so far were pretty awful in their own right.

 

Bernie understands New York rules. I think he could hold his own. Trump can't make a radical socialist label stick. After that, what else has he got?

 

Too Easy: How Republicans Would Tear Apart an Unvetted Bernie Sanders in the General Election

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/main/2016/5/19/this-ends-now-the-bernie-sanders-opposition-research-the-media-refuses-to-release

 

Federal Investigation Into Jane Sanders, Bernie Sanders’s Wife, Is Getting More Serious

http://www.newsweek.com/why-fbi-increasing-investigation-jane-sanders-bernie-sanders-wife-634508

 

Not saying the above is factually correct, just pointing out that a Trump campaign would have no issues using stuff against Sanders. Like most long term politicians and public figures, there's always something which can be used to bash, smear or spin.

 

While not much of a Sanders fan, I'm sure he would have made a better choice than Trump (but then, most would...). Whether he's a viable candidate for this particular fight, and whether he's the knight in shining armor some portray him as, can be debated.

[lannarebirth]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Too Easy: How Republicans Would Tear Apart an Unvetted Bernie Sanders in the General Election

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/main/2016/5/19/this-ends-now-the-bernie-sanders-opposition-research-the-media-refuses-to-release

 

Federal Investigation Into Jane Sanders, Bernie Sanders’s Wife, Is Getting More Serious

http://www.newsweek.com/why-fbi-increasing-investigation-jane-sanders-bernie-sanders-wife-634508

 

Not saying the above is factually correct, just pointing out that a Trump campaign would have no issues using stuff against Sanders. Like most long term politicians and public figures, there's always something which can be used to bash, smear or spin.

 

While not much of a Sanders fan, I'm sure he would have made a better choice than Trump (but then, most would...). Whether he's a viable candidate for this particular fight, and whether he's the knight in shining armor some portray him as, can be debated.

 

He's no knight in shining armor and I only agree with about 50% of his positions, not to mention the positions that are being attributed to him by so called "progressives". That said, he is the only candidate since Nader that has correctly expressed the roots of America's ills which is where any kind of comeback needs to start.  Yeah, the wife could be a problem.

[bristolboy]

2 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

He's no knight in shining armor and I only agree with about 50% of his positions, not to mention the positions that are being attributed to him by so called "progressives". That said, he is the only candidate since Nader that has correctly expressed the roots of America's ills which is where any kind of comeback needs to start.  Yeah, the wife could be a problem.

What exactly has he expressed about the roots of America's ills?

[lannarebirth]

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

What exactly has he expressed about the roots of America's ills?

 

The rise of the corporate state. The power of PAC money and its damage to American politics. Anti soverign trade treaties. Poor tax policy leading to unequal distribution of wealth. Single Payer Healthcare.

 

Don't get me wrong, he's no Nader, but he's the best of what's left.

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

 

The rise of the corporate state. The power of PAC money and its damage to American politics. Anti soverign trade treaties. Poor tax policy leading to unequal distribution of wealth. Single Payer Healthcare.

 

Don't get me wrong, he's no Nader, but he's the best of what's left.

But he's done just the opposite on most of these issues, Actually advancing the interests of people opposed to this.

And what kind of treaty wouldn't be anti-sovereign? The Constitution declares that treaties are the law of the land.

[lannarebirth]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

But he's done just the opposite on most of these issues, Actually advancing the interests of people opposed to this.

And what kind of treaty wouldn't be anti-sovereign? The Constitution declares that treaties are the law of the land.

 

Resolution panels for most international trade treaties are now supranational and are not based on the law of the land but on the policy of the particular trade organization that governs the parties in the dispute.

[mtls2005]

June 20, 2018, the day Congressional Republicans realize they've followed a doddering old fool over the cliff like lemmings.

 

‘Categorically false’: Three GOP lawmakers refute Trump on reaction to Sanford comments

 

Had a great meeting with the House GOP last night at the Capitol,” the president posted on Twitter as he was en route to Duluth, Minnesota, for a rally Wednesday evening. “They applauded and laughed loudly when I mentioned my experience with Mark Sanford. I have never been a fan of his!”

Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) responded that that lawmakers were instead “disgusted.”

 

“House Republicans had front row seats to @POTUS’s dazzling display of pettiness and insecurity,” Amash tweeted. “Nobody applauded or laughed. People were disgusted.”

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/20/trump-sanford-insult-amash-costello-660488

[Berkshire]

1 hour ago, mtls2005 said:

June 20, 2018, the day Congressional Republicans realize they've followed a doddering old fool over the cliff like lemmings.

 

‘Categorically false’: Three GOP lawmakers refute Trump on reaction to Sanford comments

 

Had a great meeting with the House GOP last night at the Capitol,” the president posted on Twitter as he was en route to Duluth, Minnesota, for a rally Wednesday evening. “They applauded and laughed loudly when I mentioned my experience with Mark Sanford. I have never been a fan of his!”

Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) responded that that lawmakers were instead “disgusted.”

 

“House Republicans had front row seats to @POTUS’s dazzling display of pettiness and insecurity,” Amash tweeted. “Nobody applauded or laughed. People were disgusted.”

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/20/trump-sanford-insult-amash-costello-660488

Trump will lie about absolutely anything and everything.  He just can't help himself. 

[bristolboy]

6 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Resolution panels for most international trade treaties are now supranational and are not based on the law of the land but on the policy of the particular trade organization that governs the parties in the dispute.

According to the Constitutions Treaties become the law of the land once they are ratified. So how can a ratified treaty not be the law of the land? And if signatories to a trade treaty disagree about sometihng how else can it be resolved but by a supranational panel? You think the parties to a treaty are going to choose the United States to be the impartial arbiter?

[Opl]

" Expert explains how Trump’s GOP has turned into a cult — and warns his spell will be hard to break. “I think you have to look at the effect of Trump’s behavior and language on his base,” she said. “He readily ridicules and chastises people. He readily pushes people aside if they’re not worshipping him. We’ve all seen the videos of his aides praising him to high heaven. That’s the kind of adulation cult leaders expect and demand.”

https://psmag.com/news/a-sociologist-explains-the-similarities-between-cults-and-trumps-gop

 

 

[tacoofthehillpeople]

This is a sad thread.