Here are 11 top moments from Trump's 'Meet the Press' interview

[Tug]

32 minutes ago, Skipalongcassidy said:

And he still occupies your collective minds... 55555

He is still a threat to my country I for one will certainly keep up on this threat untle it is a threat no more then I will be absolutely delighted as I suspect a great many folks will be as well!

[Hanaguma]

10 minutes ago, Tug said:

He is still a threat to my country I for one will certainly keep up on this threat untle it is a threat no more then I will be absolutely delighted as I suspect a great many folks will be as well!

He is no threat. He only fills a psychological need in people to feel a sense of crisis. Much the same way every election since 1980 has been billed as "the most important election of our lifetime".    

 

Back to the interview, I thought his performance was poor. Similar to his chat with Megyn Kelly. Trump does well in obvious adversarial situations where he can bluster and the interviewer follows along. But with a well prepared journalist who asks good questions and then has follow-ups prepared, he looks bad. 

[heybruce]

14 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

He is no threat. He only fills a psychological need in people to feel a sense of crisis. Much the same way every election since 1980 has been billed as "the most important election of our lifetime".    

 

Back to the interview, I thought his performance was poor. Similar to his chat with Megyn Kelly. Trump does well in obvious adversarial situations where he can bluster and the interviewer follows along. But with a well prepared journalist who asks good questions and then has follow-ups prepared, he looks bad. 

He is  a threat because he is blatantly unqualified to be President and many people don't recognize that or the danger of having an unqualified President.

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

None.

That makes it twice.

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Skipalongcassidy said:

And he still occupies your collective minds... 55555

Do you understand that this is a thread about Trump? Nothing so sad as a clueless jibe. Your response was entirely Pavlovian.

[Hanaguma]

11 minutes ago, heybruce said:

He is  a threat because he is blatantly unqualified to be President and many people don't recognize that or the danger of having an unqualified President.

Really? What are the qualifications? I thought it was something like 35 years old, native born citizen...

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Hanaguma said:

Really? What are the qualifications? I thought it was something like 35 years old, native born citizen...

By those criteria, a 35 year old native born axe murderer is qualified to be President.

[Hanaguma]

Just now, placeholder said:

By those criteria, a 35 year old native born axe murderer is qualified to be President.

Hence the "something like".  Haven't read the Constitution lately for the specifics. Have you?

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Hence the "something like".  Haven't read the Constitution lately for the specifics. Have you?

I've read it recently enough to know that, yes, a 35 year old native born axe murderer is Constitutionally qualified to be be President. So, if Constitutional qualifications are the only kind of qualification that matters. then you've made a great point. If not, then not so much.

I just looked it up. The Presdiential aspirant also has to have lived in the USA for 14 years.

Edited September 19, 2023 by placeholder

[ozimoron]

Trump's presidency was an existential threat to humans as a species. Folks only support him because of the foul, racist sewage that comes out of his mouth, not because of anything he actually did..

[Tug]

31 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

He is no threat. He only fills a psychological need in people to feel a sense of crisis. Much the same way every election since 1980 has been billed as "the most important election of our lifetime".    

 

Back to the interview, I thought his performance was poor. Similar to his chat with Megyn Kelly. Trump does well in obvious adversarial situations where he can bluster and the interviewer follows along. But with a well prepared journalist who asks good questions and then has follow-ups prepared, he looks bad. 

I only have to look at the wreckage he has left behind to know he indeed a threat I have only to look at the news every day to see the lives he has ruined as they await their sad fate I have only to see the damage he has done to our democracy that I love so dearly no sir it’s not filling some weird need he is what he is.his interview is of little accord he will change what he says to suit his needs but he did dig himself in a bit deeper so that’s helpful 

[Hanaguma]

8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

I've read it recently enough to know that, yes, a 35 year old native born axe murderer is Constitutionally qualified to be be President. So, if Constitutional qualifications are the only kind of qualification that matters. then you've made a great point. If not, then not so much.

I just looked it up. The Presdiential aspirant also has to have lived in the USA for 14 years.

So, what other qualifications are there? Other than winning an election, that is. 

[Hanaguma]

1 minute ago, Tug said:

I only have to look at the wreckage he has left behind to know he indeed a threat I have only to look at the news every day to see the lives he has ruined as they await their sad fate I have only to see the damage he has done to our democracy that I love so dearly no sir it’s not filling some weird need he is what he is.his interview is of little accord he will change what he says to suit his needs but he did dig himself in a bit deeper so that’s helpful 

I guess you and I have a fundamentally different take on America. I think the USA is a strong country with institutions that can easily withstand whatever tiny fisted tantrums a losing candidate may throw.  It has survived civil war, depression, nuclear threat, etc.  It is strong enough to survive a grumpy ex-president. 

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

So, what other qualifications are there? Other than winning an election, that is. 

There are formal qualifications and then there are informal qualifications.

For informal qualifications, I would suggest a candidate who did not specifically call for suspension of the Constitution.

[Eric Loh]

16 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

I guess you and I have a fundamentally different take on America. I think the USA is a strong country with institutions that can easily withstand whatever tiny fisted tantrums a losing candidate may throw.  It has survived civil war, depression, nuclear threat, etc.  It is strong enough to survive a grumpy ex-president. 

Institutions being organisations in government that create, enforce and apply laws which an orderly society obeys. An authoritarian like Trump if he become President can destroy institutions by intimidation, dismissal of non-conformists and replaced with conformists. He has divided society to a level whereby his supporters and even lawmakers made statement freely of a civil war. He count Putin and Kim as bosom friends. The intergrity of the President essentially complements the working of the institutions and in the case of Trump can destroy these institutions from within. He is more than a grumpy ex-President, he is a serious threat to America democracy and the world if elected. 

[ozimoron]

'Proud to be misogynistic and racist': Grammy-winner blames 'Trump years' for her country music exit

 

Rather, she says she's leaving because of what she views as the country music industry’s unwillingness to honestly reckon with its history of racism and misogyny and to open its gates to more women and queer people and people of color.

 

She added, "After the Trump years, people’s biases were on full display. It just revealed who people really were and that they were proud to be misogynistic and racist and homophobic and transphobic."

 

https://www.rawstory.com/proud-to-be-misogynistic-and-racist-grammy-winner-blames-trump-years-for-country-music-exit/

 

[metisdead]

Some posts in violation of our Community Standards and the replies have been removed.

[Hanaguma]

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

Institutions being organisations in government that create, enforce and apply laws which an orderly society obeys. An authoritarian like Trump if he become President can destroy institutions by intimidation, dismissal of non-conformists and replaced with conformists. He has divided society to a level whereby his supporters and even lawmakers made statement freely of a civil war. He count Putin and Kim as bosom friends. The intergrity of the President essentially complements the working of the institutions and in the case of Trump can destroy these institutions from within. He is more than a grumpy ex-President, he is a serious threat to America democracy and the world if elected. 

The facts dispute your assertions. Trump DID become President. He did not destroy any institutions, didnt even come close. For a rank amateur, he did rather well at some things- not starting new wars, fostering peace in the Middle East, killing some big name terrorists, keeping the economy humming along.  

 

Not sure your evidence of Putin and kim being bosom friends, sounds like hyperbole to me.  He isn't the president who said, "tell Vlad (Putin) that I will have more flexibility after I am re-elected", or the SecState who presented Russia with a huge reset button. He DID institute talks with North Korea- a good gesture IMHO.

 

He was a reflection of a divided society (at least politically), not a cause. And certainly not the danget that the hyperventilating left presents him to be.

 

[Danderman123]

Getting back to the Meet the Press interview:

 

Confession is good for the soul.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Really? What are the qualifications? I thought it was something like 35 years old, native born citizen...

That's all you expect from a US President?

 

I have higher standards.  I want someone who understands what the nuclear triad is and why we have it, what nuclear treaties are in place with Russia, why nuclear non-proliferation has been the policy of the US since the end of World War 2 and should remain so.

 

Trump talked so nonchalantly about east Asian countries acquiring nuclear weapons that the South Korean public lost faith in the US defending them from North Korea and started pushing for South Korea to acquire such weapons.  President Biden had to reassure South Korea that it was unnecessary for the country to acquire them. 

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-japan-south-korea-might-need-nuclear-weapons/

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65404805

 

South Korea seems satisfied for now, but if Trump is re-elected I suspect they may feel they need their own nuclear arsenal.  After all, Trump approaches allies and agreements with a "what's in it for me" attitude, and he apparently doesn't see any benefit in assuring our Asian and European allies that the US's nuclear umbrella covers them also.

 

Do I need to explain to you why we don't want nuclear proliferation, or do you accept that in that essential area Trump was, and still is, completely unqualified to be POTUS?

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

I guess you and I have a fundamentally different take on America. I think the USA is a strong country with institutions that can easily withstand whatever tiny fisted tantrums a losing candidate may throw.  It has survived civil war, depression, nuclear threat, etc.  It is strong enough to survive a grumpy ex-president. 

Maybe our institutions are strong enough to survive having a grumpy ex-President with no respect for institutions re-elected, but I don't want to find out.

[heybruce]

16 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

The facts dispute your assertions. Trump DID become President. He did not destroy any institutions, didnt even come close. For a rank amateur, he did rather well at some things- not starting new wars, fostering peace in the Middle East, killing some big name terrorists, keeping the economy humming along.  

 

Not sure your evidence of Putin and kim being bosom friends, sounds like hyperbole to me.  He isn't the president who said, "tell Vlad (Putin) that I will have more flexibility after I am re-elected", or the SecState who presented Russia with a huge reset button. He DID institute talks with North Korea- a good gesture IMHO.

 

He was a reflection of a divided society (at least politically), not a cause. And certainly not the danget that the hyperventilating left presents him to be.

 

Trump never had respect for US institutions, but during his first Presidency he didn't know how to undermine and bypass them.  He'll be much better at it if given another chance.

[Hanaguma]

8 minutes ago, heybruce said:

That's all you expect from a US President?

 

I have higher standards.  I want someone who understands what the nuclear triad is and why we have it, what nuclear treaties are in place with Russia, why nuclear non-proliferation has been the policy of the US since the end of World War 2 and should remain so.

 

Trump talked so nonchalantly about east Asian countries acquiring nuclear weapons that the South Korean public lost faith in the US defending them from North Korea and started pushing for South Korea to acquire such weapons.  President Biden had to reassure South Korea that it was unnecessary for the country to acquire them. 

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-japan-south-korea-might-need-nuclear-weapons/

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65404805

 

South Korea seems satisfied for now, but if Trump is re-elected I suspect they may feel they need their own nuclear arsenal.  After all, Trump approaches allies and agreements with a "what's in it for me" attitude, and he apparently doesn't see any benefit in assuring our Asian and European allies that the US's nuclear umbrella covers them also.

 

Do I need to explain to you why we don't want nuclear proliferation, or do you accept that in that essential area Trump was, and still is, completely unqualified to be POTUS?

Trump's answer was perfectly pragmatic. Nothing is stopping countries from making nukes- it isn't very hard to do.  If I were SK, I would definitely have some handy just in case lil Kim makes a move. Same with Japan.

[Hanaguma]

6 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Trump never had respect for US institutions, but during his first Presidency he didn't know how to undermine and bypass them.  He'll be much better at it if given another chance.

I doubt it. He doesn't have a great capacity for learning from his past mistakes. His behavior in the current election campaign kind of proves that. 

[heybruce]

25 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Trump's answer was perfectly pragmatic. Nothing is stopping countries from making nukes- it isn't very hard to do.  If I were SK, I would definitely have some handy just in case lil Kim makes a move. Same with Japan.

Wow!  You actually don't understand why nuclear proliferation is a bad thing.  Clearly I over-estimated your intelligence.

[Hanaguma]

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Wow!  You actually don't understand why nuclear proliferation is a bad thing.  Clearly I over-estimated your intelligence.

Not really. I think you have over-estimated the impact that Trump had or could have on anything that actually could have any real impact on the US. And now perhaps, back to the topic at hand?

[sirineou]

6 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Not really. I think you have over-estimated the impact that Trump had or could have on anything that actually could have any real impact on the US. And now perhaps, back to the topic at hand?

You think trump did not do anything that any real impact on the US? Did you take one too many hockey pucks to the head? ????

[candide]

Trump said: “Brad Raffensperger, the head – who, by the way, last week said I didn’t do anything wrong. He said, ‘That was a negotiation.’ Brad Raffensperger, who I was dealing with, I appreciate that he said that. But he said last week, I didn’t do anything wrong.” ????

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/17/politics/fact-check-donald-trump/index.html

[stoner]

On 9/18/2023 at 9:31 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

Trump’s cognitive decline is getting headlines across multiple media, it’s all downhill from now.

just think it will only be a couple of years with hundreds of blunders and he will finally be down close to the other guy. 

[Hanaguma]

12 minutes ago, sirineou said:

You think trump did not do anything that any real impact on the US? Did you take one too many hockey pucks to the head? ????

Nothing that will be anything other than a footnote or a Jeopardy question within 10 years.  You survived civil war, Woodrow Wilson, and Pearl Harbor. You will get over Trump faster than you realize.

 

It is somehow comforting for people to catastrophize their political opponents, but the reality is different. The system always wins.