Is Trump mentally unfit for the presidency to the point that he ought be removed from office?

Is Trump mentally unfit for the presidency to the point that he ought be removed from office?


  • Total voters
    56
Status
Not open for further replies.
You are entitled to your opinion. However, I respectfully disagree.
 
But I mean, what objective basis do you have for your opinion? How has Trump led any kind of "populist revolution" when he's staffed the government with plutocrats and most of the stuff he's done has involved transferring wealth upwards and rolling back social progress? What is "populist" about literally anything he's done?
 
Because we have a different definition of what "populist" means. Populist, to me, doesn't mean someone who necessarily does what is in the best interest of the masses. Rather, that masses of people support him. Whether they should support him is irrelevant. The establishment hates him. Whether they should hate him is irrelevant.

They were constantly bashing Trump all throughout the election, CNN especially but mainly everyone other than Fox. They also were determined to bash Bernie, or at the very least not give him near as much coverage (especially positive coverage) as Hillary. Bernie and Trump were the anti establishment candidates, but the establishment thought Hillary was the one that could beat both of them. This was a miscalculation on their part, and it backfired big time.

Similar to Malcolm X and Julius Ceasar, now there is political instability and unrest more than ever. There's no going back now. The smartest thing they can do is leave it alone, and for the Democrats to elect a non-establishment candidate in 2020 because you can only fight fire with fire. Instead, they seem to be going in the opposite direction, and might even be stupid enough to elect Michelle Obama or Chelsea Clinton or whatever. Hopefully, I'm proven wrong.
 
Rather, that masses of people support him.

Trump won with fewer votes than his opponent and has historically low approval ratings.

The establishment hates him.

Corporate profits remain high; the stock market is doing fine; everything I've read in the real estate rags for work suggests those vampires are quite happy to have one of their own in the White House. The idea that the journalists and politicians who hate Trump constitute the "establishment" in any real sense is pure fiction.
 
Haven't read the thread but on the title I'll say, no. He's perfectly mentally fit. He should also be removed from office.
 
If you don't like money being used as the measure, then think of it in terms of
the number of people could be employed in more productive ways.
You'll just have to accept the term "more productive ways" until the bloke comes
back with the official phrase book he borrowed.
 
Trump won with fewer votes than his opponent and has historically low approval ratings.

Julius Ceasar and Malcolm X also had tons of haters. However, the lovers were more decisive than the haters. You are being not just a hater, but a player hater, at that.


Corporate profits remain high; the stock market is doing fine; everything I've read in the real estate rags for work suggests those vampires are quite happy to have one of their own in the White House.

And many ordinary people are happy that the stock market is doing fine. The stock market is symbolic of the entire economy. How was life for the average American after the stock market crash of 1929? Trump is adding jobs. Stats don't lie, bro. There are also plenty of big name companies that are against him. There are tons of corporations that donated to Hillary, not Trump. You are leaving this out of the equation.

The idea that the journalists and politicians who hate Trump constitute the "establishment" in any real sense is pure fiction.

Wrong.
 
The establishment hates Trump's politics because they're inconsistent with the mainstream liberalism/conservatism of the past few years; however, mainstream conservatism will soon catch up to Trump's advisers and then they won't have to hate his politics.

The establishment doesn't hate Trump himself though. He still goes golfing with Bill Clinton and goes to the media's little interview shows. I mean he's a rich white man who brought CEOs back to the White House.
 
And many ordinary people are happy that the stock market is doing fine. The stock market is symbolic of the entire economy.
No it isn't.
All the stock market measures is how much a relatively small group of people value partial ownership of a company, and the indexes only measure a small group of companies.
Equating the health of the stock market with health of the economy is only useful as very rough back-of-the-envelope measurements of the health of the economy and not for any serious analysis.
Look at it this way. His Trumpiness made a huge deal in the campaign about how all of our jobs have gone to China or Mexico and factories are scattered like tombstones. However, the stock market under Obama enjoyed its single longest uninterrupted growth period in its history and hit several milestones. Either Trump is willfully lying about jobs going abroad given the strength of the stock market, or the stock market is not a particularly useful indicator of economic health.

Trump is adding jobs. Stats don't lie, bro.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Statistics mean whatever the person creating them wants them to mean as the statistic by itself means absolutely nothing.
(For example, suppose you were to read in the paper "US added 1 million jobs last year". Shorn of any context that means nothing. Does the US economy usually add 10 million jobs a year, and this is a massive decline? Or, does the US economy usually add 500,000 jobs a year and 1 million is excellent?)
The US economy is going in pretty much the same direction as it was under Obama, steady, albeit tepid growth that tends to benefit the wealthiest in society. There was a measurable bump when Trump came into office but that has been dissipating and without any substantial economic legislation passed (rejiggering some regulations in industries with low labor use doesn't add many jobs) or much time into office, any policies he has implemented have not had any time to take effect.
 
Just because we don't see breaking news every hour on Russia, doesn't mean it is has collapsed. Mueller is still at work. I suspect and predict that he will find at least two things: Trump and his family have been laundering money for years and that his campaign worked with the Russians. We've just grown used to daily revelations so when there is a break, it seems a bit unusual.
 
Last edited:

Hm I'm looking around for one recently but I guess they haven't been in a little while. They used to a lot before they became pretend enemies. They're probably taking a little break until Trump is accepted as the norm so that when they go their media friends can publish stories about attractive bipartisanism.
 
@Perfection Honest question...why do you get your news from CNN? Are you not sick of their blatant anti-Trumpism and biased reporting? I'm not saying you need to go full InfoWars or anything, but surely there's some sort of middle ground?
I get my news from plenty of other sources than CNN.

CNN is my goto for breaking news because it's quick to get stories out and is better than FOX and MSNBC

Anyways, seems like the Russia narrative collapsed and now they're going for the "Trump is crazy" narrative. Can't say I'm surprised. Good luck, Fake News.
they got russia stuff headlining today.
 
Similar to Malcolm X and Julius Ceasar, now there is political instability and unrest more than ever. There's no going back now. The smartest thing they can do is leave it alone, and for the Democrats to elect a non-establishment candidate in 2020 because you can only fight fire with fire. Instead, they seem to be going in the opposite direction, and might even be stupid enough to elect Michelle Obama or Chelsea Clinton or whatever. Hopefully, I'm proven wrong.
1. Why are people in a dither about Michelle Obama or Chelsea Clinton running? If either of them want to run, they will. I don't see why they would want to, but whatever... There are enough right-wingers on the CBC news site rambling on about Ivanka Trump running. When I asked what qualifications she had, the most any of them could muster was, "Well, she's tall and beautiful."

2. Please. It's CAESAR. Your misspelling is seriously annoying.
 
1.) Ivanka Trump should 100% not run. I really and truly hope she doesn't run. Or if she does, for her to be soundly defeated. Michelle and Chelsea can run. I don't have the right to stop them, nor do I even want to have that right. I'm just giving advice. If Michelle or Chelsea get the nomination, they will be defeated by almost anyone, including Trump himself. Michelle and Chelsea have a lot of baggage associated with their last name and where it comes from. We have already had one president from the Obama family. Do we need another? We have already had one President from the Clinton family + another family member who had a long political career, heavily in the public eye.

Many people are getting tired of just a few political families (the Clintons, the Bushes, the Kennedy's, maybe now the Obamas) having all the power. It's more than just "anti establishment". It's that they're not even trying to conceal it at all when they get someone who is a blood relative of a recent president.

2) You're spelling of CAESAR is how the establishment spells it. I am a revolutionary.
 
Here in Germany, we spell it Zäsar.

Not really, but how could you possibly know that I'm lying?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom