Trump's statements and promises

I think that will result in someone being shipped off to Africa in a monkey suit.

Thing is, the situation I described has actually happened, and the people involved weren't shipped to Africa, they were shipped to prison. But there is some question as to whether the President putting together such a scheme would even technically be illegal.
 
Well, current (and unelected by the public as PM) british PM May, has a husband who is/was a banker. I am sure they won't get millions out of insider knowledge, eg they did not with the sudden announcements resulting each time to the pound falling. They are too ethical for that, and too stupid to get caught if they used surrogates, right?
Yeah.

Imo the main issue with Trump as potus is that he clearly isn't going to last. He looks bored with actually being potus. He isn't qualified to be potus either (but W wasn't qualified to be a janitor, and was elected twice to this office). Again you should blame his election on the fact that even most dogs would win an election against alzheimer-ridden and corrupt Hillary.
 
Imo the main issue with Trump as potus is that he clearly isn't going to last. He looks bored with actually being potus.

He has been watching a lot of TV lately, according to that very reliable
bloke, "Sources close to...".

I agree that he probably won't last. A lot of shows will be back soon, so he
won't have much time for presidential matters. I wonder if he's savvy enough
to suddenly realise that The Walking Dead is a metaphor for his presidency.
 
It has been awfully quiet about the State of the Union speech. By all accounts it was very good. Why no commentary?

J
I've been commenting on the Canadian news site I belong to. There are quite a few Trumpagandists there, diligently spamming the site, crowing to the Canadian left-wing that 'your girl Hillary lost'... they appear to be extremely geographically challenged, not even capable of understanding that Canada is a separate country and we don't vote in American elections.

I watched the speech, as I was curious as to what "vile" behavior the Democrats supposedly displayed. What I saw was Trump using various people as human props, and while it was nice that he said positive things about Canada, I can't help wondering how that partnership on women entrepreneurs is going to help Canadian women. So far there is deafening silence on that.

Trump can't string two coherent sentences together on his own, but at least he showed he can read off a teleprompter.
 
It has been awfully quiet about the State of the Union speech. By all accounts it was very good. Why no commentary?

J

Because it was awful and the response to it simply shows how vapid and spineless mainstream media is. Calling for a new department and online list to publish all immigrant crimes and having the speech praised shows how low the bar can be for white men to be praised for.
 
It has been awfully quiet about the State of the Union speech. By all accounts it was very good. Why no commentary?

J

It wasn't good by all accounts.

I myself (to give you some commentary) don't count it as particularly good. And one account, which described it as "Steve Bannon with a smile," encapsulates my criticism. His tone was different, but the content was same-old-same-old. While there may be some interest in hearing a tune played one octave higher, that interest is minimal. Do I need a daily reminder that Trump has no soul, as he revealed when he reduced the heartfelt applause given to Ryan Owens' wife to a "record"? I seem to get such a daily reminder, but I don't need one.

So . . . meh.

You must yourself not have bothered with it, given that all you're recounting is the accounts you've heard rather than your own assessment. If you've ever heard a Trump stump speech in the past, I'd say you saved yourself an hour and fifteen minutes of your life by not bothering to hear this rehash done in imitation of what a president would sound like.
 
hear this rehash done in imitation of what a president would sound like.

It's learning. AHHHHHH!

Ungh. My son has been into this bedtime book, "little presidents" or some such. It goes over in cute little bobble-headed drawing fashion I think Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, Grant, Teddy, FDR, Kennedy, Reagan, Obama and then it goes into a question mark since it wasn't written since November.

Two things have struck me from the experience. The first is that what we think is going to stick as the takeaway isn't always what sticks as the takeaway. Reagan's blurp was something about "bringing people together both near and far." Which I did snort at some until I realized his most durable quote is likely to be about tearing down walls. The second was that my son then asked who the question mark is. To which I felt obligated to look up and show him a picture. I think it was one with that feces-eating closed-mouth grin. His response, God bless his generous little 5 year old heart, was "I like that man." For the first time in my life I was forced to respond to him, "I don't." His confusion hurt. I'll deal with it later, I suppose.
 
It's learning. AHHHHHH!

I don't regard it as learning.

Trump all through the campaign assured us that he could start "acting presidential" whenever he might so choose.

He never did so choose, because the entire premise of his campaign was, "Elect me. I'm not a politician."

By the fundamental logic that undergirds his entire self-presentation, he will at some point have to become "presidential." What I mean by "fundamental logic" is this. Everything non-Trump is "a mess," "carnage," "a total disaster." Everything Trump is "amazing" and "tremendous." As he takes office, America has to be "a mess." But at some point, America will have to become, as a result of his supervision "amazing." (He's already trademarked the slogan "Keep America Great.") So, right now, crime rates are at a 47-year high. But in a year or two, he'll announce that they are at a 47-year low.

As America becomes "G-r-r-r-r-reat," Trump will go from being not-a-politician to being president. Since he has started making it great, during his A+ first month, he can start looking like its president.

On your kid . . . I'm sure he only "likes that guy" because "that guy" looks like a muppet. Ernie is orange, too.
 
Last edited:
My child, much to my dismay, does not care for the creations of Jim Henson. They creep him out. Trump actually rates higher, thus far. ><
 
Ok, so now there is grounds for worry. If Muppets creep him out and Trump doesn't . . .
 
Trump's speech (not a State of the Union address) was by all accounts good? Not from this prominent conservative source:

he said not a word about moral issues.

The following words were never mentioned: abortion, assisted suicide, religion, religious liberty, and religious exemptions.

. . .

The problem with Trump's speech is that it only spoke about missiles and markets, never citing morality.

This is popular with many Republicans, whose only goals are making money and protecting national security. But without demonstrating a concern for the moral order, the two "M's" of missiles and markets are an insufficient condition of the good society: the third "M," morality, must be added if success is to be achieved.

Dr. William Donohue is the president and CEO of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. The publisher of the Catholic League journal, Catalyst, Donohue is a former Bradley Resident Scholar at the Heritage Foundation and served for two decades on the board of directors of the National Association of Scholars.

http://www.newsmax.com/BillDonohue/liberty-markets-missiles/2017/03/01/id/776270/
 
Calling for a new department and online list to publish all immigrant crimes and having the speech praised shows how low the bar can be for white men to be praised for.

Stop it with the white thing. If Ben Carson or that pizza guy with the 999 tax plan was president, they would be praised every time they deliver a not completely stupid and bigoted speech. the bar isn't being lowered for white men, it's being lowered for rich people and Republicans.
Not that it's a coincidence that all their nominees and presidents have been white men, but the party's standards have been slipping aross the board since Nixon.
 
From the look of things here, "by all accounts" is spot on. Even critically minded posters have no traction.

J

If you were to look harder here, you'd see that the speech wasn't good "by all accounts"; it wasn't good by my account, for instance, or by Bill Donohue's in JR's quote. CNN did a poll and 78% of those polled regarded it as a good speech. That means 22% didn't.

Maybe I'm just quibbling about what the word "all" means. If by "all" you mean "most," then, yeah, by all accounts it was a very good speech. But by most accounts, that would be an odd definition of "all."
 
From the look of things here, "by all accounts" is spot on. Even critically minded posters have no traction.

J
I gave you a link to where even a hard core conservative panned the speech. Congressional Republicans have panned the spending and cutting of of foreign aid.

I was personally grateful that Trump reads a teleprompter better than he tweets.
 
Back
Top Bottom