Trump Watch

A forum for the friendly discussion of national and international politics, history and current events.
User avatar
DWill
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6926
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
Location: Luray, Virginia

In a change of subject, what are people thinking about the conventions; what comparisons are you making? I was surprised first of all by my interest in these events. I recollect the conventional conventions of the past as shambolic affairs full of bloviating speakers and somewhat manufactured drama. I guess I've responded to the neat packaging of the 2020 events--three hours of tightly scheduled segments and you're done. In between, interesting panelists (PBS, in my case) give their reactions. I mean, when has Bill Clinton ever spoken for just five minutes?

The odds seemed against the Republicans to pull off anything as effective as the Democrats' show. But I think they might have done it in their very different way, largely through the force of personality of the president. The Rs have no participation from either past or current party elders--no Bush or Romney, no McConnell or Graham. One pundit asked whether that was going to signal a party failure, or was it going to formalize a new, independent direction for the party, epitomized by Donald Trump, Jr.?

The most interesting strategy so far has been to highlight a softer Donald Trump, Sr. He has played the genial host to several groups, and he's good at it. The attacking has been left to others. His better half, Melania, came off as much less confrontational than her past counterpart, Michelle Obama. When her hubby speaks, will he also try to shine the light rather than paint dark pictures? That approach really hasn't worked for him before, as he has difficulty not reverting to character afterwards.

This convention cries out for fact-checking, with several speakers claiming that Biden favors defunding the police, that he will raise taxes on 80% of Americans, and that Trump created the greatest economy in American history. Nikki Haley told us that Trump led us back to prosperity once, so he can do it again after we conquer the virus. The virus is, of course, the elephant in the room for this Republican convention.
User avatar
Harry Marks
Authors are MY fans!
Posts: 1832
Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 10:42 am

Frank Bruni pointed out today how shamelessly the Republicans have contradicted the truth. I like the Charlie Kirk observation.
"President Trump was elected to defend the American way of life. The American way of life means you follow the law, you work hard, you honor God, you raise your kids with strong values and you work to create a civil society."

How can Trump defend that when he doesn't believe in, or follow, a single one of those values? 0 for 5. He will be in the con artists' Hall of Fame for sure.
User avatar
DWill
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6926
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
Location: Luray, Virginia

Just ended: the second coronation of a lying, phoney baloney president. "Promises made, promises kept."

Right--He'll release his tax returns. He'll totally separate himself from his businesses.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... Fstory-ans
Last edited by DWill on Fri Aug 28, 2020 6:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ant
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5936
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm

DWill wrote:Just ended: the second coronation of a lying, phoney baloney president. "Promises made, promises kept."

Right--He'll release his tax returns. He'll totally separate himself from his businesses.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... Fstory-ans
Still waiting for the democrats to condemn all the violence
User avatar
Harry Marks
Authors are MY fans!
Posts: 1832
Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 10:42 am

ant wrote:Still waiting for the democrats to condemn all the violence
There have been plenty. This is the latest.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... nosha.html
But once is not enough. Five, ten times is never enough. You are actually looking for something else. Maybe you should figure out what it is?
User avatar
DWill
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6926
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
Location: Luray, Virginia

How absurd our country is in some respects. A 17-yr.-old kid comes onto a very volatile scene toting a military style rifle, and it's ok, his second amendment right.
User avatar
geo
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4679
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
Location: NC

In a long statement Sunday afternoon, Biden called "the deadly violence" in Portland "unacceptable" and said he condemns "violence of every kind by anyone, whether on the left or the right."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... uxbndlbing

Biden also condemns President Trump for fanning the flames of hate. We now have Trump supporters showing up at protests with guns, all tacitly supported by our President because it supports the narrative that the left is out of control.

Let's be frank. Some protests for racial justice have attracted anarchists, eager to damage property, loot stores and even attack innocent bystanders. Now we have the militia idiots trying to muck things up. There are bad actors on both sides; it's overly simplistic to blame all the violence on the left.
Civil, peaceful disagreement is indispensable to our system of democratic government. Now is the time to protect it.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/ ... uxbndlbing
-Geo
Question everything
User avatar
DWill
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6926
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
Location: Luray, Virginia

I support peaceful protest, but I have to admit some discomfort at protesters showing up night after night in a city. What's the plan in that? It seems a little like the Occupy Movement, and violent clashes become more likely.

I can accept that repudiating looting and burning is a relative problem for Democrats, even though Biden has made late, forceful statements. But for Trump's people to imply that Trump has been unequivocal himself in condemning violence is ridiculous. If it's about violence against property, yes that's true, but not when it comes to violence against people.
User avatar
Taylor
Thread Flintstone
Posts: 888
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:39 pm
Location: Florida

DWill wrote:A 17-yr.-old kid comes onto a very volatile scene toting a military style rifle, and it's ok, his second amendment right.
A 17-yr.-old kid does not have a second amendment right. His mommy got him that gun, she should be arrested and tried for murder too.
User avatar
Taylor
Thread Flintstone
Posts: 888
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:39 pm
Location: Florida

geo wrote:it's overly simplistic to blame all the violence on the left.
If these looters actually voted who’s to say they wouldn’t be PSfB voters?
User avatar
Harry Marks
Authors are MY fans!
Posts: 1832
Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 10:42 am

When you are willing to set aside the truth for the sake of power, then you have repudiated democracy. Treating everyone equally, and giving everyone their rights, means you follow the facts where they lead and everyone has a chance to be weighed by the evidence. We all learned that in "To Kill a Mockingbird," if it wasn't clear before that.

My wife first ran into it in Ecuador, when the leftists were demonstrating for democracy. Except ti turned out they weren't. She was at the University, and got a chance to talk to some of the students, and ask her naive American questions. It turns out they were not for whatever the voters wanted, they were for having themselves in power. No doubt there was some worthy end that justified the means. Justice, a chance for ordinary people to live in freedom instead of accepting whatever the people at the top imposed, an end to the ravages of poverty, worthy ends all. But they could not accept the idea that these things would happen if you just let the people decide. They knew that it would only happen if they had the power.

The good people of the deep South acted that way in the days of segregation. The facts of a case did not matter if a dark-skinned truth faced a light-skinned lie. Power mattered. No jury would convict a white man of killing a black man. No matter what the evidence said.

The police have been following this rule for a long time, probably as long as there were police. Sure, some of it is just power abusing others, but these days there is a vision of chaos in society, and police power as the only restraint on that chaos. Police officers know (except sometimes they forget) that police impunity is critical to maintaining that wall against the chaos of all against all. So if the facts aren't pointing in the right direction, make up some new facts.

Trump's tribe is acting that way now. If the truth is inconvenient for the power of the tribe, then alternate reality is called for. Whether it is a question of finding someone to blame for all this g--d--- trouble ("the China virus") or of hanging on to the guns that are the only defense against government trying to take away the power of the tribe ("your Second Amendment will be history,") or of losing the refuge from the problems of the city, problems that everyone knows directly trace to the unspeakable evil of slavery ("your beautiful suburbs will be ruined,") alternate reality is better than facing inconvenient truth.

We see the paranoid flight from reality and credibility every week on BT. I have to believe that much more than the preservation of privilege is involved. I think it is the threat to identity that has pushed things so far in that direction. The values that people organize their life around, the sense of who is us and can be trusted, and who is some kind of threat instead, those values are telling them that democracy is just giving the wrong verdict and the facts need to be set right, for the sake of civilization (as Tucker Carlson puts it). So that's the choice - do you want truth, or do you want civilization?

In a couple of months our election will choose. No question that Trump's base prefers alternate reality. They dress it up in the words of denial, but every time they have to choose between facts and power for the Republican party, they take the power. The real question is what will happen in the minds of swing voters, who are not so sure that civilization is threatened by what Trump calls "fake news", or that they prefer another four years of denial, corruption and non-stop aggressive lies to letting democracy and facts determine policy. The question is not whether Democrats will speak up for heartland values - the party went out of its way to choose someone whose record is on the traditionalist side of the liberal spectrum. The question is whether the paranoid vision of poverty as a direct threat to them will win out over their willingness to give rights to others, too.

In that time, the unemployment rate will rise again. The signs are too strong to ignore - bankruptcies, evictions, the tide of consumer demand turning downward again. It will not be a huge increase like 2008-9 (certainly not like March and April) since some forces are pushing the economy upward. But it will happen, and desperation will increase with it. And I think the election may very much hinge on whether the desperation creates more violence among the frustrated marginal workers who are laid off and kicked out of their homes, or more wake-up call to those who are watching denialism blow up common sense.

Pretty horrible that the choice may be between Democrats grimly saying "I told you so" about more unemployment and Republicans grimly saying "I told you so" about more violence.
User avatar
ant
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5936
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm

it's overly simplistic to blame all the violence on the left.
Right, but the left, like Ted Wheeler sure are making it easy for these thugs to do their thing.

And on what planet would these violent thugs vote for anyone on the right? Highly likely they would indeed vote left.


Pathetic how in general the left never holds itself accountable for anything gone bad in Democratic controlled regions.
PATHETIC
User avatar
ant
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5936
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm

Abolish the two party system.

Start with the Democratic party who's internal corruption is totally out of hand and who's children are now the Frankenstein monster that will eat them first.

Anyone still supporting the Democratics in any way is a delusional dinosaur still living in a bygone era
User avatar
Interbane
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7193
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
Location: Da U.P.

Start with the Democratic party who's internal corruption is totally out of hand
I'm sure there's corruption, but it's massively blown out of proportion by Russian propogandists.

If you want to see corruption, look at Trump. He's racked up over 3,000 conflicts of interest during his presidency. Foreign governments have held private events at his properties over a dozen times. Private interests, cabinet members, and congress members have all held events at his properties. He's never divested himself of interest in those properties either, so he's making millions. All the while refusing to provide his tax returns to the public, the first time in half a century for a president. And we both know he's hiding some shady stuff.

Some of his closest advisers have become convicted felons since the start of his campaign. His family members are part of his cabinet. His businesses are expanding overseas in lockstep with favors he provides to foreign governments and officials.

The list goes on and on. The molehill of democratic corruption has nothing on Trump's mountain.
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
User avatar
ant
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5936
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm

When you rig the primaries that's enough.

When you push forward a senior with clear indications of cognitive decline it's enough

When your Speaker responds to the question of lawless rioting by saying " people will do what they do" and not come close to denouncing it, it's enough.

When you push Russian conspiracy theories for months and months without clear and convincing evidence, it's enough.

And when you get otherwise sane people to buy your garbage about conspiracy theories, it's more than enough.
Post Reply