TRUMP

[rataylor22]

I can't recall any president treating the media the way Trump does, so

[Doug Glatt]

Did anyone see 60 minutes last night?
You know... love him or hate him, I don't think he's wrong about how the media treats him.
The entire interview was her interrupting him and trying to corner him. I don't recall Obama ever being treated that way.

Obama didn't constantly, pathologically lie every single time he spoke. Trump is being cornered because its the only way to try and hold him accountable for his inability to make truthful and accurate statements.

[Doug Glatt]

This is really well done.

People refuse to understand why he's in power in the first place.
They either don't care or they prefer to live in denial.

He's in power because a hostile foreign power, fascist Russia, colluded with the Trump campaign to defraud the American election process. Only one side in denial about that fact.

[4T2]

Let me preface this by saying I am not a fan of Trump and a lot of what he does. I'm pretty much a centrist (leaning left), not impressed with either sides' extremes.

But...

If you keep calling 40% of the population a bunch of knuckle-dragging, racist, misogynistic, homophobic, beer-chugging troglodytes up to their necks in 'rape culture', because they want border control, limited immigration and more assimilation, due process when accusations are made, didn't like Obama (and harbour other opinions contrary to the self-appointed morality cops) don't be surprised when they stop listening to name-calling, trial by media, chanting mobs with signs on sticks who trash their own communities, and just vote for the other side because they don't want to be associated with the political identitarians on the left. Slapping labels on people because they have different views just shuts down any hope of actually understanding where the other side is coming from. And yes the right does it too. But not to the extent the left does.

And remember, you gotta live with them. Screaming names and not listening at all to any responses is not going to get anyone to change their minds (again, I don't even like Trump - but I can see exactly how he got elected and why he will be re-elected. All anyone is doing is becoming more entrenched).

(And yes I know what Trump rallies look like - it says something when that is appealing enough compared to the alternative to win).

PS - people laughing at him for the toilet paper on his shoe while he boarded the plane: he made you look. Now how much time is devoted to that trivial (and deliberate) "gaffe" on the news, and in political discourse? He's playing everyone, leading them by the nose. More fixated on his Twitter account than what is actually happening at the governmental level. But carry on.

This is really well done.

People refuse to understand why he's in power in the first place.
They either don't care or they prefer to live in denial.

“The President in particular is very much a figurehead — he wields no real power whatsoever. He is apparently chosen by the government, but the qualities he is required to display are not those of leadership but those of finely judged outrage. For this reason the President is always a controversial choice, always an infuriating but fascinating character. His job is not to wield power but to draw attention away from it. On those criteria Zaphod Beeblebrox is one of the most successful Presidents the Galaxy has ever had" - Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy - 1978.

Zaphod is easily a stand-in for Trump. Every year I become more and more convinced that Douglas Adams was a time-traveler who came back and tried to warn us of our impending fate. If the dolphins disappear, I'm finding a way to hitch a ride off this rock.

[Wonko]

“The President in particular is very much a figurehead — he wields no real power whatsoever. He is apparently chosen by the government, but the qualities he is required to display are not those of leadership but those of finely judged outrage. For this reason the President is always a controversial choice, always an infuriating but fascinating character. His job is not to wield power but to draw attention away from it. On those criteria Zaphod Beeblebrox is one of the most successful Presidents the Galaxy has ever had" - Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy - 1978.

Zaphod is easily a stand-in for Trump. Every year I become more and more convinced that Douglas Adams was a time-traveler who came back and tried to warn us of our impending fate. If the dolphins disappear, I'm finding a way to hitch a ride off this rock.

So good! Love Douglas. RIP.

[Wonko]

Trying to get an honest answer out of Trump is next to impossible. Journalist are simply trying to do their job and get to the truth. It only comes across as harsh because Trump refuses to be honest and cries 'fake news!' overtime he is caught in another scandal or lie. Just like Trump's most recent whopper claiming he never said he would give Elizabeth Warren's charity of choice a million dollars if she proved she had native DNA. Well, she did the DNA test and it turns out she does have native ancestry.

Here is Trump's long winded deranged assault on Elizabeth Warren and her heritage along with proof of his blatant lie. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgMF7ngs5Ac

He lies so often, so blatantly and obviously it really does boggle the mind.

[Doug Glatt]

Slapping labels on people because they have different views just shuts down any hope of actually understanding where the other side is coming from. And yes the right does it too. But not to the extent the left does.

I can't allow this misinformed opinion to go unchallenged. Right-wingers in America (I no longer refer to them as conservatives or Republicans since those ideologies have been eradicated by Trumpist neo-fascism) have spent decades trashing and constantly negatively associating terms like "liberal", which is literally a pejorative to them, and the Democratic party (DemocRat party). One cannot even attempt to discuss the nuances of socialism without immediately being shouted down as a KGB agent. And they love to use terms like "leftists" when describing their opposition.These words were deliberately weaponized during the Cold War and the plan continues today on right wing talk radio, which is sadly the main "information" source for a large portion of them. So its just inaccurate to say what you did.

If you don't believe me just trot over to Breitbart, the Trump hive, and peruse the comment sections under the articles. There you will find the dark side.

[Nehithaw]

I have no horse in this race (born and raised and will live and die in Canada) it is refreshing to hear you guys tell it like it is. The world would be much better place if logic were applied to everything.

[rtstr]

I can't allow this misinformed opinion to go unchallenged. Right-wingers in America (I no longer refer to them as conservatives or Republicans since those ideologies have been eradicated by Trumpist neo-fascism) have spent decades trashing and constantly negatively associating terms like "liberal", which is literally a pejorative to them, and the Democratic party (DemocRat party). One cannot even attempt to discuss the nuances of socialism without immediately being shouted down as a KGB agent. And they love to use terms like "leftists" when describing their opposition.These words were deliberately weaponized during the Cold War and the plan continues today on right wing talk radio, which is sadly the main "information" source for a large portion of them. So its just inaccurate to say what you did.

Not trying to argue, but do you see the irony in your post? You can swap out "right" with "left", "liberal" with "conservative", "Democrat" with "Republican", etc and the takeaway of this statement remains just as true.

I also think your need to respond to his post in the way that you did is a perfect example of the retaliatory instinct that is so prevalent in politics these days. What he said isn't "misinformed"-- I would bet he has just as much evidence to support his claims as you do yours. It just for some reason pushed a button and you felt the need to push one back.

There's a mob mentality in politics now that is completely killing any opportunity for civil conversation between opposing opinions and beliefs. The majority of the aggressive banter, soapbox speeches and social media wars do nothing except contribute to the overall dumbing down of America. People don't have to agree with the opposition, but I think it's important to respect and acknowledge differing opinions otherwise no progress occurs, ever.

Again, not trying to argue or disagree with your opinion, just pointing out some sad observations of mine and playing devil's advocate in a friendly way!

[Doug Glatt]

The word conservative is not a pejorative among liberals. And the irony is that you can't see how much that immediately destroys the discourse, yet you nonetheless indulge yourself in a lengthy comment.

[PrairieDog]

I can't allow this misinformed opinion to go unchallenged. Right-wingers in America (I no longer refer to them as conservatives or Republicans since those ideologies have been eradicated by Trumpist neo-fascism) have spent decades trashing and constantly negatively associating terms like "liberal", which is literally a pejorative to them, and the Democratic party (DemocRat party). One cannot even attempt to discuss the nuances of socialism without immediately being shouted down as a KGB agent. And they love to use terms like "leftists" when describing their opposition.These words were deliberately weaponized during the Cold War and the plan continues today on right wing talk radio, which is sadly the main "information" source for a large portion of them. So its just inaccurate to say what you did.

If you don't believe me just trot over to Breitbart, the Trump hive, and peruse the comment sections under the articles. There you will find the dark side.

No what I am saying is very accurate, and you are actually reinforcing and demonstrating what I am saying - that slapping labels on groups is a cowardly way to justify completely ignoring and discounting someone immediately. You are giving an example to back this up. I stated very clearly that both sides do this.

I'm not talking about the extremes - I'm talking about the mass of people who aren't "left-wingers' or "right-wingers". The moderate liberals and moderate conservatives who aren't frothing at the mouth over every little tidbit of gossip the mass media is tailoring for them. Any deviation from the stated narrative results in a label getting slapped on and name-calling ensues. I'm not taking sides, I'm pointing out what drives a lot of people to vote for Trump.

If a citizen has concerns about border control and illegal immigration, and raises that issue, they get called racist (or nazi, bigot, etc) and shouted down. The topic gets shut down before it begins. If they want to wait for due process and investigation before deciding guilt (presumption of innocence) they get called misogynist woman haters promoting rape culture. Want to preserve your culture? As long as it's not Western European culture go ahead. It's just a static wall of noise.

So on election day which side do you think that citizen will vote for? The side that shouts them down and calls them names, or the side that says - "I hear you and I'm going to do something about it, trust me!". Trump is the result, not the cause - most people refuse to even look at how he got elected, and just continue to demonise and attack anyone who even wants to discuss it. The reason he got elected is rooted in these types of smaller-scale interactions - it's not a "Alt-right facist regime that got put in power by the Russians." Blame the white people. Blame the Russians. Blame anyone but yourself, and bully and scream down anyone who even thinks about it.

He and his team recognised this and capitalised on it. The Russians recognised this and capitalised on it - not to get Trump elected, I don't think that was their aim. They just wanted to create chaos and divisiveness across America, they knew which buttons to push and stir the US population into a frenzy of in-fighting and tribal minority group warfare. And they are sitting back and laughing their asses off because of course it worked.

But the vast majority will never admit this, how they've been played and are still being played, by all sides. It's a lot easier to fool someone than it is to convince them that they've been fooled. Bounce the acceptable narrative around in their safe-space social media bubble (just block any dissenters) - if anything tries to pierce that protective bubble then basically a meltdown occurs, wide-eyed spittle-flying tantrums with copious name-calling and slogan-slinging. Then they fly back to their flock and congratulate themselves for acting like junior-high kids.

Pat yourself on the back because you're laughing and pointing at the piece of tissue on his shoe - how righteous. Call someone a fascist/Nazi/etc because they don't perfectly conform to your particular ideology. Now you don't have to listen to a word they say, in fact they shouldn't even be allowed to speak at all - way to go, that's progress. Tell Caucasians they are personally responsible for all racism that has ever occurred. Tell anyone who is proud of Western Civilisation that it's a patriarchal racist system and morally corrupt (compared to all other civilisations and cultures that have ever existed, it's actually the LEAST patriarchal and racist, and has benefited all of humanity more than any other ever has). Anything but actually trying to come to some kind of solution.

But then when it's time to vote, it's a surprise that they don't want anything to do with the side that spent the last few years screaming accusations and names at them, and vote for the only other alternative.

Go figure.

[Godin]

Did anyone see 60 minutes last night?
You know... love him or hate him, I don't think he's wrong about how the media treats him.
The entire interview was her interrupting him and trying to corner him. I don't recall Obama ever being treated that way.

I caught some of it and the guy is amazing at avoiding answering questions he doesn't like, which was pretty much all of them.

He has no respect for the media and the feeling is mutual, because he basically ignores their questions and blames Obama for everything that is wrong with the USA. He is so obsessed with Obama that he can't stop thinking about him. It's so bizarre.

[dejeanneret]

He's in power because a hostile foreign power, fascist Russia, colluded with the Trump campaign to defraud the American election process. Only one side in denial about that fact.

With all respect, this I think unjustifiably lets the Democratic party and the Clinton campaign off the hook for a number of really inexcusable failures including, among others:

1) The DNC directly undermining and alienating voters in their own party by actively favoring Clinton over Sanders (or at least appearing to) during the primary process;
2) The DNC and Clinton doing a miserable job in the aftermath of the primary process of bridging the gap with disheartened Bernie supporters, with reports at the time suggesting that some (many?) were so disillusioned by the process that they vowed not to vote at all in the general election or to vote for Trump (who, at least at the time, was seen as a greater catalyst for change in national politics -- which, it appears, is what many voters at both poles of the political spectrum were truly after);
3) The Clinton campaign badly misjudging the true battleground states, focusing far too much campaign effort on Florida, Ohio and North Carolina (none of which she really needed to win, and none of which she ultimately did win) to the neglect of traditionally democrat stronghold midwestern, yet struggling rustbelt states that she ultimately lost (such as Wisconsin, Michigan and nearly Minnesota); and
4) Simply failing to connect with more rural, blue-collar workers even in places that had been reliably "blue" for quite some time, like Pennsylvania.

In other words, I think there were many reasons behind Trump's shocking victory. Pinning it all on illicit outside influence and interference, I fear, dismisses too easily many of the reasons that firmly were (and, in the future, still are) within the control of those at the helm who can and should do/know better. Without facing and owning up to those failures, the chances of continuing to misread broad segments of the electorate and misfire in national election cycles are increased.

Just my two cents.

[Wonko]

she had the audacity to ask him if he agreed Putin was involved in assassinations and poisoning people. Um, WHAT?!
And (Shaking head as I type this) he actually answered that one! He should have been more evasive than he was, imho, considering the nature of those questions.
There's no benefit in asking a question like that, other than to try painting him with a devil brush.

Trump has lavished praise on Putin many times. Trump claims that he believed Putin's denials over multiple US intelligence agency's findings in regard to Russian interference in the 2016 election. So why is this question so off base? I was actually pleasantly surprised that Trump accepted the fact that Putin was involved in these assassinations, of course he then went on to downplay it, ....since the assassination were not committed on US soil. No just in England. One to the USA's most robust and most traditional allies. Putin can murder all the folks he wants there.....Not Trump's problem. But is our problem. Having a President who lavishes praise and respect for unscrupulous murdering dictators is our problem. ​

It makes you realize Trump would likely run the country the same way given half the chance.

Thankfully America at least has some checks and balances, though Trump is trying to undermine them at every turn.

[Godin]

First of all, there are 2 too many letter in POTUS. You can figure out which 2 for yourself.

After watching the interview with Leslie Stahl, all he does is pat himself on back and blame Obama. The guy can't give a straight answer on any subject. Ironically, this is probabliy where he is the most political.

Other notes;

-Leslie asks him about climate change and he says that scientists have their own political agenda, meanwhile, his administration actually blocked a government scientist from speaking at a conference about the role climate change has had on forest fires. So he doesn't even trust his own scientists. He actually replaced the head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) when he took office, with a guy who was filing law suits against a variety of EPA regulations. Strange that that would even be at the top of his agenda. So he had his own political agenda?

-According to Trump, they were going to war with North Korea before he became President. News to me but blame Obama for the possibility of the Appocalypse. Trump saved the world according to himself. Phew. His back must be quite sore from all the back patting he does. He mentions the Obama administration for bad relations with NK which may be somewhat true but I can't remember Bush or any other Republican being very friendly with NK before him. Trump seems to overlook Kim Jong-un's murderous past. Now, yes, I do think it is good that they are talking but, Trump seems to believe anyone that seems to like him.

-He thinks everyone, particularly Canada and NATO, has been taking advantage of the USA in previous deals. So basically, he is saying that every leader before him, Democrat or Republican, was not as smart as him and no one will take advantage of America again. Pat on the back.

-He says he gave the Ukraine weapons and tank killers while Obama gave them pillows and blankets. lol Hey Donald, what did you give your fellow Americans in Peurto Rico to help with their flooding following Hurricane Maria? Oh yeah, paper towels. I bet Obama would have at least given them pillows and blankets.

-Lesile asks him about immigration separation. He says it was the same when Obama was president. Leslie told him that Obama didn't actually enforce it, then he says again later in the interview that Obama did it to.

-She says that the country is polarized. He says "it was very polarized under Obama. Unbelievably polarized under Obama."

-How can he say Hillary Clinton made a really nasty statement regarding Kavanaugh? This is after him mocking the alleged rape victim at a recent rally.

-He says he doesn't trust everyone in the Whitehouse but feels very comfortable. So is he saying that his hiring judgement isn't very good? Yeah, I guess he is.