**President Trump 2018 Thread**

[Dick Allen]

Presidents undergo annual physicals. It's not weird.

Not weird for 44 presidents. Weird for 1.

[Dick Allen]

Good thing he's a genius. My God, billions in taxpayer money would have been wasted. Praise to Trump:

 

Kellyanne Conway says Trump has 'discovered' there are rivers and mountains on the border that make a physical wall unfeasible.

[Balta1701]

I did not state that he hadn't done or said anything prior to hide his intent anywhere in that post.

No, but the idea that "THIS" will somehow shake something loose...not going to happen.

 

If you didn't understand who this person is before now, it's because you deliberately don't want to.

[StrangeSox]

Because nothing he's done or said so far has made that obvious or apparent.

 

There's a reason why Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, the people every Republican House and Senate voter have supported indirectly, have issued no statement yet.

 

The Republicans who were present in the meeting have had various responses, none of which even attempt to address his comments:

 

https://twitter.com/AlexNBCNews/status/951846421896073216

 

Updating my earlier tweet re reax from House mbrs that were in the Oval Office mtg ystdy --> Diaz-Balart releases stmt that doesn't confirm/deny/reference s-hole comments but focuses on DACA; Goodlatte's office says they have no comment; Maj Ldr McCarthy's office hasn't responded

 

No, but the idea that "THIS" will somehow shake something loose...not going to happen.

 

If you didn't understand who this person is before now, it's because you deliberately don't want to.

 

We all know he's a racist and he's instituting policies to support his white nationalism. There's still something emotionally visceral when certain statements are made.

Edited January 12, 2018 by StrangeSox

[Balta1701]

The Republicans who were present in the meeting have had various responses, none of which even attempt to address his comments:

 

https://twitter.com/AlexNBCNews/status/951846421896073216

 

d

They're not going to. They learned their lesson when they dared criticize him for things like saying a judge with a Mexican ancestor couldn't adequately decide his case back in the campaign and then the voters elected him anyway. Enough of the Republican base fully agrees with this statement that they'll just keep their mouths shut, wait for it to pass, and then move on to funding more immigration enforcement.

[Balta1701]

We all know he's a racist and he's instituting policies to support his white nationalism. There's still something emotionally visceral when certain statements are made.

Which one of the previous ones do we need to bring up? "They all have AIDS" was only published 3 weeks ago.

[bmags]

No, but the idea that "THIS" will somehow shake something loose...not going to happen.

 

If you didn't understand who this person is before now, it's because you deliberately don't want to.

 

Again, wasn't stating this was a turning point or would shake something loose. I'm saying having a president who openly demeans certain minority races and religions is rare (or the favorite "not normal") even when you go back historically to times where status quo was much more more racist and bigoted.

 

My point was that I think even keeping lip service that all groups are equal and welcome is important even if its papering over policy which is doing the opposite. I'm hoping it doesn't lead to much more dramatic backsliding on rights since he is anchoring conversation to these despicable ends. Presidents words are still important even when people are fatigued by his nonsense.

[Balta1701]

Again, wasn't stating this was a turning point or would shake something loose. I'm saying having a president who openly demeans certain minority races and religions is rare (or the favorite "not normal") even when you go back historically to times where status quo was much more more racist and bigoted.

 

My point was that I think even keeping lip service that all groups are equal and welcome is important even if its papering over policy which is doing the opposite. I'm hoping it doesn't lead to much more dramatic backsliding on rights since he is anchoring conversation to these despicable ends. Presidents words are still important even when people are fatigued by his nonsense.

I think it has already led to backsliding on rights - uprooting 200,000 people who have lived here for nearly 20 years, something like 40,000 US homeowners, and sending them to El Salvador, seems like a reasonable example, and we just announced that one last week. A guy got blocked from coming to a conference in the US from the UK this week to talk about his research on Multiple Sclerosis because he was born in Iran.

 

If we don't want this to be who we are, we actually have to show it in November. Until then, we proved in 2016 that this is who we are. This is him speaking for us.

[StrangeSox]

The AIDS story was published on 12/24, so a lot of people probably never even saw it, even among the heavily informed. Why did the allegations against Weinstein unleash a tidal wave? Why do some police shootings of innocent black people result in large protests and others don't? It's maybe an interesting sociological question but that doesn't mean there can't be a difference in the response and reaction among the public.

 

There still seems to be more of a widespread emotional response to this one. I don't know why this one and not other ones, but I'm not going to dismiss it. It won't instantly "change" things, but it does play a roll in the continuing story of the Trump Presidency and opposition to it.

[Balta1701]

The AIDS story was published on 12/24, so a lot of people probably never even saw it, even among the heavily informed. Why did the allegations against Weinstein unleash a tidal wave? Why do some police shootings of innocent black people result in large protests and others don't? It's maybe an interesting sociological question but that doesn't mean there can't be a difference in the response and reaction among the public.

 

There still seems to be more of a widespread emotional response to this one. I don't know why this one and not other ones, but I'm not going to dismiss it. It won't instantly "change" things, but it does play a roll in the continuing story of the Trump Presidency and opposition to it.

There was an equal or bigger widespread response to his description of "Very fine people" chanting "Blood and soil" and "Jews will not replace us".

[StrangeSox]

There was an equal or bigger widespread response to his description of "Very fine people" chanting "Blood and soil" and "Jews will not replace us".

 

And a couple of months latter, Democrats won big victories in elections across the country and a month after that won a Senate seat in Alabama.

 

 

edit: my original thoughts were more about reactions to this statement than any sort of political "mattering." I get and share the anger and disbelief at people, including many in the media, who still pretend like he's a normal if belligerent President even though he's openly defended neonazis and regularly attacks non-white people and has ICE and CBP doing some truly horrendous things. Regardless of whether there should have been a stronger reaction in the past, there does seem to be a strong one now.

Edited January 12, 2018 by StrangeSox

[Balta1701]

And a couple of months latter, Democrats won big victories in elections across the country and a month after that won a Senate seat in Alabama.

And the Republican party joined together to pass their tax cuts with him and have continued confirming judges and launched a much more intensive campaign to defend him from any liability for his actions during the campaign along with a foreign power committing criminal acts on US Soil to support him.

[bmags]

Fun conversation.

[Balta1701]

Fun conversation.

I can imagine worse ones. Like sitting around a table while your 70 year old relative spouts all sorts of racist stuff about countries he's never visi.....oh.

[StrangeSox]

oh no all political problems weren't solved instantly I guess that means nothing matters and people don't actually have different responses to things for sometimes confusing reasons

 

like I'm not disagreeing with you that things are still bad, Republicans in general have succumbed to Trumpism, that lots of people will never recognize Trump for who he is or that racism is even a real thing in 2018

 

I can imagine worse ones. Like sitting around a table while your 70 year old relative spouts all sorts of racist stuff about countries he's never visi.....oh.

 

cut supporters of white supremacy out of your life

Edited January 12, 2018 by StrangeSox

[bmags]

Well heres a question:

- Do you make a deal with a racist president to protect that status of some vulnerable minorities at the cost of setting policy with the worst person possible

OR

- do you cut off talks with a racist president and risk cruel uprooting and splitting of families on a mass scale

[Balta1701]

oh no all political problems weren't solved instantly I guess that means nothing matters and people don't actually have different responses to things for sometimes confusing reasons

 

like I'm not disagreeing with you that things are still bad, Republicans in general have succumbed to Trumpism, that lots of people will never recognize Trump for who he is or that racism is even a real thing in 2018

 

 

 

cut supporters of white supremacy out of your life

Basically my point - this will not change at all until something different happens in November. And especially since the Republicans have made it 100% clear they don't care how often elections are rigged in their favor, there's a good chance that nothing different happens in November and this is just who we are as a country.

[StrangeSox]

Well heres a question:

- Do you make a deal with a racist president to protect that status of some vulnerable minorities at the cost of setting policy with the worst person possible

OR

- do you cut off talks with a racist president and risk cruel uprooting and splitting of families on a mass scale

 

What is the cost of that deal? Do you make a deal to protect DACA today but that also reduces legal immigration for racist reasons while also funding a border wall?

 

What do you do about the cruel uprooting and splitting of families on a mass scale that's going to happen regardless of DACA?

[bmags]

What is the cost of that deal? Do you make a deal to protect DACA today but that also reduces legal immigration for racist reasons while also funding a border wall?

 

What do you do about the cruel uprooting and splitting of families on a mass scale that's going to happen regardless of DACA?

 

I think you go with A, fake fight against money for wall but push as much money into it as possible to get DACA passed with agreed upon immigration levels that are slightly decreased but not racist. Post passing, the wall will take forever to build and just hope you get a wave election and divert the resources elsewhere.

 

BUt I doubt any cuts to ICE will happen and there's not much you can do on homeland security policy for now.

[StrangeSox]

Something I've not seen and admittedly haven't tried to dig into, but does whatever DACA fix is being proposed only cover people here currently or would it apply to future undocumented minors as well?

[caulfield12]

The scary thing here is that Trump could still win in 2020 if the Dems were to run Sanders, Warren or Harris.

 

Donnie Deutsch, who I usually don’t go to for political wisdom...is right on the money. Someone too far to the left and the latent forces of prejudice/racism are really going to come out more openly.

 

It’s getting closer and closer to the point where it’s two separate countries, with the coasts/populated urban areas in opposition to the rural areas. There’s a really good article at politico.com about Alaska (and Colorado would be another) and how it’s turning more and more purple without the national Democratic Party doing a thing about it.

 

And, for what it’s worth, the next huge battleground is the 18th Congressional District on March 13th in SW Pennsylvania. Trump carried it by 20+ points and losing that seat would be even more shocking than AL (Moore handily wins without the pedo allegations). The GOP candidate’s struggling with his fundraising, and Trump and Pence are both scheduled to go there multiple times.

 

https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrBT6Lc61h...4HTUyl36tkqJ2g-

 

Conor Lamb looks like a Dem out of central casting, the reverse of Nicholson in Wisconsin...with an unassailable military record. If that seat goes, you’re going to see double the numbers of GOP Reps bailing out before the expected bloodbath in November. Interestingly, it’s an area that perhaps the only national Dem who can go in there on Lamb’s behalf is probably Joe Biden. Probably.

Edited January 12, 2018 by caulfield12

[StrangeSox]

They're not going to. They learned their lesson when they dared criticize him for things like saying a judge with a Mexican ancestor couldn't adequately decide his case back in the campaign and then the voters elected him anyway. Enough of the Republican base fully agrees with this statement that they'll just keep their mouths shut, wait for it to pass, and then move on to funding more immigration enforcement.

 

Look at this strong response from Republican Martha McSally:

 

 

The problem isn't that he said "s***," it's the racism underlying it and the context it was in. I'm just going to assume that every non-answer like this is tacit admission that they too say things like this behind closed doors and agree with Trump's views on white nationalism until they give a reason to think otherwise.

[caulfield12]

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/12/t...reaction-337926

 

So far, only four Republicans have really gone after Trump on this.

 

Rick Scott in Florida, it’s simply a political calculation with such a diverse state that he’s better off siding with the immigrants than with Trump.

 

Flake and Ros-Lehtinen aren’t running again. Both from immigrant heavy states, too.

 

Here’s what Rep. Erik Paulsen (Minnesota, another state with huge immigrant numbers) said on Twitter.

It is completely inappropriate for the President to refer to other countries in the manner in which he reportedly did, especially given the circumstances and disasters that led many TPS immigrants to seek refuge and shelter in the US.

 

Also kind of tired of Gillibrand putting her name out there in every obvious opportunity.

 

Why doesn’t the GOP simply admit the American Dream is officially dead to the non-white immigrant world (unless you happen to be from countries like Saudia Arabia, Panama and Indonesia with Trump properties)???

Edited January 12, 2018 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

Recently declared strong Republican contender for Senate and current Congressperson from Ohio:

ANCHOR: President’s comments yesterday bother you, frustrated? He lamented about the immigration program that was in front of him, says, “why are we taking so many people from these “s-hole* countries”, what is your reaction to that?

 

RENACCI: Well look, I’ve said all along, the president many times says what people are thinking. I learned as a business guy you have to be careful what you say because people pick everything up, believe me, when I have a mic on I have got to watch what I say. That is a business guy going into a political career. It’s difficult, I know it’s difficult for the president, because many times you want to say what you are thinking, but in the end, I know a lot of times he is saying what people are thinking. So, I always say, judge the President after 4 years.

If the Republicans don't want me saying this represents all of them, then at some point it'd be nice if they made it tougher to say that.

[Dick Allen]

Welp. He did get everyone to stop talking about Russia.