The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Raoul said:
Are you talking about Flynn ? He was NSA.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sorry, National Security Advisor, my mistake. Still, the point remains that in such a short period of time he's already talking about major changes, it doesn't exactly sound like it's a well oiled professional machine or promote any degree of confidence does it? It sounds like a complete shambles to be perfectly honest.

A quick question though @Raoul It's been widely reported that Trump has hardly filled any cabinet positions at all, is that having any real effect on things yet? And if he continues to run on a skeleton staff (for lack of a better description) then how dangerous/problematic is it for the country? I'm genuinely interested because I've read countless reports of him not filling so many positions yet not read anything saying how that's actually making any difference to how things are supposed to run.
 
On a sad day like today, a bit of laughter from McCain on Morning Joe:

 
Crossie said:
On a sad day like today, a bit of laughter from McCain on Morning Joe:

Click to expand...


I'd fine it funnier tbh if McCain if actually did anything action-wise to back up his criticism of Trump.
 
langster said:
Yeah, sorry, National Security Advisor, my mistake. Still, the point remains that in such a short period of time he's already talking about major changes, it doesn't exactly sound like it's a well oiled professional machine or promote any degree of confidence does it? It sounds like a complete shambles to be perfectly honest.

A quick question though @Raoul It's been widely reported that Trump has hardly filled any cabinet positions at all, is that having any real effect on things yet? And if he continues to run on a skeleton staff (for lack of a better description) then how dangerous/problematic is it for the country? I'm genuinely interested because I've read countless reports of him not filling so many positions yet not read anything saying how that's actually making any difference to how things are supposed to run.
Click to expand...

I'm sure its had an effect on the the ability of the government to function as it should, although with Trump, he seems to be the sort of guy who operates within a very small circle of decision making among his WH staff, family members and immediate top line advisors like Mattis, McMaster et al. A majority of the positions that have gone unfilled are likely ones that Trump wouldn't fully utilyze if they were all filled, so its hard to say whether it's a plus or a minus.
 
Seeing a lot of anger at Trump on the right wing sites and social media.

Some high profile Trump supporters on social media have said they will stop supporting Trump and that this move has destroyed his presidency.
 
Fergies Gum said:
Seeing a lot of anger at Trump on the right wing sites and social media.

Some high profile Trump supporters on social media have said they will stop supporting Trump and that this move has destroyed his presidency.
Click to expand...

I think next election is already a goner for him. He can count himself successful if doesn't get himself impeached earlier.

Joe Biden if he runs will probably be the next president.
 
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/stephen-bannon-white-house.html?_r=0&referer=
WASHINGTON — Thick with tension, the conversation this week between Stephen K. Bannon, the chief White House strategist, and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser, had deteriorated to the point of breakdown.

Finally, Mr. Bannon identified why they could not compromise, according to someone with knowledge of the conversation. “Here’s the reason there’s no middle ground,” Mr. Bannon growled. “You’re a Democrat.”
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
Fergies Gum said:
Seeing a lot of anger at Trump on the right wing sites and social media.

Some high profile Trump supporters on social media have said they will stop supporting Trump and that this move has destroyed his presidency.
Click to expand...

I find that all a bit funny and surreal. People on the right have historically been fairly amenable to foreign escapades.
 
Pexbo said:
Then a Democrat will have to come in and spend 8 years cleaning up the mess the filling of the vacuum caused.
Click to expand...

This would be the mirror image of what happened under Clinton, who didn't just campaign on this, she gave an interview yesterday advocating a strike on an airfield.
 
Is it possible that Senator James Risch is a bit ... naive? Or stupid? Or thinks the public is?

'I think the big story of this strike is that people in North Korea, Beijing, ... are sitting around the table and say 'hey, we need to re-calibrate.' '
 
Crossie said:
Is it possible that Senator James Risch is a bit ... naive? Or stupid? Or thinks the public is?

'I think the big story of this strike is that people in North Korea, Beijing, ... are sitting around the table and say 'hey, we need to re-calibrate.' '
Click to expand...
Beijing!?!
 
Crossie said:
Is it possible that Senator James Risch is a bit ... naive? Or stupid? Or thinks the public is?

'I think the big story of this strike is that people in North Korea, Beijing, ... are sitting around the table and say 'hey, we need to re-calibrate.' '
Click to expand...
Those notions have already been mentioned several times, including here.
 
Gorsich just got confirmed as SCOTUS by a simple majority. As I predicted, the Dems fell right into the trap of goading the GOP into blowing up the filibuster and will now pay the price once Ginsburg or Breyer croak later in Trump's term and he appoints a right wing nutjob like Pryor.
 
Raoul said:
Gorsich just got confirmed as SCOTUS by a simple majority. As I predicted, the Dems fell right into the trap of goading the GOP into blowing up the filibuster and will now pay the price once Ginsburg or Breyer croak later in Trump's term and he appoints a right wing nutjob like Pryor.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Long term this levels the playing field. No more shenanigans.
 
senorgregster said:
I disagree. Long term this levels the playing field. No more shenanigans.
Click to expand...

If Trump is in office for two terms it will be too late for long term considerations as the SCOTUS could be 7-2 in favor of right leaning judges, which will literally reshape US law for the next 30-40 years.
 
berbatrick said:
This would be the mirror image of what happened under Clinton, who didn't just campaign on this, she gave an interview yesterday advocating a strike on an airfield.
Click to expand...
Here's the video of the interview you're referring to.

 
Raoul said:
Gorsich just got confirmed as SCOTUS by a simple majority. As I predicted, the Dems fell right into the trap of goading the GOP into blowing up the filibuster and will now pay the price once Ginsburg or Breyer croak later in Trump's term and he appoints a right wing nutjob like Pryor.
Click to expand...
Say the Dems had let Gorsuch slide...what would have prevented the Republicans from going nuclear if and when Dems resisted the next appointee?
 
Carolina Red said:
Beijing!?!
Click to expand...

That's what I understood from him and why I found his statement to be particularly bizarre.

Organic Potatoes said:
Those notions have already been mentioned several times, including here.
Click to expand...
That Risch isn't the smartest of all cookies or that North Korea et al would be impressed by a single air strike of an airfield? Sorry, I missed both.
 
Raoul said:
If Trump is in office for two terms it will be too late for long term considerations as the SCOTUS could be 7-2 in favor of right leaning judges, which will literally reshape US law for the next 30-40 years.
Click to expand...
That's happening if GOP hold the Senate no matter what. They twist and bend to suit their agenda.
 
Raoul said:
Gorsich just got confirmed as SCOTUS by a simple majority. As I predicted, the Dems fell right into the trap of goading the GOP into blowing up the filibuster and will now pay the price once Ginsburg or Breyer croak later in Trump's term and he appoints a right wing nutjob like Pryor.
Click to expand...
Raoul, you definitely did not predict this :lol: You explicitly said they wouldn't as all sane strategists were advising against it.
 
Raoul said:
I find that all a bit funny and surreal. People on the right have historically been fairly amenable to foreign escapades.
Click to expand...

Yep, its the beginning of the end for the alt-rights support for Trump. If he gets rid of Bannon, i suspect the majority of the alt-right base will turn on Trump.
 
Neutral said:
Say the Dems had let Gorsuch slide...what would have prevented the Republicans from going nuclear if and when Dems resisted the next appointee?
Click to expand...

There's little public support for blocking Gorsuch, because for better or worse, he's a qualified candidate who is replacing a right leaning judge. The next time a left leaning judge like Ginsburg bites the dust, Trump now has the ability to put a hard right judge in place because he just needs a simple majority to do it - and he will because he will want to drive home the point that the Dems fecked themselves by politicizing the Gorsuch nomination because of Garland. Had the filibuster been preserved during Gorsuch, the Dems would've had a lot more leverage in protecting a left leaning SCOTUS replacement by attempting to block a hard right Trump replacement. The public sentiment would've been on their side and they would actually have had a chance of blocking it and Trump would've been fecked with the filibuster still in place and a strong public support to not blow it up. That would've been the best case for the Dems. Now they will be fecked for potentially 8 years of Trump nominees, which will reshape the court for decades. A brilliant strategy.
 
Raoul said:
There's little public support for blocking Gorsuch, because for better or worse, he's a qualified candidate who is replacing a right leaning judge. The next time a left leaning judge like Ginsburg bites the dust, Trump now has the ability to put a hard right judge in place because he just needs a simple majority to do it - and he will because he will want to drive home the point that the Dems fecked themselves by politicizing the Gorsuch nomination because of Garland. Had the filibuster been preserved during Gorsuch, the Dems would've had a lot more leverage in protecting a left leaning SCOTUS replacement by attempting to block a hard right Trump replacement. The public sentiment would've been on their side and they would actually have had a chance of blocking it and Trump would've been fecked with the filibuster still in place and a strong public support to not blow it up. That would've been the best case for the Dems. Now they will be fecked for potentially 8 years of Trump nominees, which will reshape the court for decades.
Click to expand...

He'd have done this anyway by removing the fillbuster whenever he wanted someone else in.
 
Cheesy said:
He'd have done this anyway by removing the fillbuster whenever he wanted someone else in.
Click to expand...

He would be attempting to do it against public sentiment if he tried it later, whereas now, there's a palpable momentum to finally get a 9th Justice on the court after not having one for 15 months.
 
Raoul said:
He would be attempting to do it against public sentiment if he tried it later, whereas now, there's a palpable momentum to finally get a 9th Justice on the court after not having one for 15 months.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the public would've cared enough to make it that big an issue. If the Republicans want someone in over the next four-eight years they're gonna do it either way.
 
Cheesy said:
I'm not sure the public would've cared enough to make it that big an issue. If the Republicans want someone in over the next four-eight years they're gonna do it either way.
Click to expand...

Having the filibuster in place raises the bar for the amount of bipartisan support needed to get a Justice on the court. That is a good thing and should be preserved for as long as possible. The Dems decided to be political drama queens and have now been burned.
 
Supreme court picks get the righty base out far better than the lefty base (example, November 2016). The Dems in retrospect should've nuked it for Garland, but thought Clinton would win so stalled to use it for the next one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.