Trump 2.0

Tiassa said:
That, and he's trying to sound presidential, and utterly failing.
Click to expand...
Is part of the problem for America, if one is willing in the first instance to accept it as a problem, as I know there are some who will not generally accept that premise... is part of the problem for America that Trump is, or at least seems, incapable of articulating his position clearly and "presidentially", and that this is the biggest draw he has?
By this I mean that if he did or could then maybe even the right would understand what it is he's intending, and not support him. Is it because he, deliberately or otherwise, comes across as such a stupid and ignorant person, that many people either don't feel he will do what he says, or don't even understand what it is he's actually saying he will do?

Would a Republican who, say, was as articulate as Obama, have persuaded as many to his cause? If one accepts that Vance is a better orator, or at least is capable of coming up with an argument beyond "They're eating the dogs! ... They're eating the cats!" would he have been able to get the votes? Would the right still have won? Or is America just favouring "he's not Presidential" over all else?


And in other news, I see that a Republican member of Congress is already putting forward an amendment to the Constitution to allow Trump a 3rd term...
ogles.house.gov

Rep. Ogles Proposes Amending the 22nd Amendment to Allow Trump to Serve a Third Term

WASHINGTON, DC - Congressman Andy Ogles introduced a House Joint Resolution to amend the Constitution of the United States to allow a President to be elected for up to but no more than three terms. The language of the proposed amendment reads as follows:
ogles.house.gov ogles.house.gov

I guess if you know you haven't a chance of achieving your aim, at least you'll get a pat on the back from your cult leader for the support. And maybe the knowledge that it will never come to pass means that one might propose such an amendment even if you actually don't want it to, all for the short-term praise and support for when your seat is next up for grabs.
 
#unpresidentiality | #WhatTheyVotedFor​

swensen2024-jdvance-detail-bw.png

Sarkus said:
Would a Republican who, say, was as articulate as Obama, have persuaded as many to his cause? If one accepts that Vance is a better orator, or at least is capable of coming up with an argument beyond "They're eating the dogs! ... They're eating the cats!" would he have been able to get the votes? Would the right still have won? Or is America just favouring "he's not Presidential" over all else?
Click to expand...

I think part of it has to do with the idea↗ that, if it's harder to understand why, remember, that part doesn't need to make sense.

It's not just that "he's not presidential". It's the manner in which Trump is not presidential. For some people, womanhood is "not presidential", but the people invested in unpresidentiality, as such, aren't voting for a Democratic woman.

This year, yes, it works out that Vance probably could have gotten the votes; he was close enough to Project 2025 that the Christianists would rally 'round, and had ties to venture cap, so the fiscal conservatives would play along. The actual Millennial vote would be an interesting question, because he was in fact, so awkward, weird, and creepy↗.

But what we know from the Trump experience is that the traditionalist bully argument still trumps all else.

†​

Not unrelated: Never say we weren't warned.

J. D. Vance at the National Conservatism Conference, November, 2021↱:

And I think of this movement of National Conservatism, what we need more of than inspiration is we need wisdom. And there is a wisdom in what Richard Nixon said approximately forty-fifty years ago. He said, and I quote, "The professors are the enemy."

(via @NatConTalk↱)​
____________________

Notes:

@NatConTalk. "@JDVance1 at the National Conservatism Conference: 'The professors are the enemy.' #NatCon". Twitter. 2 November 2021. X.com. 25 January 2025. status/1455700807144415232
 
The Way Things Go

Inspectors General have responded to President Trump's attempt to fire them; the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency↱ asserts the dismissals are "legally insufficient":

January 24, 2025

Mr. Sergio Gor
Director of Presidential Personnel
The White House

Dear Mr. Gor:

I am writing in response to your email sent to me and other Inspectors General earlier this evening wherein you informed each of us that “due to changing priorities, your position as Inspector General … is terminated, effective immediately.

”As Chairperson of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE), I recommend that you reach out to White House Counsel to discuss your intended course of action. At this point, we do not believe the actions taken are legally sufficient to dismiss Presidentially Appointed, Senate Confirmed Inspectors General.

Specifically, based upon the 2022 amendments to the Inspector General Act of 1978, the President must notify Congress 30 days prior to removal of an IG and provide “substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons” for such removal. 5 U.S.C. § 403(b), as amended by the section 5202(a) of the Securing Inspector General Independence Act of 2022 (Title LII, Subtitle A, of P.L. 117-263, 136 Stat. 2395, 3222). The requirement to provide the substantive rationale, including detailed and case specific reasons, was added to better enable Congress to engage on and respond to a proposed removal of an Inspector General in order to protect the independence of Inspectors General.

Should you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to me at [email].

Sincerely,
Hannibal “Mike” Ware
CIGIE Chairperson

Cc:

Rand Paul, Chairman, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Gary Peters, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
James Comer, Chairman, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform​

And, yes, CIGIE is an actual part of the government.

The truth of the matter is that the Inspectors General will, over the long run, lose this fight one way or another. It is improbable that the midterms will bring Democrats a sufficient majority to actually save these officials.

Still, this is the value of the record they leave: The current manner of effort to overturn the Inspectors General evades the law.

†​

Over on the socmed machines, an interesting combo hit. Jordain Carney↱ reports:

Susan Collins on Trump's firing of IGs: “I don't understand why one would fire individuals whose mission is to root out waste, fraud and abuse. So this leaves a gap in what I know is a priority for President Trump”

Adds that she wasn't aware of failure to notify Congress​

To which, Bulwark pundit Tim Miller↱ adds:

Let me help you out @SenatorCollins. Trump doesn’t actually care about waste fraud and abuse if it’s happening while he is in charge. In fact, fraud has been central to his success. Hope that clears it up.​

And amid all that, reporter Ray Suarez↱ observes, "Some serious knit brows and 'voiced concerns' are on their way."
____________________

Notes:

@Jordainc. "Susan Collins on Trump's firing of IGs: 'I don't understand why one would fire individuals whose mission is to root out waste, fraud and abuse. So this leaves a gap in what I know is a priority for President Trump' Adds that she wasn't aware of failure to notify Congress". X. 25 January 2025. X.com. 25 January 2025. status/1883194534479401254

@Timodc. "Let me help you out @SenatorCollins. Trump doesn’t actually care about waste fraud and abuse if it’s happening while he is in charge. In fact, fraud has been central to his success. Hope that clears it up." X. 25 January 2025. X.com. 25 January 2025. status/1883224390944649262

@RaySuarezNews. "Some serious knit brows and 'voiced concerns' are on their way." X. 25 January 2025. X.com. 25 January 2025. status/1883225804605358152

Ware, Hannibal. "CIGIE letter to Sergio Gor WH". Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. 24 January 2025. DocumentCloud.org. 25 January 2025. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25504469-hannibal-ware-cigie-letter-to-sergio-gor-wh/
 
(Q) said:
So JD Vance adds in his vote to make it 51-50 making Pete Hegseth the new Secretary of Defense. Insanity.
Click to expand...
I have to wonder what is going on in Hegseth's head.

Imagine going to work in a really Big Building where there are lots of people smarter than You, lots of people more competent than You, and lots of people who attained higher Ranks than You!

But they have lots, and Lots....of GUNS!

Maybe they need to test some Killer Drones one day. They have a 15 kilometer range in Ukraine.
 
The cold war between Musk and Trump is brewing nicely: Musk has not only been relegated to another building other than the White House (Eisenhower Executive Office Building next door) but he's also having to report to Trump's Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles, rather than direct to Trump.

Seems Musk is also driving Trump's aides mad with frustration, especially when he undermined TOF's recent anouncement about "Stargate" - the $500bn AI project/investment - saying that while it was a good name, it was also broke, that those underpinning the $500bn haven't got the cash...
"They don’t actually have the money. SoftBank has well under $10B secured. I have that on good authority.”
 
Sarkus said:
Musk has not only been relegated to another building other than the White House (Eisenhower Executive Office Building next door) but he's also having to report to Trump's Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles, rather than direct to Trump.
Click to expand...
That's funny.

Can you imagine the conversation?

E.M. "WTF Don! I put millions of dollars into your campaign and you stick me in the fucking Eisenhower Building!"

D.T. "We've been over this, you're gonna have to go through Susan going forward with any queries, ok I'll have to go I've got Vlad on the other line."
 
Tiassa said:
Over on the socmed machines, an interesting combo hit. Jordain Carney↱ reports:

Susan Collins on Trump's firing of IGs: “I don't understand why one would fire individuals whose mission is to root out waste, fraud and abuse. So this leaves a gap in what I know is a priority for President Trump”
Click to expand...
The full phrase in the IG mandate is "abuse of power " - Collins is having another attack of being disingenuous. The condition emerged as chronic during the first Trump administration. Seems to be a new low for her. Firing IGs in order to get loyalists in there is standard procedure in the dictator playbook.
 
I see Trump has endorsed Israel’s disgusting ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip, suggesting its 2m inhabitants should be taken in by other Arab countries.

And he has had a “fiery” phone call with Denmark in which he seems to have demanded Greenland, threatening tariffs on Denmark if he does not get his way. He was told to get lost, of course. But I can see a scenario in which he opens his cheque book and makes a Local Hero style offer to the population ( there are only 60,000 or so) that forces a referendum among the Greenlanders.
 
exchemist said:
I see Trump has endorsed Israel’s disgusting ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip, suggesting its 2m inhabitants should be taken in by other Arab countries.
Click to expand...
What's 2 million Arabs when you could have some trashy waterfront casinos and resorts?
exchemist said:
And he has had a “fiery” phone call with Denmark in which he seems to have demanded Greenland, threatening tariffs on Denmark if he does not get his way. He was told to get lost, of course. But I can see a scenario in which he opens his cheque book and makes a Local Hero style offer to the population ( there are only 60,000 or so) that forces a referendum among the Greenlanders.
Click to expand...
I don't know much about the economy or societal structures of Greenland, other than that they are heavily dependent upon Denmark for funding; but I wonder what kind of sum it would take for Greenlanders to consider abandoning education, healthcare, and the other benefits of a decent, functioning social democracy for whatever kind of crap it is that we've got in the US?
 
exchemist said:
I see Trump has endorsed Israel’s disgusting ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip, suggesting its 2m inhabitants should be taken in by other Arab countries.

And he has had a “fiery” phone call with Denmark in which he seems to have demanded Greenland, threatening tariffs on Denmark if he does not get his way. He was told to get lost, of course. But I can see a scenario in which he opens his cheque book and makes a Local Hero style offer to the population ( there are only 60,000 or so) that forces a referendum among the Greenlanders.
Click to expand...
Greenland is not yet independent, so any sale would surely first have to be agreed in principle by Denmark, and they have repeatedly stated that it is not for sale. I presume that they are saying this because that is their understanding of the position of the inhabitants of the territory. Of course, if the Greenlanders desired to become American, and wanted a sale to go through, then Denmark would likely agree to a sale. But this does not seem to be the case.

This clearly isn't about money, as the US could easily afford even a higher-end valuation, and both Greenland and Denmark have thus far said no. From what I understand, Greenland are ultimately looking to gain independence from Denmark, so why on earth would they then agree to become part of the US? Swap one owner for another when what you're looking for is independence?

Trump also has to understand that Denmark is part of the EU. Any sanctions, tariffs, or other financial pressure applied to Denmark as a result of simply not handing over the territory (as the orange muppet-in-chief seems to think should be the case) would almost certainly see retaliation by the EU bloc, and a significant breakdown in the relationship. It may be something the UK can steer clear of, but I would suspect we would show solidarity with our EU neighbours.

I can see Greenland becoming an independent nation, with defence pacts with NATO / US, as well as them having closer ties with the US regarding military bases, and granting them access to the minerals (all for a fee, obviously). I.e. everything the US, well, Trump, wants but without the need to buy the country. It's just his arrogant posturing that's making this all far more complicated and risible than it needs to be.
 
parmalee said:
What's 2 million Arabs when you could have some trashy waterfront casinos and resorts?

I don't know much about the economy or societal structures of Greenland, other than that they are heavily dependent upon Denmark for funding; but I wonder what kind of sum it would take for Greenlanders to consider abandoning education, healthcare, and the other benefits of a decent, functioning social democracy for whatever kind of crap it is that we've got in the US?
Click to expand...
The Greenlanders have some issues with Denmark, due to historical ill treatment of the Inuit population, so there is something of an independence movement. But they are financially dependent on Greenland. I agree with you it seems very unlikely they would sell out to Trump, if it meant losing the socially cohesive ethos of Denmark and the EU. But no doubt since for him everything is about $$$ he will try tariff penalties to try to force Denmark to come to heel. But I can't imagine Denmark's trade with the USA amounts to much. I think the Danes are bloody-minded enough, with EU support, to tell him to F off. In which case will he start a war with the EU by invading? What will the US military think of that?

The Palestinian case is tragic though. It seems the Israelis are trying to get rid of an inconvenient group of people by raising their towns and infrastructure to the ground and hoping they will just emigrate. I can't understand why our media and government don't have the balls to call it by its name: ethnic cleansing.

Anyway, whatever moral authority the USA still had in international affairs is now gone, probably for decades.

(cross-posted with Sarkus )
 
Sarkus said:
This clearly isn't about money, as the US could easily afford even a higher-end valuation, and both Greenland and Denmark have thus far said no. From what I understand, Greenland are ultimately looking to gain independence from Denmark, so why on earth would they then agree to become part of the US? Swap one owner for another when what you're looking for is independence?
Click to expand...
But how could anyone resist the allure of becoming an unincorporated US territory? You're the subject of the US government and you lack sovereignty, citizenship, the right to vote, and many of the protections of said government of which you are subject.
 
exchemist said:
The Greenlanders have some issues with Denmark, due to historical ill treatment of the Inuit population, so there is something of an independence movement. But they are financially dependent on Greenland. I agree with you it seems very unlikely they would sell out to Trump, if it meant losing the socially cohesive ethos of Denmark and the EU. But no doubt since for him everything is about $$$ he will try tariff penalties to try to force Denmark to come to heel. But I can't imagine Denmark's trade with the USA amounts to much. I think the Danes are bloody-minded enough, with EU support, to tell him to F off. In which case will he start a war with the EU by invading? What will the US military think of that?
Click to expand...
Fortunately, this matter will not be settled by something as "simple" as a vote--there would necessarily be a whole lot of bargaining and paperwork, at the very least. Otherwise, Trump could just employ his usual tactics: lies and false promises.
exchemist said:
The Palestinian case is tragic though. It seems the Israelis are trying to get rid of an inconvenient group of people by raising their towns and infrastructure to the ground and hoping they will just emigrate. I can't understand why our media and government don't have the balls to call it by its name: ethnic cleansing.

Anyway, whatever moral authority the USA still had in international affairs is now gone, probably for decades.
Click to expand...
I think the Gaza issue lost Kamala Harris a lot of votes. Probably not enough to have changed the outcome of the election, but a significant number nonetheless. Even the supposedly "left-leaning" elements of the mainstream media in the US won't call it for what it is.

Tangentially, this interview is hilarious. Bassem Youssef has been described as the Jon Stewart of the Arab world and he's on fire here:
 
Chapters of the Klu Klux Klan (Trinity White Knights) are sending out flyers to immigrants demanding they leave the country now or get deported. Welcome to a Trump America.
 
25% tariffs on Colombia.
Colombia refused permission for 2 military planes with undocumented deportees, so now Americans will likely face higher coffee prices and various other price increases.
You'd think that if you're that keen on removing illegal immigrants then you'd get the country you're returning them to to have agreed beforehand to take them. Oh, no. Not TOF. Just fly in, try to land, and get rejected.
Slap 25% tariffs on them in retaliation, and see how it plays out. I guess the US can buy it's coffee from other places, at least until those places also get the tariffs put on them.

Enjoying it yet, America? ;)
 
parmalee said:
What's 2 million Arabs when you could have some trashy waterfront casinos and resorts?

I don't know much about the economy or societal structures of Greenland, other than that they are heavily dependent upon Denmark for funding; but I wonder what kind of sum it would take for Greenlanders to consider abandoning education, healthcare, and the other benefits of a decent, functioning social democracy for whatever kind of crap it is that we've got in the US?
Click to expand...
$10 mil each.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top