Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[smjjames]

Am I completely misunderstanding Trump's quote? Because I just can't think of any other way to interpret it...

Really? It seems fairly clear - and reasonable - to me. Mexico has a big problem with violence from the cartels (RIP in peace all those 'I'm going to fight the cartels' politicians who have been found with their head missing). Cartels who are, in some places, packing serious amounts of firepower. Trump is saying that if that's an issue, America is willing to help.

It's probably said more to politically embarrass the Mexican president more than anything else, but no, I don't think he was going for a re-enactment of TWD.

Didn't sound like "We're willing to help if you want.", more like a threat "Deal with that shit, or we'll send troops in".

Even CNN's version of it, which, while it's less threatening, it still sounds rather threatening. Mainly it's the use of the 'bad hombres' bit.

While Putin is every bit as authoritarian as Trump, even I don't see Putin doing that. Sure, he's capable of making threats, but he knows how to not sound threatening as well.

[Silverthrone]

He is a big, selfish, boorish, bullying baby-man, but one would have thought it would be rather apparent, by his behaviour and his actions. And yet, he is the one that people wanted to take the leadership of the nation, and I am quite fearful whether it was in spite of or because of these qualities. It is perfectly understandable to not feel a hint of trust for the normal political establishment, and wanting something else, and Making America Great Again is not an unreasonable wish at all. What I do not understand is why someone would look at that man, how he behaves, how he talks, how he acts, and decide to entrust their future and hopes in his hands. What is it in him that I cannot see?

I wonder what might happen when other world leaders get quite fed up with this "toughness" and stops accomodating for it. A presidential tantrum, most certainly, and then where?

Am I completely misunderstanding Trump's quote? Because I just can't think of any other way to interpret it...

Really? It seems fairly clear - and reasonable - to me. Mexico has a big problem with violence from the cartels (RIP in peace all those 'I'm going to fight the cartels' politicians who have been found with their head missing). Cartels who are, in some places, packing serious amounts of firepower. Trump is saying that if that's an issue, America is willing to help.

It's probably said more to politically embarrass the Mexican president more than anything else, but no, I don't think he was going for a re-enactment of TWD.

Didn't sound like "We're willing to help if you want.", more like a threat "Deal with that shit, or we'll send troops in".

Even CNN's version of it, which, while it's less threatening, it still sounds rather threatening. Mainly it's the use of the 'bad hombres' bit.

While Putin is every bit as authoritarian as Trump, even I don't see Putin doing that. Sure, he's capable of making threats, but he knows how to not sound threatening as well.

Putin is, after all, a dignified, collected professional, a true statesman. He is certainly more bite than bark, as it were.

[Reelya]

Isn't Trump meeting with the Queen soonish?

It would take the cake if he did or said something extremely inappropriate with the frikkin Queen. That's my Queen as well BTW, I will take it personally if he grabs her by the pussy.

Am I completely misunderstanding Trump's quote? Because I just can't think of any other way to interpret it...

Really? It seems fairly clear - and reasonable - to me. Mexico has a big problem with violence from the cartels (RIP in peace all those 'I'm going to fight the cartels' politicians who have been found with their head missing). Cartels who are, in some places, packing serious amounts of firepower. Trump is saying that if that's an issue, America is willing to help.

It's probably said more to politically embarrass the Mexican president more than anything else, but no, I don't think he was going for a re-enactment of TWD.

Didn't sound like "We're willing to help if you want.", more like a threat "Deal with that shit, or we'll send troops in".

Also, Mexico has gun laws about as strict as the UK. The gang's guns mostly come from America, you've heard of "straw purchasers" etc.

So it's a two way problem. The USA's War of Drugs causes cartel profits to be very high, and American guns kill Mexicans. They have just as much right to blame America as you have to blame Mexico. But it's the American drug war and guns that make the whole thing happen.

[Sheb]

Am I completely misunderstanding Trump's quote? Because I just can't think of any other way to interpret it...

Really? It seems fairly clear - and reasonable - to me. Mexico has a big problem with violence from the cartels (RIP in peace all those 'I'm going to fight the cartels' politicians who have been found with their head missing). Cartels who are, in some places, packing serious amounts of firepower. Trump is saying that if that's an issue, America is willing to help.

It's probably said more to politically embarrass the Mexican president more than anything else, but no, I don't think he was going for a re-enactment of TWD.

Didn't sound like "We're willing to help if you want.", more like a threat "Deal with that shit, or we'll send troops in".

Even CNN's version of it, which, while it's less threatening, it still sounds rather threatening. Mainly it's the use of the 'bad hombres' bit.

While Putin is every bit as authoritarian as Trump, even I don't see Putin doing that. Sure, he's capable of making threats, but he knows how to not sound threatening as well.

Although to be fair, the Mexican Pres at least claim this sentence isn't something he actually said.

[smjjames]

Isn't Trump meeting with the Queen soonish?

It would take the cake if he did or said something extremely inappropriate with the frikkin Queen. That's my Queen as well BTW, I will take it personally if he grabs her by the pussy.

There's been no date set, and if he acted inappropriately with Theresa May, there's been no word of it.

I wouldn't put it past him to make a typical 'American misunderstands Royal!' type gaffe, but if he is able to act appropriately around Theresa May and treats his female workers in the WH fine, then he should be able to behave himself with the Queen.

Am I completely misunderstanding Trump's quote? Because I just can't think of any other way to interpret it...

Really? It seems fairly clear - and reasonable - to me. Mexico has a big problem with violence from the cartels (RIP in peace all those 'I'm going to fight the cartels' politicians who have been found with their head missing). Cartels who are, in some places, packing serious amounts of firepower. Trump is saying that if that's an issue, America is willing to help.

It's probably said more to politically embarrass the Mexican president more than anything else, but no, I don't think he was going for a re-enactment of TWD.

Didn't sound like "We're willing to help if you want.", more like a threat "Deal with that shit, or we'll send troops in".

Even CNN's version of it, which, while it's less threatening, it still sounds rather threatening. Mainly it's the use of the 'bad hombres' bit.

While Putin is every bit as authoritarian as Trump, even I don't see Putin doing that. Sure, he's capable of making threats, but he knows how to not sound threatening as well.

Although to be fair, the Mexican Pres at least claim this sentence isn't something he actually said.

And Trump claimed that things were just fine too. It's no surprise that both sides would offer sanitized versions of the conversation.

Even if he has some mental disorder, he does appear to be capable of learning from his mistakes and adjusting or backing off. As has been said a zillion times, there's a learning curve, and he'll certainly get an earfull from Tillerson, now that he is in charge of diplomacy.

[Silverthrone]

Isn't Trump meeting with the Queen soonish?

It would take the cake if he did or said something extremely inappropriate with the frikkin Queen. That's my Queen as well BTW, I will take it personally if he grabs her by the pussy.

I am not even one of her subjects (House of Bernadotte, born and raised, as it were), and I am thinking the same. "Hands off of my queen!"

Of course, I imagine that her majesty will pour hot tea down his trousers if he passes a certain limit. And there are the guards, of course. Even he could reasonably be expected to behave himself. Nonetheless, I do think that Prince Charles ought to do his mother a solid and take over. At her age, she ought to be forgiven for declining bad company.

[Sergarr]

Also, If that had been the case then Trump might not have gotten up, and the fact that Sanders polled higher against the Republican candidates than Hillary did would have counted for much more, as the race would have been closer. Democrats largely push a less-overall-popular mainstream candidate because they thought they had it in the bag. If Cruz or Rubio was running, Clinton may not have looked like such a safe bet. It would be Democrats then with more to gain by running Sanders to pick up the un-served populist vote.

It's probably safe to say just ignore polls and listen to common sense. Polls failed here and failed in the UK repeatedly, at least until such time as pollsters stop finding answers before they ask the question

Oy, man, stop repeating that fake news.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The polls, at most, underestimated Trump's share of votes in states solidly going to Trump. Nationally, he was a simple polling margin of error away from Clinton. The polls were not wrong. No matter how many times you say this, the polls were not wrong.

Not to say that the media didn't fuck up reporting on the polls constantly. That's on them, not the data.

More clear.

Yes. The idiots in the media department, as well as in the renowned institution like Princeton University, have mistakenly assumes that the polls were independent measurements of the true variable, when they were anything but that. Also, most Trump-leaning polls were declared as "outliers", including 538 themselves, who got a LOT of flak from the lolberals for giving Trump "only" a 30% chance of victory. Lots of people are no longer satisfied with just winning, they want to win big, or they'll flip the table.

[smjjames]

Isn't Trump meeting with the Queen soonish?

It would take the cake if he did or said something extremely inappropriate with the frikkin Queen. That's my Queen as well BTW, I will take it personally if he grabs her by the pussy.

I am not even one of her subjects (House of Bernadotte, born and raised, as it were), and I am thinking the same. "Hands off of my queen!"

Of course, I imagine that her majesty will pour hot tea down his trousers if he passes a certain limit. And there are the guards, of course. Even he could reasonably be expected to behave himself. Nonetheless, I do think that Prince Charles ought to do his mother a solid and take over. At her age, she ought to be forgiven for declining bad company.

She has dealt with plenty of unsavory characters during her time, so, she'd know how to deal with him. None of us should assume that she'd be helpless in front of Trump.

Whether or not he actually will come is up in the air, the UK parliament has been discussing whether or not to.

[Reelya]

Trump was at his finest that one time at the Convention when he used a teleprompter. Ah those were the day.

Teleprompter for President.

Yes. The idiots in the media department, as well as in the renowned institution like Princeton University, have mistakenly assumes that the polls were independent measurements of the true variable, when they were anything but that. Also, most Trump-leaning polls were declared as "outliers", including 538 themselves, who got a LOT of flak from the lolberals for giving Trump "only" a 30% chance of victory. Lots of people are no longer satisfied with just winning, they want to win big, or they'll flip the table.

Yeah, the media almost never understands the idea of "sampling", "error margins" and "probability". If a statistician is saying "30% chance I'm wrong" that figure has already taken the lack of sampling into account. You're going to call every third election wrong if you have a 30% chance of failure. That's why the data wasn't wrong. Sampling error was accounted for in their accuracy estimate (i.e. they already told us the accuracy was low). But us dumb humans take "slightly more likely than not" to mean "definitely going to happen".

[Silverthrone]

Isn't Trump meeting with the Queen soonish?

It would take the cake if he did or said something extremely inappropriate with the frikkin Queen. That's my Queen as well BTW, I will take it personally if he grabs her by the pussy.

I am not even one of her subjects (House of Bernadotte, born and raised, as it were), and I am thinking the same. "Hands off of my queen!"

Of course, I imagine that her majesty will pour hot tea down his trousers if he passes a certain limit. And there are the guards, of course. Even he could reasonably be expected to behave himself. Nonetheless, I do think that Prince Charles ought to do his mother a solid and take over. At her age, she ought to be forgiven for declining bad company.

She has dealt with plenty of unsavory characters during her time, so, she'd know how to deal with him. None of us should assume that she'd be helpless in front of Trump.

Well, true. Very true, indeed. It was mostly playful speculation, I really do doubt there would be rudeness afoot if they do meet. But then again, nothing seems impossible.

[sluissa]

After listening to Trump's prayer speech this morning, I'm now more convinced than ever that Trump is a monster. Like, Dexter style, incapable of empathy or other normal human emotions, driven to kill us all just because he's bored type of monster.

WASHINGTON — President Trump turned his speech to National Prayer Breakfast into a roast, mocking his domestic opponents and promising to "be tough" with foreign leaders at an event that is normally solemn and bipartisan in tone.

Huh. And there's his speech for Black History Month, where he started talking about black people but segued into a rant about how the media hates Donald Trump, and the ongoing fixation about not winning popular vote.

There's a pattern here. Basically he doesn't have the normal wiring in that head of his, perhaps because he's always been the rich kid that always gets his way, he doesn't have the normal common sense of what's appropriate to do or say in which situation. Sociopath plus Narcissist? That's what comes to mind, he's got two overlapping personality disorders in there perhaps.

"Lack of self-awareness" is a recognized NPD trait. Trump seems to have this trait.
http://thenarcissistinyourlife.com/tag/narcissists-lack-insight/

The narcissist lacks insight–the ability to examine and understand one’s inner mental process as well as the perception of others. Narcissists are incapable of introspection and lack insight. They live from an external perspective. Their image, the persona they project to the world, how much money they have accumulated, the power they wield over others—-these are their life priorities.

Kinda sums up Trump's tone deaf speeches recently, and his tweets, he has no sense of what's approriate or how it's coming across, as a result he does in fact need to use the simplistic bluster and scapegoating, he doesn't have any other advanced oratory techniques, because these require you to be attuned to your audience and to consider the gravity of your words. Instead, Trump squanders his gains through griping about minor slights, completely oblivious to what that makes him look like.

You also have to remember, Trump is 70. It's very possible age is simply getting the better of him and combined with this new set of stresses is pushing him beyond his limit. Maybe he simply can't focus anymore. Maybe he's not even coming up with a lot of these ideas Re: Executive orders on his own. It's been shown that he puts alot, perhaps for too much stake in his family's suggestions for who he surrounds himself with in his cabinet and staff.

At this point he may just be that old cliched story of the aged ruler whose frailty keeps them from properly ruling and thus the kingdom is left up to advisors who are able to manipulate what information he sees and what messages come from him. The president may just be a rubber stamp and puppet for Bannon and Kushner.

[smjjames]

I wouldn't put it past him to just be an American and accidentially make some sort of gaffe which isn't particularily polite or proper.

Dem Royals!

-snip-

As fun as the psychoanalyzing is, we shouldn't accuse him of being senile or being affected by old age without actual evidence.

Replace Trump with Clinton and you'll see how silly all of this is.

Also, he's kind of always been tone deaf.

[sluissa]

I wouldn't put it past him to just be an American and accidentially make some sort of gaffe which isn't particularily polite or proper.

Dem Royals!

-snip-

As fun as the psychoanalyzing is, we shouldn't accuse him of being senile or being affected by old age without actual evidence.

Replace Trump with Clinton and you'll see how silly all of this is.

Also, he's kind of always been tone deaf.

I always had the same argument against Clinton, this is once again, one solid reason why I voted third party. It's not silly. It's just facts. Trump is old. People younger than him develop senility. And it's very clear he has a hard time focusing and based on some of his speeches during the election, sometimes he can't even form a coherent sentence.

[Reelya]

Say what you will for him, he's not boring.

"May you live in interesting times".

[Sheb]

Ugh, the last time a US President visited Brussels, we had to fork 10 millions for security and the traffic jams were even worse. I dunno why you'd want ANY US president around, let alone Trump.