Print

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

[smjjames]

Or he just has ADHD/ADD?

Also, I say that we've just gotten used to Obama the Orator.

Too bad that there is no mental/psychological examination test for President.

And, to be fair, I did have a similar concern with Clinton, but for different reasons, that she might have a chance to develop Alzheimers. However, there are treatments out now and being developed that didn't exist in Reagans day which would help treat or even reverse it.

[sluissa]

Obama was not that great an orator. He was only slightly better than GWB in my eyes and worse than Reagan. Despite GWB's flubs and occasional lack of grammar and proper vocabulary. He was excellent at delivering speeches.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dnzv3TjXPh0 Watch his recent speech at the memorial of the Dallas Police shooting last year if you haven't already. Say what you want about his decisions, or his politics. But that man can deliver a speech when the chips are down, even now, at nearly the exact same age as Trump. I never supported GWB while he was President, but I'll be damned if I didn't sit down and listen to a speech he made if I was around to hear it. And yet he got a lot of flak for being a poorly spoken president.

[Silverthrone]

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.

You are literally the first of my countrymen I've ever encountered who openly wants Charles to take over.

As far as the Queen and Trump goes, hopefully he's able to shock a bit of life back into her, one way or the other. Or at least cheer her up a bit, her face seems to have a perpetually sour expression these days.

Anyway, I imagine a lot of people are looking forward to him coming here, whatever side of the divide you're on. Say what you will for him, he's not boring.

I am not a countryman, I am afraid, but I quite like the Windsors, and stand by them. I am not British, but I like to imagine that I have 'adopted' them, as it were. Although I must confess, I do not truly want Charles to take over. I'd rather the queen keeps ticking for decades and decades. Or even better, pass the crown directly to William, for a lark. That said, no harm in him being a good boy and doing his mother a favour now and then. Give her more time to spend with other things, and hopefully cheer herself up a bit.

Now, Trump cannot ever be accused of being a boring visitor, but neither could Idi Amin. It does not strike me as a great recommendation, but, as you say, if he livens the palace up a bit, it would be well worth it.

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.

Why, there is nothing quite like some pageantry now and then.

[Frumple]

And yet he got a lot of flak for being a poorly spoken president.

That's 'cause he was, really. More to presidential speaking than intermittent speeches.

Too bad that there is no mental/psychological examination test for President.

And, to be fair, I did have a similar concern with Clinton, but for different reasons, that she might have a chance to develop Alzheimers. However, there are treatments out now and being developed that didn't exist in Reagans day which would help treat or even reverse it.

Eh. Health wise, I'm pretty sure most anything short of ovarian cancer trump's at more of a risk for than clinton is. Dude's older (only by something like a year, but a year's a year), and ladies tend to live longer besides.

Mental/psych exam... no. I mean, it's a nice idea, but it's ridiculously abusable. Theoretically the primaries and election are supposed to keep anyone that's significantly troubled on that front out of office. EC buggered us again on that particular side of things, but *shrugs*

[smjjames]

Mental/psych exam... no. I mean, it's a nice idea, but it's ridiculously abusable. Theoretically the primaries and election are supposed to keep anyone that's significantly troubled on that front out of office. EC buggered us again on that particular side of things, but *shrugs*

Yeah, theoretically. Didn't stop Nixon from being elected.

And yeah, I suppose it would be ridiculously abuseable, especially for the opponents.

[smjjames]

I am not a countryman, I am afraid, but I quite like the Windsors, and stand by them. I am not British, but I like to imagine that I have 'adopted' them, as it were. Although I must confess, I do not truly want Charles to take over. I'd rather the queen keeps ticking for decades and decades. Or even better, pass the crown directly to William, for a lark. That said, no harm in him being a good boy and doing his mother a favour now and then. Give her more time to spend with other things, and hopefully cheer herself up a bit.

Ah, that explains it. Not sure why I thought you were British. And yeah, I'd prefer it to pass directly from Liz to William (or, for more fun, to Harry!) and avoid Charles whatsoever.

EC buggered us again on that particular side of things, but *shrugs*

Speaking of the EC, I've got a hypothetical question (I'm sure it'd never come up in reality, but it's interesting to consider) - to the many detractors of the EC, would you be willing to trade switching from the EC to a direct popular vote in exchange for the implementation of more stringent voter ID laws across the country?

The only way that strict voter ID laws would be acceptable is when everybody is guaranteed to be able to vote. The problem in our country is that voter ID laws have been used to actively suppress voting, so, it would have to be done in a way that guarantees that votes won't be suppressed.

A voter ID (or some form of identification) by itself isn't neccesarily a problem, it's how they're being used that's the problem. There's also the issue of access.

[Silverthrone]

I am not a countryman, I am afraid, but I quite like the Windsors, and stand by them. I am not British, but I like to imagine that I have 'adopted' them, as it were. Although I must confess, I do not truly want Charles to take over. I'd rather the queen keeps ticking for decades and decades. Or even better, pass the crown directly to William, for a lark. That said, no harm in him being a good boy and doing his mother a favour now and then. Give her more time to spend with other things, and hopefully cheer herself up a bit.

Ah, that explains it. Not sure why I thought you were British. And yeah, I'd prefer it to pass directly from Liz to William (or, for more fun, to Harry!) and avoid Charles whatsoever.

It is possibly the writing, and people do tend to believe I am British when I speak english, as well. Well, non-British english speakers, that is. Odd, but quite practical.

Now Harry, that would be an amusing choice. It does not sound particularly regal, but who knows, he might grow into the role, with time. I can picture poor old Charles's face if it where to happen, and it would be worth it for that alone. William does seem the more reasonable choice, though, with Harry as the spare. Old Charles can be the hapless jester-advisor type by the throne-side.

[Frumple]

The only way that strict voter ID laws would be acceptable is when everybody is guaranteed to be able to vote. The problem in our country is that voter ID laws have been used to actively suppress voting, so, it would have to be done in a way that guarantees that votes won't be suppressed.

A voter ID (or some form of identification) by itself isn't neccesarily a problem, it's how they're being used that's the problem. There's also the issue of access.

Yeah, pretty much. Voter ID would be a non-issue if it wasn't an issue, heh. People generally don't actually give a damn how strict the voter ID laws are so long as they're not preventing voters from voting. Stateside proponents of note can't seem to figure that bit out, unfortunately.

If I had to choose between the stuff that's received meaningful attention over here and the EC, though, for all the EC's screwed us over occasionally, I'd still take it occasionally screwing us over something that would be screwing parts of the country each and every election. If you're actually stuck choosing between intermittent bad and constant worse, you go with the former.

[SalmonGod]

Don't have time to check if this has already been commented on, since I'm on my lunch break and have to leave in a couple minutes.  So sorry if this has been/already is being discussed.

But I just saw some shit about Trump removing white supremacist organizations from domestic terrorist watch programs?  WTF is this?  I don't even know how to process.

It's really fucking incredible how Trump has exceeded everyone's expectations.  We all knew he was going to be awful, but thought that at least some of his stuff was blowing hot air at a reactionary base for campaign purposes and the worst stuff he actually tried to act on would get shut down.  But it seems he's already gone far beyond even the most alarmist predictions from the left.

BTW you guys post too damn much.  I try to read a few pages a day, and I still haven't even finished the old thread.

[smjjames]

Lots more details on that botched Yemen raid. NYT article.

While it does say that they went in without insufficient intel, ground support, or backup, and that Bannon and Kushner along with Mattis and another general were in the room. I'm giving Trump a huge benefit of the doubt here because the thing was planned for months under Obama and it just happened to be pushed to Trumps admin, and so, it could easily have been Obama's disaster rather than Trumps.

Not to mention that seemingly everything went wrong that could go wrong.

and our guys got surprised by some of the women, FFS.....

Don't have time to check if this has already been commented on, since I'm on my lunch break and have to leave in a couple minutes.  So sorry if this has been/already is being discussed.

But I just saw some shit about Trump removing white supremacist organizations from domestic terrorist watch programs?  WTF is this?  I don't even know how to process.

It's really fucking incredible how Trump has exceeded everyone's expectations.  We all knew he was going to be awful, but thought that at least some of his stuff was blowing hot air at a reactionary base for campaign purposes and the worst stuff he actually tried to act on would get shut down.  But it seems he's already gone far beyond even the most alarmist predictions from the left.

BTW you guys post too damn much.  I try to read a few pages a day, and I still haven't even finished the old thread.

What I saw wasn't abandoning or removing white supremacist organizations from domestic terrorist lists, it was just restructuring it to focus more on the MidEast.

A link would be nice however.

[Sergarr]

WASHINGTON — President Trump vowed Thursday to overturn a law restricting political speech by tax-exempt churches, a potentially huge victory for the religious right and a gesture to his political base.

Mr. Trump said his administration would “totally destroy” the Johnson Amendment, which prohibits churches from engaging in political activity at the risk of losing their tax-exempt status.

 Leaked Draft of Trump’s Religious Freedom Order Reveals Sweeping Plans to Legalize Discrimination

If signed, the order would create wholesale exemptions for people and organizations who claim religious objections to same-sex marriage, premarital sex, abortion, and trans identity.

cool

[smjjames]

WASHINGTON — President Trump vowed Thursday to overturn a law restricting political speech by tax-exempt churches, a potentially huge victory for the religious right and a gesture to his political base.

Mr. Trump said his administration would “totally destroy” the Johnson Amendment, which prohibits churches from engaging in political activity at the risk of losing their tax-exempt status.

 Leaked Draft of Trump’s Religious Freedom Order Reveals Sweeping Plans to Legalize Discrimination

If signed, the order would create wholesale exemptions for people and organizations who claim religious objections to same-sex marriage, premarital sex, abortion, and trans identity.

cool

Those are two completely different things though.

Also, the Trump WH is leaking like a sieve. Yeah there's always going to be leaks, but I don't remember the Obama WH leaking this much, or the Bush 43 one.

[Sergarr]

Those are two completely different things though.

this only increases the cool factor you know

[smjjames]

The relaxation of Russian sanctions begins.

I know Congress has said that they'll put back any sanctions that Trump overturns, but given how minor this seems to be, not sure how they'll react.

Trump might be testing how far he can go with removing the sanctions before Congress acts on it.

Actually, nvm, turns out it was something that is normal and the Obama adminstration had actually planned to do.

[TheBiggerFish]

...Trump better not be rude to the Queen.  That would be pretty much the last straw IMHO.

And I'm a USian.  :v


Trump admin is leaking like a sieve probably because it's full of crazy.  Crazy doesn't like to be classified.