Print

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

[Phmcw]

Because factually, he isn't fascist, the number of companies that bankrupted is completely irrelevant to his financial success, there are no credible news outlets, and the democratic candidate was a safer but not a better bet. Also everything you read against him has been exaggerated one way or another to incite you to click on it.

[Sergarr]

Also everything you read against him has been exaggerated one way or another to incite you to click on it.

Does that include his own Twitter?

[Neonivek]

Because factually, he isn't fascist, the number of companies that bankrupted is completely irrelevant to his financial success, there are no credible news outlets, and the democratic candidate was a safer but not a better bet. Also everything you read against him has been exaggerated one way or another to incite you to click on it.

Yes... his... "Financial Success" quotation.

I am not sure I'd really boast about his financial success if you
A) Know his financial history (he was dirt poor for years upon years... HECK he could be dirt poor right now)
B) You know HOW he made his money... Lets just say "Legitimate business practices" is not one of those ways.

[Phmcw]

Also everything you read against him has been exaggerated one way or another to incite you to click on it.

Does that include his own Twitter?

Especially his twitter.

Because factually, he isn't fascist, the number of companies that bankrupted is completely irrelevant to his financial success, there are no credible news outlets, and the democratic candidate was a safer but not a better bet. Also everything you read against him has been exaggerated one way or another to incite you to click on it.

Yes... his... "Financial Success" quotation.

I am not sure I'd really boast about his financial success if you
A) Know his financial history (he was dirt poor for years upon years... HECK he could be dirt poor right now)
B) You know HOW he made his money... Lets just say "Legitimate business practices" is not one of those ways.

No idea how successful he has been, where can I get reliable information? His tax returns?

[Rolan7]

As a reminder, he outright lied by saying he couldn't reveal his tax returns due to an ongoing investigation.  While running on the idea that he was personally successful - his explanation was that he bankrupted those businesses for his own gain, because he's so good at business.

So we chose a CEO who's only proven record is, maybe, lining his own pockets as his companies fall to pieces.  Also, refusing to pay people what they're owed - but he'll surely create more jobs.  Also he's probably lying about even managing to succeed personally.

And yeah, his twitter isn't exaggerated.  In fact he has a clear record of doubling down when his handlers or sympathetic interviewers try to help him walk back comments.
The guy's basically shouting "NO, NOT KIDDING, I NOMINATE MY HORSE" and yet apologists call us hysterical for being concerned.
Particularly since we're at the stage where he's actively doing things ("WHAT, MY HORSE GOT NOMINATED??") and they're very concerning.

[Neonivek]

Ohh it is better than that. Sometimes he INTENTIONALLY destroys his company in order to personally make money.

and yet apologists call us hysterical for being concerned.

Honestly I feel sorry for the people who have to defend Trump because it must be painful.

"Just because Trump put someone whose life's work is to remove environmental protection... in charge of the US's environmental protection... doesn't mean he will undermine it. I am sure Trump had a very good reason"

[Sergarr]

Also everything you read against him has been exaggerated one way or another to incite you to click on it.

Does that include his own Twitter?

Especially his twitter.

But it's a primary source. How can it be exaggerated? It's straight from his mouth!
So, Trump's twitter could have been used by Bannon, based on a very unusual, for Trump, choice of words. The argument says that Trump would not use "accumulation of data",  because this is not how he talks - but it's a favourite phrase of Bannon. His writing style is so dumb that not even his advisers can fully copy it. Cool!

[Reelya]

Yeah, that's not Trump. Also check out the sentence structure:



There are just too many non-trumpish things here.

[Puzzlemaker]

In other news every single Superbowl commercial was pretty political and pro-immigration, which was funny to see.  I even saw some local ones (DC area) that basically directly bashed trump.

[Reelya]

97 tech companies did some sort of legal action against the immigrant ban, too. Basically all of Silicon Valley are issuing legal challenges.

[Starver]

Also wow! Trump is going to end up having more executive orders then... the last ten presidents combined at this rate.

Went and looked it up. FDR (covering the war years, so probably excused) signed OEs at an average rate of 290 per year. One every 1¼ days! (And over 3-and-a-bit terms, obviously.) Currently Donald's on (assuming there are no splurges in the pipeline that need to be back-counted once they emerge) one every 2⅛ days.  The rate will probably fall off, though, once "hitting the ground running" is no longer the dominant force.

From JFK to Obama, inclusive, 2,852 OEs were signed. Assuming two terms, or 2922 days in office, Donald needs to approach one OE per day to match that.

OTOH, of those prior ten, Carter (no idea what his beef might have been... Or peanut?) was the most prolific at slightly over 4½ days per, over his four years. JFK over his shortened term did almost as much (Space Race stuff?) with 4.8ish days mean frequency. Just outside those last ten was Dwight D's 6 days per, over 8 years (484 total), but "culmination of the Cold War" Reagan did the 'best' of the two-termers within the catchment, at 381 total, one per 7⅔ days.

I get a feeling (from limited data, and obviously without foreknowledge of any 'EO Allergy' Trump may catch if he gets something spectacularly wrong, soon enough) that he's certainly capable of producing an award-winning rate, however many (whole or partial) terms he lasts. Or whichever of the advisers it is, again, who is actially typing up these OEs for Trump to rubberstamp. If they mess up/fall foul of their rivals in the administration, it might quieten down somewhat.

[EnigmaticHat]

After the backlash they stopped releasing EOs.  A week ago when the anger about this was fresh (I can't believe I'm talking about that like it was another time), Trump had issued I believe 20 EOs in 9 days.

[Starver]

After the backlash they stopped releasing EOs.  A week ago when the anger about this was fresh (I can't believe I'm talking about that like it was another time), Trump has issued I believe 20 EOs in 9 days.

I was actually going by 8 in 17 days, so it seems the list I consulted for Trump might be a bit behind. The rest (possibly with the exception of any not-yet-declassified ones from Obama, or others even) I trust as historically fact and not subject to change, though.

[Reelya]

When they say 20 they included presidential memoranda etc as well. These are a form of Executive action but not classed as an Executive order, at least not overtly. But they might as well be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_memorandum

A presidential memorandum is a type of executive action issued by the president of the United States to manage and govern the actions, practices, and policies of the various departments and agencies found under the executive branch of the United States government. It has the force of law and is usually used to delegate tasks, direct specific government agencies to do something, or to start a regulatory process. There are three types of presidential memorandums: presidential determination or presidential finding, memorandum of disapproval, and hortatory memorandum.

Sometimes used interchangeably, an "executive order" is a more prestigious form of executive action that must cite the specific constitutional or statutory authority the president has to use it. Unlike executive orders, memorandums are not required by law to be published in the Federal Register, but publication is necessary in order to have "general applicability and legal effect".

So Trump's executive orders may have breached the actual law, because they're supposed to by law state the specific constitutional/legal basis of the order. And his didn't.

[Sergarr]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

It's cool to see that almost a third of rurals are against Trump. Not so cool to see a third of urbans to support him. The partisanship divide is predictably off the charts.