A Tweet Too Far ?

[toucana]

[Watson]

Just reading the subject line, my thought question was, 'What did idiot trump say now?' It does appear the left side of his brain doesn't know what the right side is..........never mind.

[toucana]

And what "tapes" would those be Donnie ?

[someguy1]

Loretta Lynch will go to jail before anyone in the Trump admin. She's in trouble if she communicated with Debbie Wasserman Schultz regarding the Hillary email investigation.

[toucana]

This time launching a presidential charm offensive against the morning anchors of MSNBC.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/29/donald-trump-attacks-morning-joe-hosts-mika-brzezinski-joe-scarborough/438608001/

N.B. According to Sean Spicer's statement of 6th June, these Tweets are official presidential documents.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-s-tweets-official-statements-spicer-says-n768931

[TheVat]

That might be true if he were an actual president.

He is a vile human being, and unfit for public office. May he rot in hell.

I've moved out of my striving-for-some-modicum-of-tolerance phase. As Thomas Mann said, "Tolerance, when it is applied to evil, is a vice."

[Old Rasputin]

I find Trump’s (un-presidential-like) tweets very interesting and somewhat amusing.

When Trump responds with his trash tweets to those that trash him, I find it very hypocritical and pathetic when those trashers themselves start crying ‘foul’, …and then suddenly start playing the role of the ‘victim’. ...come on people, stop being cry-babies; if you can’t take the trashing, then stop dishing it out.

I say, good for Trump! -- It is about time someone stood up and fought back against these trashers. For this reason, I am impressed with the man (and his willingness to look like a fool) to fight back against his attackers. Kudos to Trump!

*******

This time launching a presidential charm offensive against the morning anchors of MSNBC.

Don't forget, Trump was not voted into office for his "charm" ("presidential-ness"), -- he was voted into office to kick-ass and get things done. Those that voted for him knew how "un-charming" he is.

Those that 'expect' the president to be "charming" (i.e. "presidential") LOST the presidential race. Those 'expectations' belong only to the LOSERS, and not to those that voted for Trump.

The LOSERS show no respect for the fair and democratic outcome of the presidential race, and constantly continue with their disrespectful hateful and trash talking of OUR president.

Get over it already! ...it's time to move forward, and together as ONE America, ...so EVERYONE stop the hate and trash talking, ...now!

[TheVat]

Good for Trump, once again attacking a woman by degrading reference to her physical appearance? He's POTUS, not the guy on the next barstool. The POTUS represents our nation to the world. Responding to every slight and criticism like an angry adolescent is not what the position of POTUS calls for.

You say you are impressed by his willingness to look like a fool. With his consistent level of immaturity, I expect you will remain highly impressed.

Also, in what way was Mika a "cry-baby??" She fired back, without shedding a tear.

[TheVat]

The LOSERS show no respect for the fair and democratic outcome of the presidential race, and constantly continue with their disrespectful hateful and trash talking of OUR president.

Get over it already! ...and let's move forward, and together as ONE america.

You understand an elected President is supposed to act in the interests of all constituents, right? That would include the 72 percent of registered voters who did not vote for him. We have a right to speak out against policies and actions that are antithetical to our interests and the safety of a Constitutional government, to demonstrate, to protest, to petition....and this is not trash talk. To dismiss political dissent as such is to debase democracy and the rule of law.

Your emotional kneejerk response to critics of Trump shows a woeful unawareness of what he and his minions are doing, of his crooked and shameful past, and his corrupt and mendacious tactics in trying to enrich and empower himself.

[Old Rasputin]

Good for Trump, once again attacking a woman by degrading reference to her physical appearance?

…nice spin job, …Trump is an "equal opportunity" trasher.

He's POTUS, not the guy on the next barstool. The POTUS represents our nation to the world.

Agreed. And this is what makes him extraordinary. He does not follow the script/role/expectations that some ‘expect’ him to follow.

Whether right or wrong, I admire his ‘fight’ to stand up against his attackers. For him to not cower to the trash talk of the hateful media/elite bullies, seems to be an admirable trait. Don’t you agree?

Responding to every slight criticism…

You seem to equate the never ending; day in and day out, constant barrage of hateful rhetoric as just “slight criticism”.

…is not what the position of POTUS calls for.

Who is the definer of this “position”? ...isn't it the voters?

The LOSERS show no respect for the fair and democratic outcome of the presidential race, and constantly continue with their disrespectful hateful and trash talking of OUR president.

You understand an elected President is supposed to act in the interests of all constituents, right? That would include the 72 percent of registered voters who did not vote for him. We have a right to speak out against policies and actions that are antithetical to our interests and the safety of a Constitutional government, to demonstrate, to protest, to petition....and this is not trash talk. To dismiss political dissent as such is to debase democracy and the rule of law.

I would agree if it were just civil and respectful "political dissent". But it is not, it is “hate” and "hateful rhetoric". Just look at your own words:

"That might be true if he were an actual president. He is a vile human being, and unfit for public office. May he rot in hell." -- Braininvat

Your emotional kneejerk response to critics of Trump shows a woeful unawareness of what he and his minions are doing, of his crooked and shameful past, and his corrupt and mendacious tactics in trying to enrich and empower himself.

It seems to me, that one's “hate” for Trump, skews and corrupts one’s rational ability to fairly interpret his motives; tactics and decisions.

[TheVat]

How odd that you didn't speak out against the vitriolic litany of nasty comments from your side of the aisle against Obama. And, unlike the legitimate criticism of Trump as a corrupt narcissistic liar and bigot and con artist and molester of women, the anti-Obama stuff was outright slander. Remember "closet Muslim....Kenyan-born fraud...advocate of black insurrection...secretly building concentration camps to use after declaring martial law...." Hmmm. Where was your outrage then? Trump's peccadillos are public record. Obama's were fabrications from right-wing bloggers who basically wanted to get that damned n---er out of our White House!

Seems to me dissent is deemed not respectful when it's directed at the guy you partisans are waving the foam finger for. You showed little respect for Obama, a man of uncommon decency and personal integrity.

[TheVat]

Also, does my hating Trump make me wrong in all past postings where I have criticized him? Seems like an ad hominem, pal. "You are hating someone, ergo your point, no matter how supported by facts, must be wrong."

I hate Trump, but you give no reason that his crude insults to women (there are dozens, all public record) should ever be acceptable in public discourse, from the POTUS? A strong prima facie case can be made that such noxious behavior from a POTUS foments sexism and bigotry and harms the advancement of women. You've got nothing but your excuse-making.

Look at how the world views DT, in this Pew survey taken recently:

https://qz.com/1015147/people-around-the-world-have-more-confidence-in-vladimir-putin-than-in-donald-trump/

Compare those results with Obama. A man who understood what the office requires. And what ADULTHOOD requires.

[zetreque]

Don't forget, Trump was not voted into office for his "charm" ("presidential-ness"), -- he was voted into office to kick-ass and get things done. Those that voted for him knew how "un-charming" he is.

Get what done exactly? Make the US a corporate dictatorship even more extreme than we already are? Divide the nation into a civil war? Start war with other countries? Turn us into a laughing stalk of the world? Turn us into a joke? Destroy what resources we have left? Pollute our country into a toxic mess? Help kill off other species in the world at an even faster rate? Turn us into an ignorant country of greedy corporatism.
Those who voted for him were in the dark about what exactly he is trying to get done such as tax breaks for the rich, covering up his monopolies and making himself richer.
You don't get things done by muscling through when it involves other people unless you want to cause a broken mess... The day after the bar fight we are left to pick up the pieces of what's left and rebuild if it's even possible to rebuild.

[Old Rasputin]

You showed little respect for Obama, a man of uncommon decency and personal integrity.

Umm? sorry, I've never been an Obama hater (quite the contrary in fact), ...you must be thinking of someone else.

Also, does my hating Trump make me wrong in all past postings where I have criticized him?

No, not necessarily.

But hopefully you recognize that one's ‘hate’ (of Trump/Obama) biases one's ability to interpret their motives/actions ‘fairly’. Agreed? ...in other words, sometimes 'emotion' gets the best of us, and not let us see things clearly as they are.

Don't forget, Trump was not voted into office for his "charm" ("presidential-ness"), -- he was voted into office to kick-ass and get things done. Those that voted for him knew how "un-charming" he was.

Get what done exactly?

Well, I think those that voted for Trump, would say:

Firstly and more specifically, to return to the “rule of law”; to honor, obey, and respect the laws of this country. (…and not just those laws that we WANT or feel like obeying, …note: not everyone will like every law, but as members of this country we should all agree to abide by them all, imo).

And secondly and more generally, “Make America Great Again”.

Divide the nation into a civil war?

This seems to be the mission of the left leaning MSM/elite bullies.

Start war with other countries? Turn us into a laughing stalk of the world? Turn us into a joke? Destroy what resources we have left? Pollute our country into a toxic mess? Help kill off other species in the world at an even faster rate? Turn us into an ignorant country of greedy corporatism.

Isn’t this just the view of the sore-losers* of the election? Certainly those that voted for Trump don’t see it this way. True?

*Note: I dislike using this term “sore-losers”, but it seems to be the most bluntly obvious reasoning for all the discontent with our new president. The “sore-losers” seemingly do not have respect for the electoral process, nor the "winners" of the election.

Those who voted for him were in the dark about what exactly he is trying to get done such as tax breaks for the rich, covering up his monopolies and making himself richer.

So do you know better, or claim to be smarter, than the majority of people that voted him into office? If so, then are you in favor of only allowing the “smart” Americans to vote, and not letting the “dumb” one's vote?

Either we honor and respect our laws and election results, …or we don’t.

[Watson]

*Note: I dislike using this term “sore-losers”, but it seems to be the most bluntly obvious reasoning for all the discontent with our new president. The “sore-losers” seemingly do not have respect for the electoral process, nor the "winners" of the election.

I think the more obvious reasoning for the discontent has to do with the childish behavior of the president, the disorganized administration he has put together, and the destructive path he is so keen to drag the country down.

Sore loser? Not even on the list.

[TheVat]

Firstly and more specifically, to return to the “rule of law”; to honor, obey, and respect the laws of this country.

And voting for a con artist who bilked Trump U. students out of millions of dollars is the way to go about that worthy goal? Voting for a guy who cheated Deutschebank out of 600 million he owed them? Voting for a guy who won't show his tax returns (as every other recent POTUS has done, without a peep of complaint)? Voting for a guy who lets Saudi billionaires pretend to rent rooms in his hotel (they make a reservation, cancel, but then don't ask for a refund of the big chunk of money they advanced) in a fraudulent pay-for-play influence scheme? Voting for a guy who has made a career cutting corners around, and loopholes through, any law he doesn't like? Voting for a guy who has openly expressed his dislike of certain Constitutional constraints, including 1st Amendment rights? Voting for a man who, by the Toronto Star's rather conservative tally, has told outright lies (defined as, deliberate and based upon assertions he knew to be false) 213 times? Voting for a man who attempted to coerce and politically influence the head of the government's independent law enforcement arm, failed, and then fired him? OK, I'll go easy, and not get into the whole Russia or Azerbaijan/Iran RG or other messes. My fingers are getting tired, anyway.

That guy? Sure, why not. As you said, we have to allow the dumbest voters to vote.

[zetreque]

Wait, let me get this straight. Trump is admitting that Russia meddled in the election and then people are just "sore losers"? Let's see if we can come up with a metaphor here. Someone breaks into your house and steals all your valuables. The police tell you, "You should have had 3 deadbolts instead of two so it was a fair breaking and you deserved to be robbed."

It feels better banging my head against the wall than listen and trying to make sense of the lunacy out there coming from our president and his followers.

[Old Rasputin]

Zetreque, are you saying the Russians changed my vote to Trump?

Watson, Biv, and Zet, we don't have to like Trump, but if we are American citizens that respect our laws and democratic election process, then it seems that we should also respect the results of our elections.

It's time to move on, and stop all the hateful disrespect. For better or worse, we got who we got as president, fair and square (unless of course the evil Russians robbed our votes!)

[zetreque]

Zetreque, are you saying the Russians changed my vote to Trump?

We don't have to like Trump, but if we are American citizens that respect our laws and democratic election process, then it seems that we should also respect the results of our elections.

It's time to move on, and stop all the hateful disrespect. For better or worse, we got who we got as president, fair and square (unless of course the evil Russians changed the votes!)

Please look into the definitions of hacking, manipulation, and cyber warfare. Also try to understand how money and media work. Or you can get a psychology degree like countless others are doing.

[Old Rasputin]

...so Zet, seriously, do you actually believe the Russians caused Trump to win the election?

[zetreque]

...so Zet, seriously, do you actually believe the Russians caused Trump to win the election?

Excuse me while I go bang my head against the wall and make decisions with my eyes closed. Perhaps I will try driving with my eyes closed and see how it works out. Oh but look, I'm getting something done.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/07/i-just-closed-my-eyes-and-said-do-it-how-trump-approved-dakota-access-pipeline-video/

[zetreque]

...so Zet, seriously, do you actually believe the Russians caused Trump to win the election?

I saw the weird shit going on around the internet with republican youtube videos getting spammed out there and thumbs ups and fake accounts. Add 1+1 together with all the hypocrisy and baloney coming out of the trump administration and you have 2. Why do hackers do what they do? Often just because they can. It doesn't matter who it was. Something is definitely wrong here and you have total hypocrisy coming out of these people.

[Watson]

We don't have to like Trump, but if we are American citizens that respect our laws and democratic election process, then it seems that we should also respect the results of our elections.

One thing I haven't heard from any one is, "If you don't respect the man, you at least have to respect the office?" Trump has lowered the bar to the point it is even hard to find respect for the office of the President of the United States of America. No small task.

Just my 2 cents cnd worth, so that cost me about 3.45 cents. And yes the rest of the world can have an opinion since this incompetence reaches far beyond the US borders.

[TheVat]

LOL anyone whining about Trump not getting respect. Respect for a political office is earned, not handed to you on a silver platter. Old Ras adroitly dodges many of the points of fact in my earlier posts and just keeps parroting "respect him!" over and over, as if that is an argument. Most of us who don't show respect aren't getting personal - I have no comment to make on his looks or his hands or what he does in the privacy of a Russian hotel room. My problem is with his behavior in public life and politics. Old Rasputing seems to have a sudden preoccupation with etiquette while a petulant child in the White House trashes this nation and its global standing, tweeting insane garbage and lying incessantly.

Our duty as citizens is to be the watchdogs of government, to be informed, to protest what is not legitimate and corrupt. Not sit with our hands folded meekly in our laps, nattering on about respect. We have every right to call foul. Calling the massive protests against Trump's actions "disrespect" is like calling a woman screaming for help while being mugged "shrill and discourteous to those trying to sleep."

[Watson]

Isn't Rasputin a Russian name?

[toucana]

Old Rasputin wrote:

Either we honor and respect our laws and election results, …or we don’t.

Well someone might want to share that piece of wisdom with Donald Trump, because the one thing he can't get over is the fact that he actually lost the plebiscite by at least 3 million votes. He is a minority president who obtained the presidency thanks to an archaic and fustian electoral college system that was originally written into the constitution as a safeguard against the inadvertent election of a tyrannical demagogue, or a suborned agent of a foreign power (a double failure in Trump's case).

The affront to Trump's vanity is so enormous that he keeps insisting that he only lost the popular vote because of "massive electoral fraud" in spite of the total absence of any real evidence to support this view. Trump believes this so thoroughly that he has set up a Federal Election Integrity Commission under the chairmanship of Sen. Kris Kobach (R-Kansas) who was recently sanctioned by a judge for ethics violations in a related court case.

This Federal Election Integrity Commission has now written to all fifty states demanding unprecedented quantities of information about every single voter on their rolls, including, names addresses, military service, party affiliation and partial social service #s.

Many states have flatly refused to comply with this letter citing the Tenth Amendment. The most forthright response came from Delbert Hosemann the Republican Secretary of State for Mississippi who said earlier tonight

He can take a running jump into the Gulf of Mexico. And Mississippi is great place to launch from.

[someguy1]

Well someone might want to share that piece of wisdom with Donald Trump, because the one thing he can't get over is the fact that he actually lost the plebiscite by at least 3 million votes. He is a minority president who obtained the presidency thanks to an archaic and fustian electoral college system that was originally written into the constitution as a safeguard against the inadvertent election of a tyrannical demagogue, or a suborned agent of a foreign power (a double failure in Trump's case).

The thread's about Trump's tweeting, and I agree that this business with Mika is a new low, even worse than his 3am tweetstorm against the beauty queen a few weeks before the election. I thought that would sink him for sure. If someone took his tweeter away that would solve 90% of his problems. He is his own worst enemy.

That said, if we're jacking this thread to talk about the electoral system, I'd be happy to state the case for why it's a good thing. The electoral system is designed as a smoothing mechanism to reveal national consensus where the popular vote doesn't. As a striking example, Bill Clinton failed to win a popular majority in either of his presidential victories in 1992 and 1996.

Imagine if the Trump-Clinton situation were reversed, and a liberal candidate with broad national support lost to a right-winger popular only in the south and midwest, say. In fact, consider what would happen in a popular contest.

First, it would be fairly unusual for anyone to have a majority (> 50%) at all. Whenever there's a viable third-party candidate they wreck any possibility of a popular majority for anyone.

So then you'd have to say that the winner is the candidate with the most votes, majority or not. In that case, you'd have many regional candidates on the ballot. The liberal coastal candidate, the southern Redneck candidate, the midwestern farmer candidate. You'd end up with dozens of candidates, and the winner would be the one who was the most popular in their region. If some nutball won 90% of the southern vote, that would be enough to get them elected.

Or, you'd have a runoff system. In which every election would start out with dozens of regional candidates in November followed by the inevitable runoff in January or February. Is this anyone's idea of a good plan?

I would love to have a conversation about the electoral system. I happen to think it's a very clever idea. But to have the conversation you have to put aside Trump/Hillary and try to discuss the system and not the specific candidates. Bubba became president in 1992 with 43% of the popular vote. Remember Ross Perot? He got 19 million votes. In a popular vote contest you'd get dozens of Ross Perot's running every election. The eventual president would be lucky to get 10% in the first go-round.

I often hear people complain about the electoral system but I rarely see people think these issues through. Try to think of them as candidates A, B, C, and so forth, and not Trump and Hillary. Take away California and Hillary loses the popular vote as well as the electoral vote. If it were reversed, a conservative could sweep Texas and Alabama and beat a liberal who had broad national support.

[someguy1]

ps -- The complete list of US presidents who did not win a majority of the popular vote. I urge people to consider how an election decided by national popular vote would actually work. Remember, if you only need a plurality of the popular vote, every local nutball candidate will run. So you need to design an entirely new system, not just say that you hate Trump hence you hate the electoral college.

1.1 Election of 1844: James K. Polk
1.2 Election of 1848: Zachary Taylor
1.3 Election of 1856: James Buchanan
1.4 Election of 1860: Abraham Lincoln
1.5 Election of 1880: James A. Garfield
1.6 Elections of 1884 and 1892: Grover Cleveland
1.7 Election of 1912: Woodrow Wilson
1.8 Election of 1916: Woodrow Wilson
1.9 Election of 1948: Harry S Truman
1.10 Election of 1960: John F. Kennedy
1.11 Election of 1968: Richard Nixon
1.12 Election of 1992: Bill Clinton
1.13 Election of 1996: Bill Clinton

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... _victories

[Old Rasputin]

BIV, Zet, Toucana, and Watson,

My opinion is that Trump is not as bad as you all make him out to be. But I see that I am outnumbered here, so I will end with this one final question --

Are your ongoing opinions/judgments of Trump's actions, negatively 'tainted' (determined) by your 'hate' of him?

[TheVat]

I can't speak for others, but my hate (it's more dislike, really) is a result of observation of his behavior, rather than any prior bias. Indeed, someone not being a career politician would normally make me more kindly disposed towards them, not less. If Warren Buffet had run instead of Trump, I might have preferred him over HRC.

It's unlikely Buffet has a fake Time cover of himself posted in the Berkshire Hathaway office.