Is Donald Trump mad?

Bi-partisan support based on what, The 1995 law that was passed?

There's tons of gambling outside of Vegas.
Most likely NJ will be allowed to offer sports betting at all there casinos and race tracks pretty soon
Fact is Adelson pushed hard for this during the campaign and ponied up considerable sums to see it happen.
 
During the campaign one of his higher profile surrogates (believed to be Kelly Anne Conway) was supposedly given to telling media folks off the record that the candidate was showing early stages of dementia but that they could handle it

Yesterday he gave a speech which was slurred and in which he struggled, it sounded more like someone who'd suffered a minor stroke actually

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/m...bility-after-dry-mouth-speech/article/2642806
 
Last edited:
SlimChance said:
Sheldon? Really? All that ******* cares about is gambling not being leagilised outside Nevada. Don't run away from the fact this has bi-partisan support but because Trump will do it we must all set our hair on fire.
Click to expand...

The Dems had their opportunity under Obama for 8 years, and never went anywhere near it, because they knew full-well that it was a pointlessly provocative act, with absolutely zero upside, and a fu*ckload of downside.

That's the point.

Trump has chosen to do this in isolation; in much the same way as he chose to act alone, in withdrawing from the Paris Accord on climate change. It's the nativism, the wanton disregard for international diplomacy, and the Devil-may-care attitude about the consequences of his actions, that cause us to tear our hair out, not the man himself................though by any measure, he is also a super-fried cu*nt of the highest order.
 
Last edited:
SlimChance said:
It's one completely fucked up country. No matter what happens the left has one version and the right has a completely different version.
Click to expand...

I'm not totally sure this is true of America to be honest (the existence of a distinct left and right - not the fucked up bit)

Now I accept that the 'political compass' isn't the last word in this, and it is by any honest measure a subjective index, but it illustrates the incredibly narrow choice corridor quite well. Draw vertical lines between Trump and Clinton, and the gap between them is your left/ right spectrum. America's much cherished 'freedom' is pretty much a freedom to conform

https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2016

The way I like to look at it as that the American political landscape has been dominated for the last 50 years by a giant unbalanced pendulum. This pendulum swings 2 pts to the right and then swings 1pt back to the left. If you repeat this over enough cycles you end up with Trump, and you're also well on your way to electing fascism (which I'm not convinced is a contradiction in terms)

For the Republicans this possibly started in the last 60's with Nixon pushing back against the so-called 'counter culture' although you might trace it back further into the paleo cons. At this time the Democrats were still fielding candidates like Humphrey and McGovern who had some connections with traditional supporting blocs in social organisations and labour unions. Carter momentarily flipped this mood when he won an election by virtue of not being Gerald Ford, but that didn't last long. Reagan would go onto beat Carter in 1980, and the Democrats fielded and lost with Mondale and Dukakis there after. The epicentre of American politics was changing, and the Overton window was migrating right. Eventually as we went into the 90's the Democrats began their own transition as their own candidates became increasingly more and more right wing. You can almost see this as a perfect linear regression. This of course legitimises the Republicans and they can push onto the extremes of the window even further. It's probably reached a point now whereby if their patron saint, (Ronald O'Reagan) were to stand today, he wouldn't win the nomination (gun control alone would stop him)

I think the important take out though is that Trump needn't be a freak. He actually represents America much more than many Americans are comfortable about admitting. I actually get a bit tired listening to all the Democrats bleating that he only 46% of the popular vote and she got 48%. So what. The point is he was a disqualifying candidate who still managed to get 46% of the vote. Even if he had lost, this should still be of a massive concern. Western Europe's most right wing country is France, and we tend to get a bit spooked when the FN can manage 40%. OK some of the outliers in eastern Europe like Poland and Hungary bear comparison with America, but America is pretty way out there now, and needn't be finished just yet. Trump might not be the worst of what they're capable of electing. Ultimately if the rest of the country continues to elect alt-right quasi militarists against the wishes of the wealth producing states of coastal areas, you do wonder if the fabric of the union will hold together, and whether perhaps a federated system might come to pass as Yankee land and California look for greater autonomy? Who knows
 
Last edited:
Warbler said:
I'm not totally sure this is true of America to be honest (the existence of a distinct left and right - not the fucked up bit)

Now I accept that the 'political compass' isn't the last word in this, and it is my any honest measure a subjective index, but it illustrates the incredibly narrow choice corridor quite well. Draw vertical lines between Trump and Clinton, and the gap between them is your spectrum. America's much cherished 'freedom' is pretty much a freedom to conform

https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2016

The way I like to look at it as that the American political landscape has been dominated for the last 50 years by a giant unbalanced pendulum. This pendulum swings 2 pts to the right and then swings 1pt back to the left. If you repeat this over enough cycles you end up with Trump, and you're also well on your way to electing fascism (which I'm not convinced is a contradiction in terms)

For the Republicans this possibly started in the last 60's with Nixon pushing back against the so-called 'counter culture' although you might trace it back further into the paleo cons. At this time the Democrats were still fielding candidates like Humphrey and McGovern who had some connections with traditional supporting blocs in social organisations and labour unions. Carter momentarily flipped this mood when he won an election by virtue of not being Gerald Ford, but that didn't last long. Reagan would go onto beat Carter in 1980, and the Democrats fielded and lost with Mondale and Dukakis there after. The epicentre of American politics was changing, and the Overton window was migrating right. Eventually as we went into the 90's the Democrats began their own transition as their own candidates became increasingly more and more right wing. You can almost see this as a perfect linear regression. This of legitimises the Republicans and they can push onto the extremes of the window even more. It's probably reached a point now whereby if their patron saint, (Ronald O'Reagan) were to stand today, he wouldn't win the nomination (gun control alone would stop him)

I think the important take out though is that Trump needn't be a freak. He actually represents America much more than many Americans are comfortable about admitting. I actually get a bit tired listening to all the Democrats bleating that he only 46% of the popular vote and she got 48%. So what. The point is he was a disqualifying candidate who still managed to get 46% of the vote. Even if he had lost, this should still be of a massive concern. Western Europe's most right wing country is France, and we tend to get a bit spooked when the FN can manage 40%. OK some of the outliers in eastern Europe like Poland and Hungary bear comparison with America, but America is pretty way out there now, and needn't be finished just yet. Trump might not be the worst of what they're capable of electing. Ultimately if the rest of the country continues to elect alt-right quasi militarists against the wishes of the wealth producing states of coastal areas, you do wonder if the fabric of the union will hold together, and whether perhaps a federated system might come to pass as Yankee land and California look for greater autonomy? Who knows
Click to expand...

Almost nothing can be discounted the way things are trending
 
Warbler said:
I'm not totally sure this is true of America to be honest (the existence of a distinct left and right - not the fucked up bit)

Now I accept that the 'political compass' isn't the last word in this, and it is by any honest measure a subjective index, but it illustrates the incredibly narrow choice corridor quite well. Draw vertical lines between Trump and Clinton, and the gap between them is your left/ right spectrum. America's much cherished 'freedom' is pretty much a freedom to conform

https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2016

The way I like to look at it as that the American political landscape has been dominated for the last 50 years by a giant unbalanced pendulum. This pendulum swings 2 pts to the right and then swings 1pt back to the left. If you repeat this over enough cycles you end up with Trump, and you're also well on your way to electing fascism (which I'm not convinced is a contradiction in terms)

For the Republicans this possibly started in the last 60's with Nixon pushing back against the so-called 'counter culture' although you might trace it back further into the paleo cons. At this time the Democrats were still fielding candidates like Humphrey and McGovern who had some connections with traditional supporting blocs in social organisations and labour unions. Carter momentarily flipped this mood when he won an election by virtue of not being Gerald Ford, but that didn't last long. Reagan would go onto beat Carter in 1980, and the Democrats fielded and lost with Mondale and Dukakis there after. The epicentre of American politics was changing, and the Overton window was migrating right. Eventually as we went into the 90's the Democrats began their own transition as their own candidates became increasingly more and more right wing. You can almost see this as a perfect linear regression. This of course legitimises the Republicans and they can push onto the extremes of the window even further. It's probably reached a point now whereby if their patron saint, (Ronald O'Reagan) were to stand today, he wouldn't win the nomination (gun control alone would stop him)

I think the important take out though is that Trump needn't be a freak. He actually represents America much more than many Americans are comfortable about admitting. I actually get a bit tired listening to all the Democrats bleating that he only 46% of the popular vote and she got 48%. So what. The point is he was a disqualifying candidate who still managed to get 46% of the vote. Even if he had lost, this should still be of a massive concern. Western Europe's most right wing country is France, and we tend to get a bit spooked when the FN can manage 40%. OK some of the outliers in eastern Europe like Poland and Hungary bear comparison with America, but America is pretty way out there now, and needn't be finished just yet. Trump might not be the worst of what they're capable of electing. Ultimately if the rest of the country continues to elect alt-right quasi militarists against the wishes of the wealth producing states of coastal areas, you do wonder if the fabric of the union will hold together, and whether perhaps a federated system might come to pass as Yankee land and California look for greater autonomy? Who knows
Click to expand...

Nice post. California shouts very loudly, as if it speaks for the whole country. It doesn't.
 
Grasshopper said:
The Dems had their opportunity under Obama for 8 years, and never went anywhere near it, because they knew full-well that it was a pointlessly provocative act, with absolutely zero upside, and a fu*ckload of downside.

That's the point.

Trump has chosen to do this in isolation; in much the same was as he chose to act alone, in withdrawing from the Paris Accord on climate change. It's the nativism, the wanton disregard for international diplomacy, and the Devil-may-care attitude about the consequences of his actions, that cause us to tear our hair out, not the man himself................though by any measure, he is also a super-fried cu*nt of the highest order.
Click to expand...

Obama clearly showed himself to be anti-Israel. Don't dress if up as him having diplomatic tact.
 
Obama held the internationally-recognised diplomatic line on the Jerusalem question, and the wider two-State solution, throughout his Presidency.

To all practical intents, he treated Israel no different to any of his predecessors - even if he did have a severe personal distaste for Netanyahu (which is hardly an out-there position to adopt).
 
He should have watched The West Wing, they covered this really well. Maybe 'fiction' but based in reality and sanity. He really is an idiot and has no idea at all. How he is still in power is scary. Does he listen to his advisors or are they as bad as him? If they are, there's no hope.
Hamas should direct their anger his way.
 
He listens to Kushner and Pence who have their grubby little mitts all over this latest provocation. One is set for a big fall and one is likely to be the next president.
 
G-G said:
Does he listen to his advisors or are they as bad as him? If they are, there's no hope.
Click to expand...

He was asked about his advisers, particularly as it happens, in the field of Foreign policy. This is his reply (March 16th 2016)

“I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things. I know what I’m doing and I listen to a lot of people, I talk to a lot of people and at the appropriate time I’ll tell you who the people are. But my primary consultant is myself and I have a good instinct for this stuff."​
 
I'm not convinced America voted for Trump. I reckon they voted against the status quo. They'd have voted for me if I'd stood.

I base this on a conversation with an American couple in the run-up to the election. At a time when the rest of the world was laughing at the idea of his becoming president these two were almost in tears at the confusion in the USA.

The guy was a retired chief engineer of a major power company in Texas. The woman (his wife) was a Latina immigrant and retired professor from a Texan university (don't recall its name). They were quiet, unassuming, polite and mannerly. We saw them at Mass nearly every time we went ourselves and when we stopped en route (we were on a tour of Italy) their first stop was almost invariably the nearest church.

However, once we expressed surprise at the idea of Trump not being dismissed out of hand as a candidate we couldn't get them to shut the fvck up. Everything that was wrong with America was the fault of failing successive administrations and they wanted change.

Trump's rhetoric - so laughably empty to us - captured their imagination. They had fallen for the rhetoric (rather than the man) hook, line and sinker. They didn't even detect a whiff of irony in their anti-immigration stance.

The parallels with the Brexit campaign in the lead-up to the referendum here were striking.

Trump was very accurately described one night on Question Time. I can't recall the exact litany of adjectives and nouns and can't find the edition on Youtube but the words sociopath, narcissist, misogynist and deluded may have been used.

A number of my American 'cousins' (lots of them are second/third cousins x-tmes removed etc but still 'cousins' to us) are in contact with us via FB and they are split down the middle. Those traditionally Democrat in their persuasion hate Trump, those of a Republican persuasion are backing him although they do seem to have some reservations.
 
Last edited:
I'm not convinced America voted for Trump either - I'm convinced they voted against HRC. She is almost universally-despised over there - even amongst a large part of the Democratic caucus

You could have put Satan up against her, and they would have bet 10/11 the pair.
 
Last edited:
All countries have a rabid element in their electorate

In the UK it tends to run between 6% and 12%

In continental Europe it runs between 10% and 20%

In America it runs between 20% and 33%

America has a particularly deep seam of nasty opinion. Hillary Clinton wasn't far wrong when she described half of Trump's natural support as "deplorable" (although she should never have said it)

If I had to point to any single factor that's driven this, then its the wave of never recovered (from the credit crunch). It's not as if history hasn't shown us this before. In the wake of a massive economic slump people don't automatically turn extreme, but if after about 7-8 years they haven't recovered their status then they become a lot more receptive to this type of messaging. They begin to resent data led recoveries, and being told by remote politicians that everything is back to where it was, when their own experiences are frankly contradicting this. It begins to manifest itself as a vote that I would describe as; this ain't working for me any longer, may as well try it, what's the worse that can happen? Which I think accounts for a fair amount of Brexit antipathy

America has a couple of other issues that make them particularly vulnerable

In the first case they allow the poison of religion into the politics much more so than any other western country, and it tends to be a quite radical interpretation too. Ironically it was something Jimmy Carter first plugged into, but the Republicans have taken it to new levels

I think what's probably more relevant however is the breakdown in the relationship with the media post Iraq, which has coincided with the emergence of new social platforms. American news doesn't report. Instead it campaigns. It's perfectly possible now to take your news in an echo chamber of bias confirmation. Fox are appalling, but it also needs to be acknowledged that CNN and MSNBC are equally partisan, they just tend to produce more thoughtful content, even if the likes of Rachael Maddow would never be allowed to get away with the stuff she pumps out in the UK. Then of course you have this whole wodge of right wing websites like Brietbart, or Info Wars, plus their local radio is truly shocking

Perhaps the final piece in the jigsaw is their education system. Americans do actually make me laugh when they brag about their world class universities. Just ask how many of them went to one? The fault line is in the strata below. America is outside of the top-20 in all three of the PISA categories. In fact she was outside of the top-40 in maths. America spends 2% of her federal budget on education, and 7% on interest repayment (some education is picked up at state level of course). There seems to have been an insidious invasion however that has begun to celebrate ignorance in American culture

"War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength;"​
 
Warbler said:
All countries have a rabid element in their electorate

In the UK it tends to run between 6% and 12%

In continental Europe it runs between 10% and 20%

In America it runs between 20% and 33%

America has a particularly deep seam of nasty opinion. Hillary Clinton wasn't far wrong when she described half of Trump's natural support as "deplorable" (although she should never have said it)

If I had to point to any single factor that's driven this, then its the wave of never recovered (from the credit crunch). It's not as if history hasn't shown us this before. In the wake of a massive economic slump people don't automatically turn extreme, but if after about 7-8 years they haven't recovered their status then they become a lot more receptive to this type of messaging. They begin to resent data led recoveries, and being told by remote politicians that everything is back to where it was, when their own experiences are frankly contradicting this. It begins to manifest itself as a vote that I would describe as; this ain't working for me any longer, may as well try it, what's the worse that can happen? Which I think accounts for a fair amount of Brexit antipathy

America has a couple of other issues that make them particularly vulnerable

In the first case they allow the poison of religion into the politics much more so than any other western country, and it tends to be a quite radical interpretation too. Ironically it was something Jimmy Carter first plugged into, but the Republicans have taken it to new levels

I think what's probably more relevant however is the breakdown in the relationship with the media post Iraq, which has coincided with the emergence of new social platforms. American news doesn't report. Instead it campaigns. It's perfectly possible now to take your news in an echo chamber of bias confirmation. Fox are appalling, but it also needs to be acknowledged that CNN and MSNBC are equally partisan, they just tend to produce more thoughtful content, even if the likes of Rachael Maddow would never be allowed to get away with the stuff she pumps out in the UK. Then of course you have this whole wodge of right wing websites like Brietbart, or Info Wars, plus their local radio is truly shocking

Perhaps the final piece in the jigsaw is their education system. Americans do actually make me laugh when they brag about their world class universities. Just ask how many of them went to one? The fault line is in the strata below. America is outside of the top-20 in all three of the PISA categories. In fact she was outside of the top-40 in maths. America spends 2% of her federal budget on education, and 7% on interest repayment (some education is picked up at state level of course). There seems to have been an insidious invasion however that has begun to celebrate ignorance in American culture

"War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength;"​
Click to expand...

I could pretty much sign off on this although I'd probably rate the poison/hypocrisy of religion in politics higher than the relationship with the media.
All these holy rollers that voted for Trump and quite possibly putting a pedophile in the Senate just want to make me vomit.
My already high disdain for organized religions has never been higher than at this present time.
In retrospect Hillary was the worst possible candidate imaginable for the dems.
 
Warbler said:
All countries have a rabid element in their electorate

In the UK it tends to run between 6% and 12%

In continental Europe it runs between 10% and 20%

In America it runs between 20% and 33%

America has a particularly deep seam of nasty opinion. Hillary Clinton wasn't far wrong when she described half of Trump's natural support as "deplorable" (although she should never have said it)

If I had to point to any single factor that's driven this, then its the wave of never recovered (from the credit crunch). It's not as if history hasn't shown us this before. In the wake of a massive economic slump people don't automatically turn extreme, but if after about 7-8 years they haven't recovered their status then they become a lot more receptive to this type of messaging. They begin to resent data led recoveries, and being told by remote politicians that everything is back to where it was, when their own experiences are frankly contradicting this. It begins to manifest itself as a vote that I would describe as; this ain't working for me any longer, may as well try it, what's the worse that can happen? Which I think accounts for a fair amount of Brexit antipathy

America has a couple of other issues that make them particularly vulnerable

In the first case they allow the poison of religion into the politics much more so than any other western country, and it tends to be a quite radical interpretation too. Ironically it was something Jimmy Carter first plugged into, but the Republicans have taken it to new levels

I think what's probably more relevant however is the breakdown in the relationship with the media post Iraq, which has coincided with the emergence of new social platforms. American news doesn't report. Instead it campaigns. It's perfectly possible now to take your news in an echo chamber of bias confirmation. Fox are appalling, but it also needs to be acknowledged that CNN and MSNBC are equally partisan, they just tend to produce more thoughtful content, even if the likes of Rachael Maddow would never be allowed to get away with the stuff she pumps out in the UK. Then of course you have this whole wodge of right wing websites like Brietbart, or Info Wars, plus their local radio is truly shocking

Perhaps the final piece in the jigsaw is their education system. Americans do actually make me laugh when they brag about their world class universities. Just ask how many of them went to one? The fault line is in the strata below. America is outside of the top-20 in all three of the PISA categories. In fact she was outside of the top-40 in maths. America spends 2% of her federal budget on education, and 7% on interest repayment (some education is picked up at state level of course). There seems to have been an insidious invasion however that has begun to celebrate ignorance in American culture

"War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength;"​
Click to expand...

The universities are overrun by professors that are against free speech and have extreme left wing ideologies. They are teaching students to be victims, not men and women that think for themselves.
 
SlimChance said:
The universities are overrun by professors that are against free speech and have extreme left wing ideologies. They are teaching students to be victims, not men and women that think for themselves.
Click to expand...

Possibly...but I accept what someone (somewhere) said on this issue, along the lines of, 'we do have a left bias in teaching to young people, but that's because the actual capitalist-world they're about to enter is right-wing, or neo-liberal, etc'.

Who can argue with that?
 
Last edited:
Marble said:
Possibly...but I accept what someone (somewhere) said on this issue, along the lines of, 'we do have a left bias in teaching to young people, but that's because the actual capitalist-world they're about to enter is right-wing, or neo-liberal, etc'.

Who can argue with that?
Click to expand...

They're teaching people in elite colleges to be victims. There is a hell of a lot wrong with that.
 
brendanr said:
This Ed Krassenstein is relentless. Roll protest movement
Charles Blow must be proud.
Click to expand...

He's easily the most pathetic ******* on the internet. He really should go outside and see the world is still the world no matter who is president.
 
Last edited:
Something else to look out for from the left. Anytime Trump tweets about the economy you get the hilarious "Thanks Obama" replies. This is a mistake by Trump. As soon as the economy implodes, which is highly likely if he gets reelected then all of a sudden the economy will be his fault. He should stick to his draining the swanp mantra because once the economy blows all the "Thanks Obama" tweets will quietly be deleted.
 
I think the universities being left-wing training children to be victims is one of the most boring tropes of the right-wing commentators. The Ben Shapiro, Milo, Breitbart alt-right clan. There are some universities where it has become an issue where some students have protested against speeches from these likes. The idea that the whole of academia can be decried because of this is utter twaddle. It is the mirror image of uber liberal anti-trumpers.
 
Back
Top