Topic: Typhoid Trump: the not-smart, corrupt, coward, loser, thread

[Something Worse]

That's got nothing to do with the negotiations over the border funding bill though has it? It's not something the Democrats can do unless they're in power, and it's not like Pelosi could've demanded the abolition of ICE as part of those negotiations.

And whom is the only person that can do that?

Work

Backwards

From

There

[TepidT2O]

The trouble is that these despicable comments will actually win him votes.

And worse still, the white educated Americans will still vote for him.


Shameful.

[soxfan]

He off on one again


Donald J. Trump
‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump
2m2 minutes ago

We will never be a Socialist or Communist Country. IF YOU ARE NOT HAPPY HERE, YOU CAN LEAVE! It is your choice, and your choice alone. This is about love for America. Certain people HATE our Country....

....They are anti-Israel, pro Al-Qaeda, and comment on the 9/11 attack, “some people did something.” Radical Left Democrats want Open Borders, which means drugs, crime, human trafficking, and much more....


....Detention facilities are not Concentration Camps! America has never been stronger than it is now – rebuilt Military, highest Stock Market EVER, lowest unemployment and more people working than ever before. Keep America Great!

Whenever this piece of shit drops dead (hopefully from some horrific disease), whether it's 2 days or 2 decades from now, I definitely am going to open a bottle of champagne. I've never thought like that about any other human being before. He is the lowest of the low.

I stumbled onto some website last night that ranked the 15 worst Nazis during WW2. I kept thinking how high Trump would have ranked if he was in Germany at that time. He definitely would have been a Hitler fan, no question.

[Giono]

The frustrating thing about all this is that while the media predictably gets caught up in debating just how racist Trump's comments are, they seem to be missing the more sinister side to what he's said - the idea that criticising the President means you're criticising America - and therefore you hate America. That's classic dictator behaviour. That's what they should be focussing on, and those Democrats he's talking about need to respond by saying something like, "I love America, but I hate what the President is doing to America".

The frustrating thing is that it is designed to distract about the border.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

I'd be more than willing to bet that at least one of them will be on their way out during the next election cycle.

Edit: "Ocasio-Cortez was recognized by 74% of voters in the poll; 22% had a favorable view.Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota — another member of The Squad — was recognized by 53% of the voters; 9% (not a typo) had a favorable view."

https://www.axios.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-poll-democrats-2020-aeaa3771-f142-4059-b79e-1fed569dfdf9.html

I’d wager that quite a few are eyeing up Cortez’s seat, and will probably get more than a little help from the DNC (have read before she won the primary on a low turnout so a good chance for someone who does the groundwork there to beat her)

Haven’t seen that axios poll but does show why the GOP/trump are smart to target her and make her the face of the democrat party, don’t think she’s quite worked that out yet, but when you surround yourself with people who think you are the bees knees it never ever ends well and her ego gets nice and big whilst gifting trump a second term

[Giono]

The trouble is that these despicable comments will actually win him votes.

And worse still, the white educated Americans will still vote for him.


Shameful.

All GOP candidates will have to agree or disagree with this crap.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

The frustrating thing is that it is designed to distract about the border.

think he’s also shitting what Epstein could come out with over the coming days too (although probably not the only one)

[rafathegaffa83]

Yep. He's like a carnival barker: LOOK AT ME FOLKS! LOOK AT ME! NOT THAT! ME!

[Giono]

Yep. He's like a carnival barker: LOOK AT ME FOLKS! LOOK AT ME! NOT THAT! ME!

Just another ink cloud from the octopotus.

[KenyanKopite]

I'd be more than willing to bet that at least one of them will be on their way out during the next election cycle.

Edit: "Ocasio-Cortez was recognized by 74% of voters in the poll; 22% had a favorable view.Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota — another member of The Squad — was recognized by 53% of the voters; 9% (not a typo) had a favorable view."

https://www.axios.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-poll-democrats-2020-aeaa3771-f142-4059-b79e-1fed569dfdf9.html

That poll you've quoted is shady.


https://splinternews.com/axios-peddles-shady-poll-pushing-attack-on-progressive-1836375126

On Sunday, Axios’ Mike Allen published a post highlighting an “exclusive poll” that claimed to show Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s negative effect on the Democratic Party’s standing with crucial swing-state voters. The post also noted how Rep. Ilhan Omar carried a “9% (not a typo)” favorability rating, and that capitalism, not socialism, was respondents’ preferred system. In all, it was a broad rejection of the progressive House Democrats—if you chose, like Axios, to ignore the details.

Axios didn’t hide the fact that the poll was two months old and focused on 1,003 white people with two years of college experience or less—but it spun the polled population as “swing voters,” hid the people who conducted the poll, apparently as a condition of seeing the results, and concealed the name of a “top Democrat” who discussed findings with them.

[Red Beret]

Whenever this piece of shit drops dead (hopefully from some horrific disease), whether it's 2 days or 2 decades from now, I definitely am going to open a bottle of champagne. I've never thought like that about any other human being before. He is the lowest of the low.

I stumbled onto some website last night that ranked the 15 worst Nazis during WW2. I kept thinking how high Trump would have ranked if he was in Germany at that time. He definitely would have been a Hitler fan, no question.

He'd be a Goring. Not an outright Nazi as such, but a political opportunist and a canny operator, who saw it as expedient to join up and carry the card.

[Rob Dylan]

Work

Backwards

From

There

No, you were asked for practical things that Pelosi could've done in the negotiations over the border funding bill. Abolishing ICE, or anything that might lead to that goal, was not an option in those negotiations. Stop moving the goalposts and then patronising people by making out they don't understand what you're saying.

[Max_powers]

I think Republicans and Trump will undoubtedly try to turn the next election Trump vs this democratic Boogeyman spearheaded by AOC. They can't use the fear factors of immigrants to the same extent as the last election as that only brings to fore trumps failures, including having a Mexico funded wall built.

They tried something similar with Pelosi in the midterms (there was a great NYT podcast about it). The problem is Pelosi is experienced and comes off as safe pair of hands compared to Trump. So largely across the country their strategy failed.

Now they will be hoping that by presenting AOC (and the squad) as the face of Democrats to tap into deep rooted fears of communism, socialism and even xenophobia in sub-urban America, they can have Trump look better in comparison. Fox News and and lot of conservative media is already on board. They will also try to exploit any divide between the democrats. Trump did do a lot of that in 2016, even praising Bernie at times to undermine Clinton.

I hope AOC and other democrats don't lash out, present a united front and continue to bring to front all of Trump Administration's failings. They need to campaign hard on things that matter to your blue collar workers and many middle class people like healthcare and stagnating wages. They need to look like the grown ups. This what worked for them in the midterms, and there is no reason why that won't in 2020.

[thejbs]

Daft bint on fox news had a go at Omar for using bad language. Omar, at the time, was quoting Trump. Can't make this shit up.

[Giono]

I think Republicans and Trump will undoubtedly try to turn the next election Trump vs this democratic Boogeyman spearheaded by AOC. They can't use the fear factors of immigrants to the same extent as the last election as that only brings to fore trumps failures, including having a Mexico funded wall built.

They tried something similar with Pelosi in the midterms (there was a great NYT podcast about it). The problem is Pelosi is experienced and comes off as safe pair of hands compared to Trump. So largely across the country their strategy failed.

Now they will be hoping that by presenting AOC (and the squad) as the face of Democrats to tap into deep rooted fears of communism, socialism and even xenophobia in sub-urban America, they can have Trump look better in comparison. Fox News and and lot of conservative media is already on board. They will also try to exploit any divide between the democrats. Trump did do a lot of that in 2016, even praising Bernie at times to undermine Clinton.

I hope AOC and other democrats don't lash out, present a united front and continue to bring to front all of Trump Administration's failings. They need to campaign hard on things that matter to your blue collar workers and many middle class people like healthcare and stagnating wages. They need to look like the grown ups. This what worked for them in the midterms, and there is no reason why that won't in 2020.

Interesting take, I think you are right. He wants to campaign against some new boogeyman (woman). Butters kind of showed their eventual hand in his fix interview by calling them communists and anti-Israel. I hope that AOC and 'the squad' maintain some discipline.

The current unpredictableness of the Dem primary must be getting to him as they don't know who to smear yet...

[ChaChaMooMoo]

I hope that AOC and 'the squad' maintain some discipline.

I dont get why AOC wants to accomplish everything at the same time and immediately. In a political scene, it is important to have allies (or take time to make allies) who subscribe to your school of thought. But AOC and her sense of urgency is exactly what Trump will want to show that the democrats are a bunch of communists and socialists. She needs to be disciplined and careful in her presentation.Otherwise it will be a repeat of 2016 again, only difference being, this time it would be Trump vs radical socialism the way it was Trump vs Clinton's Emails last term. And the Trump will want exactly that.

[Giono]

I dont get why AOC wants to accomplish everything at the same time and immediately. In a political scene, it is important to have allies (or take time to make allies) who subscribe to your school of thought. But AOC and her sense of urgency is exactly what Trump will want to show that the democrats are a bunch of communists and socialists. She needs to be disciplined and careful in her presentation.Otherwise it will be a repeat of 2016 again, only difference being, this time it would be Trump vs radical socialism the way it was Trump vs Clinton's Emails last term. And the Trump will want exactly that.

She's young and inexperienced. She's learning. I'm sure that she will recede somewhat when the Dems have  a narrower leadership contest and when she is focused on her own reelection.

[rafathegaffa83]

I dont get why AOC wants to accomplish everything at the same time and immediately. In a political scene, it is important to have allies (or take time to make allies) who subscribe to your school of thought.

I think part of it is inexperience. Arguably, she's also one of a recent trend of Twitter politicians in the U.S., who seem to want instant results for complex problems, which is probably partially driven by the demands of vocal online supporters, who are a minority compared to the rest of the electorate

[jambutty]

So Trunt walks out to the lawn for his usual gib, and I notice some small Worcestershire sauce type bottles on a table behind him, product placement style.

Close examination shows 'em to be Frank's Red Hot. All part of his Great Buy American Products Showcase.

Brief research shows Pence marveling at whiffle bats, Christmas stockings in flag motif, Stetson hats and maple syrup.  Other than Gibson guitars not one thing anyone else in the world would think about buying.

He sure is making America great again.

I know he's the king of hyperbole, but the gap between the kind of events he imagines and the utter shiteness of the end product is facepalmable.

[Lynndenberries]

The trouble is that these despicable comments will actually win him votes.

And worse still, the white educated Americans will still vote for him.


Shameful.

It's disheartening to say the least. My impression is they think it's just a show and, as long as they are benefitting financially, they don't really care what he says or does on Twitter.

[24/7]

I deleted some posts. Behave, you bizarre little men

[Rob Dylan]

I'm not writing out a full set of amendments on a message board, you bizarre little man. You don't get to frame the argument that way and then declare yourself the victory because I have neither the time nor the inclination to do something like that.

98% of this thread is "look at this shit thing Trump did" do you expect every single one of those posts to be backed up with a 12 page essay on what he should be doing instead? Pelosi did nothing. That's not enough. The Congressional Hispanic Caucus put out a statement saying "we will not forget this betrayal", should I tell them that Rob Dylan from RAWK said their statement is invalid because it didn't have a set of proposed amendments attached to it?

Jeez, way to overreact. I haven't 'declared myself the victor' of anything. I didn't ask for a '12-page essay' or a 'full set of amendments' - you said she should have fought more and got more, I just said how could she get more when the Republicans will always say no to everything and have no need to make any concessions because they have the majority in the Senate, and the Democrats had one day to try and secure some funding before the recess. They held all the cards.

I wasn't even asking for a specific policy, just an explanation of how she could 'get more' in that scenario - more a question of tactics than policy. Someone else asked a similar question and you said they need to abolish ICE, which has nothing to do with the negotiations we were talking about and is not something Pelosi can influence at the moment. When that was pointed out you just rolled out the insults.

I wasn't debating with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, so you can tell them whatever you want. I only asked you to explain your own position, not use someone else's position to justify it. I mean I could say: Nancy Pelosi has decades of experience of passing legislation and an intimate knowledge of the issues surrounding immigration and the specifics of the border funding bills, as well as first-hand experience of the negotiations that went on prior to this legislation being passed. Should I tell her that she's weak and useless because Claus from RAWK thinks she 'should have done more' but can't say how or what?

You don't have time to answer my question but you have plenty of time to keep coming back and insulting people. Just weird.

[Something Worse]

Jeez, way to overreact. I haven't 'declared myself the victor' of anything. I didn't ask for a '12-page essay' or a 'full set of amendments' - you said she should have fought more and got more, I just said how could she get more when the Republicans will always say no to everything and have no need to make any concessions because they have the majority in the Senate, and the Democrats had one day to try and secure some funding before the recess. They held all the cards.

I wasn't even asking for a specific policy, just an explanation of how she could 'get more' in that scenario - more a question of tactics than policy. Someone else asked a similar question and you said they need to abolish ICE, which has nothing to do with the negotiations we were talking about and is not something Pelosi can influence at the moment. When that was pointed out you just rolled out the insults.

I wasn't debating with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, so you can tell them whatever you want. I only asked you to explain your own position, not justify it by pointing to something someone else has said. Anyone can do that, for example: Nancy Pelosi has decades of experience of passing legislation and an intimate knowledge of the issues surrounding immigration and the specifics of the border funding bills, as well as first-hand experience of the negotiations that went on prior to this legislation being passed. Should I tell her that she's weak and useless because Claus from RAWK thinks she 'should have done more' but can't say how or what?

You don't have time to answer my question but you have plenty of time to keep coming back and insulting people. Just weird.

I hope for all our sakes that putting amendments on a bill takes a little bit longer than typing three words.

My position is, as it always has been - Pelosi got nothing and rolled over. This isn't some extreme leftist position, there are a ton of people mad at her for this. And it's all she does. All the time. Your defense of her is essentially"she could do no more", which nobody else really agrees with. It smacks of bootlicking to be honest. You get more by delaying, obstructing, harrassing. Make it difficult for Trump to get anything. And if ultimately you end up in the same place, at least you have earned the respect of the people beneath you, instead of their contempt or outright rage.

I guess the difference is you think she tried and failed. I doubt she tried all that hard. I think she's complicit (alongside a lot of Dems) and would rather play by the rules and be a good politician than stand up for something.

I deleted some posts. Behave, you bizarre little men

My bad, sorry for that. And sorry to Rob too.

[Iska]

It's disheartening to say the least. My impression is they think it's just a show and, as long as they are benefitting financially, they don't really care what he says or does on Twitter.

Plenty of indicators seem to be flashing for a big recession about to hit, at least in part due to The Great Man’s trade wars.  If that’s right you’d hope it’s good news politically, if not in terms of human misery.

[ShakaHislop]

Trump bans family planning clinics from abortion referrals

The Trump administration has banned family planning clinics that receive taxpayer funding from referring women for abortions.

The policy also requires clinics to separate their finances from abortion providers. Existing US laws bar the use of tax money for elective abortions.

Medical and women's rights groups have decried the rule, which is seen as a win for anti-abortion groups.

The health department is to speak with the affected clinics again on Tuesday.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) confirmed to the BBC that clinics using this federal grant money had been notified on Monday that compliance with the new policy would be enforced immediately.

Abortions are still legal in the US under federal law, and under the new rule, providers at clinics receiving federal funding will still be able to discuss with patients about abortions, but cannot promote it and will not be mandated to counsel patients about abortion.

The compliance rule states that funding regulations for the family planning programme known as Title X have been amended "to remove the requirement for nondirective abortion counselling and referral, to prohibit referral for abortion, and to clarify compliance obligations with state and local laws".

And HHS plans on requiring providers to keep abortion facilities in separate buildings from clinics receiving funding by March 2020.

Should that policy go into effect, it could see many clinics shutter over the additional costs or be forced to withdraw from Title X funding.

The American Medical Association (AMA), along with advocacy groups and over a dozen states, had sued the administration over the rule in March.

But in June, a three-judge panel in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the rule to stand, saying the funding programme was meant to provide "pre-pregnancy family planning services - it does not fund medical care for pregnant women". Federal courts in July also denied another motion for an injunction.

As a result, HHS said that the courts "made clear that HHS may begin enforcing" the rule.

The administration is also fighting legal battles to allow employers to deny women free birth control by citing religious or moral objections and giving health care providers the ability to deny procedures for similar grounds.

The Title X federal fund was established in 1970 as a means of ensuring lower-income families had access to reproductive healthcare. This includes birth control, cancer screenings, and HIV and sexually transmitted disease testing.

According to the AMA without Title X, the rates of unintended pregnancy and abortion would be an estimated 31% higher.

According to a Congressional Research Service report, some four million Americans used Title X-funded clinics in 2017. The vast majority of patients using these services have incomes below 150% of the poverty level, HHS reports.

Federal law already prohibits the use of Title X funds for elective - or family planning - abortion, and clinics are monitored by HHS to ensure no misappropriation of funds. Though some anti-abortion groups argue that funding providers that also have abortion services is indirectly funding abortion.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, several states would see more than 50% of their Title X clinics lose funding under the new rules.

Religious conservatives and anti-abortion groups have praised the measure. Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B Anthony List. an anti-abortion advocacy network, said the policy "simply draws a bright line between abortion and family planning".

The AMA and reproductive healthcare provider Planned Parenthood have spoken out against the rule, saying it allows the government to interfere in a patient's care and would negatively affect primarily low-income women.

The Planned Parenthood Action Fund tweeted on Tuesday: "The Trump admin's devastating, illegal, & unethical Title X gag rule puts birth control and other essential care at risk for millions."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-49007866

[Mag Hull]

Donald Trump’s
Racism: The Definitive
List, Updated
By DAVID LEONHARDT and IAN PRASAD PHILBRICK
JAN. 15, 2018
Donald Trump has been obsessed with race for the entire time he has been a public figure. He had a history of making racist comments as a New York real-estate developer in the 1970s and ‘80s. More recently, his political rise was built on promulgating the lie that the nation’s first black president was born in Kenya. He then launched his campaign with a speech describing Mexicans as rapists.

The media often falls back on euphemisms when describing Trump’s comments about race: racially loaded, racially charged, racially tinged, racially sensitive. And Trump himself has claimed that he is “the least racist person.” But here’s the truth: Donald Trump is a racist. He talks about and treats people differently based on their race. He has done so for years, and he is still doing so.

Here, we have attempted to compile a definitive list of his racist comments – or at least the publicly known ones.

The New York Years
 
ELECTION 2016 By NATALIA V. OSIPOVA 1:22
Applying for Housing at a Trump Property in the '60s
Trump’s real-estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African-Americans in the 1970s and gave preferential treatment to whites, according to the federal government.

Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former hotel executive said Trump criticized a black accountant: “Black guys counting my money! I hate it. … I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault, because laziness is a trait in blacks.”


In 1989, Trump took out ads in New York newspapers urging the death penalty for five black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park; he argued they were guilty as late as June 2019, more than 15 years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.

In 1989, on NBC, Trump said: “I think sometimes a black may think they don’t have an advantage or this and that. I’ve said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage.”

An Obsession With
Dark-Skinned Immigrants

He began his 2016 presidential campaign with a speech disparaging Mexican immigrants as criminals and “rapists.”

He uses the gang MS-13 to disparage all immigrants. Among many other statements, he has suggested that Obama’s protection of the Dreamers — otherwise law-abiding immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children — contributed to the spread of MS-13.

In December 2015, Trump called for a “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” including refusing to readmit Muslim-American citizens who were outside of the country at the time.

Trump said a federal judge hearing a case about Trump University was biased because of the judge’s Mexican heritage.

In June 2017, Trump said 15,000 recent immigrants from Haiti “all have AIDS” and that 40,000 Nigerians, once seeing the United States, would never “go back to their huts” in Africa.

At the White House on Jan. 11, Trump vulgarly called for less immigration from Haiti and Africa and more from Norway.

Trump regularly demonized dark-skinned immigrants before the 2018 midterm elections, and his campaign produced an ad — about a caravan of migrants traveling through Mexico — that was so racist even Fox News declined to air it. He claimed that the same caravan included “criminals and unknown Middle Easterners.”

During a White House meeting in 2018, he referred to some undocumented immigrants as “animals” and later said they would “pour into and infest our country.” He also claimed, without evidence, that migrants were bringing diseases into the country.

Obama As Unqualified,
Lazy and Un-American
An 'extremely credible source' has called my office and told me that @BarackObama's birth certificate is a fraud.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 6, 2012
He spent years suggesting that the nation’s first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya, a lie that Trump still has not acknowledged as such.

Trump called Obama (who was editor in chief of the Harvard Law Review) “a terrible student, terrible.”

Obama has admitted that he spends his mornings watching @ESPN. Then he plays golf, fundraises & grants amnesty to illegals.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 16, 2014
Trump frequently claimed that Obama did not work hard as president.

Trump falsely claimed that President Obama “issued a statement for Kwanzaa but failed to issue one for Christmas.”

Urban America As a Hellscape
He often casts heavily black American cities as dystopian war zones. In a 2016 debate with Hillary Clinton, Trump said, “Our inner cities, African Americans, Hispanics are living in hell because it’s so dangerous. You walk down the street, you get shot.” Trump also said to black voters: “You’re living in poverty; your schools are no good; you have no jobs.”

He frequently offers false crime statistics to exaggerate urban crime, including about Oakland, Philadelphia and Ferguson, Mo.

Just out report: "United Kingdom crime rises 13% annually amid spread of Radical Islamic terror." Not good, we must keep America safe!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 20, 2017
He is quick to highlight crimes committed by dark-skinned people, sometimes exaggerating or lying about them (such as a claim about growing crime from “radical Islamic terror” in Britain). He is very slow to decry hate crimes committed by whites against dark-skinned people (such as the killing of an Indian man in Kansas last year).

Minorities As Uppity,
Ungrateful and Unintelligent

He frequently criticizes prominent African-Americans for being unpatriotic, ungrateful and disrespectful.

He called Puerto Ricans who criticized his administration’s response to Hurricane Maria “politically motivated ingrates.”

He also has a pattern of criticizing African-Americans as unintelligent or racist.

In July 2019, Trump suggested that four minority Democratic congresswomen, all of whom are American citizens and three of whom were born in the United States, should “go back” to “the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”

Friendliness with Proud
Racists and White Nationalists
"@WhiteGenocideTM: @realDonaldTrump Poor Jeb. I could've sworn I saw him outside Trump Tower the other day! https://t.co/e5uLRubqla"

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 22, 2016
He has retweeted white nationalists without apology.


He called some of those who marched alongside white supremacists in Charlottesville, Va., last August “very fine people.”

After David Duke, the former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, endorsed him, Trump was reluctant to disavow Duke even when asked directly on television.

Trump hired Steve Bannon as his campaign head and later White House chief strategist. Under Bannon’s leadership, the website Breitbart made white nationalism a central theme. It featured a section, for example, on “black crime.”

Trump has endorsed or praised politicians who have made racist statements, defended the Confederacy or associated with white supremacists, including Roy Moore in Alabama.


Trump pardoned – and fulsomely praises – Joe Arpaio, the Arizona sheriff sanctioned for racially profiling Latinos and for keeping immigrants in brutal prison conditions.

Denigrating Native Americans
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the “Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well documented.” At the time, he was fighting competition for his casino business.

In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. “I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations.”

In a November 2017 meeting with Navajo veterans of World War II, Trump mocked Senator Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas.”

In a Feb. 2019 tweet about Elizabeth Warren, Trump appeared to mock the Trail of Tears, a forced exodus that killed thousands of Native Americans.

Other Assorted Racism
Trump today: "Hillary Clinton meets in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of U.S. sovereignty." Fascist code for "Jews"

— Ben White (@morningmoneyben) October 13, 2016
Trump has trafficked in anti-Semitic caricatures, including the tweeting of a six-pointed star alongside a pile of cash. He has also been reluctant to condemn anti-Semitic attacks on journalists from his supporters, and he echoed neo-Nazi conspiracy theories by saying that Hillary Clinton “meets in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of U.S. sovereignty in order to enrich these global financial powers, her special interest friends and her donors.”

In a White House meeting with a Korean-American intelligence analyst briefing him on Pakistan, Trump wondered aloud why she was not working on North Korea policy.

Trump once referred to a Hispanic Miss Universe as “Miss Housekeeping.”


At a June 2016 campaign rally, Trump pointed to one attendee and said: “Oh, look at my African-American over here. Look at him.”

According to Michael Cohen, his former lawyer, Trump has privately made disparaging remarks about minority neighborhoods in Chicago, countries run by black people, an African-American contestant on “The Apprentice” and African-American voters.

Trump has nominated or appointed multiple people with a history of making racist comments.

Trump parroted a racist conspiracy theory about the alleged killing of white South African farmers.

[Giono]

Plenty of indicators seem to be flashing for a big recession about to hit, at least in part due to The Great Man’s trade wars.  If that’s right you’d hope it’s good news politically, if not in terms of human misery.

The yield curve is inverted. That is one big sign. It could be down freakishly to something else, but the inversion of the curve is normally a signal of a coming recession.

[Chakan]

And uses it to get his mug on TV more.

Worked for him in the past, works today. Gets away with everything.

[jambutty]

Worked for him in the past, works today. Gets away with everything.

I'm waiting for him to shoot a woman in a hijab on 5th Ave.

[Giono]

Worked for him in the past, works today. Gets away with everything.

Journos get tired of the same old shtick.

He didn't get away with the "caravans" thing before 2018. He is not getting away with this one either.

Most of the Dem politicians to oppose him are senate candidates that must win state-wide elections and folks in the house in purple districts.

[Chakan]

Journos get tired of the same old shtick.

He didn't get away with the "caravans" thing before 2018. He is not getting away with this one either.

Most of the Dem politicians to oppose him are senate candidates that must win state-wide elections and folks in the house in purple districts.

Journo's get tired of the same of schtick? They still report every single thing he does.

Come on mate, he's gotten away with pretty much everything he's done since he got into office. The dems are the only ones that care about the country and the people, that hasn't changed.

[Red Beret]

Trump is used to getting away with shit. 

It's a power play.  He's getting increasingly desperate as the investigations take their toll, so he has to resort to every more grotesque wordplay.  And, as all weak men do, he tries to make himself look powerful - so he portrays this as him becoming bolder as he seemingly goes unchallenged.

The narrative he is trying to set is that the Democrats are too weak and/or scared to come after him, and so he is the man to lead.  But what doesn't go reported (or at least what goes unnoticed by his supporters) is that none of this stops or delays the investigations.  It just distracts from them. 

The breaking point will be when he IS challenged openly, in a manner that he can't distract from.  When his supporters try to square the circle that reality presents will determine Trump's response in those circumstances.

Trying to find the words to describe that scenario is difficult for me - but I'm guessing he will try to portray what has been building for years as a sudden, out of the blue attempt to oust him.  He'll try to paint it as a coup.

[Giono]

Journo's get tired of the same of schtick? They still report every single thing he does.

Come on mate, he's gotten away with pretty much everything he's done since he got into office. The dems are the only ones that care about the country and the people, that hasn't changed.

He's president of the united states. Of course they report it. And they have to apear impartial and show reverence for the position and institution. 

It's how they report it that is important. CNN and others called it racist from day 1. No debate. That's a step forward.

[Giono]

Trump is used to getting away with shit. 

It's a power play.  He's getting increasingly desperate as the investigations take their toll, so he has to resort to every more grotesque wordplay.  And, as all weak men do, he tries to make himself look powerful - so he portrays this as him becoming bolder as he seemingly goes unchallenged.

The narrative he is trying to set is that the Democrats are too weak and/or scared to come after him, and so he is the man to lead.  But what doesn't go reported (or at least what goes unnoticed by his supporters) is that none of this stops or delays the investigations.  It just distracts from them. 

The breaking point will be when he IS challenged openly, in a manner that he can't distract from.  When his supporters try to square the circle that reality presents will determine Trump's response in those circumstances.

Trying to find the words to describe that scenario is difficult for me - but I'm guessing he will try to portray what has been building for years as a sudden, out of the blue attempt to oust him.  He'll try to paint it as a coup.

Great take RB.

I wonder what will happen after primary season. Will the fear of Trump's base in primaries change into a fear of a state-wide electorate in a general for GOP senate candidates? Would this be the time they turn and cut him loose if they are going to?

[Red Beret]

Great take RB.

I wonder what will happen after primary season. Will the fear of Trump's base in primaries change into a fear of a state-wide electorate in a general for GOP senate candidates? Would this be the time they turn and cut him loose if they are going to?

primaries and elections are two different things.  Appeal to the base long enough to get the nomination, then move to the centre ground and hope half the electorate is dumb enough to forget what you said.  That includes the dumb fucks who voted for you in the primary who might wonder why you've moderated your stance since you got the nomination (because let's face it, they'll vote red regardless or not at all).

[Giono]

primaries and elections are two different things.  Appeal to the base long enough to get the nomination, then move to the centre ground and hope half the electorate is dumb enough to forget what you said.  That includes the dumb fucks who voted for you in the primary who might wonder why you've moderated your stance since you got the nomination (because let's face it, they'll vote red regardless or not at all).

Agree. I half think that Trump entertains his base with rallies and red meat in order to keep GOP politicians in check rather than as an election strategy. They fear his base.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

I think part of it is inexperience. Arguably, she's also one of a recent trend of Twitter politicians in the U.S., who seem to want instant results for complex problems, which is probably partially driven by the demands of vocal online supporters, who are a minority compared to the rest of the electorate

the twitter politician thing is a good shout, have seen people talk of her as someone to run in 2024 when you are essentially looking for her to do a trump (ie someone totally unqualified for the top job running because they’re good at making their points on social media), whilst at the same time finding the notion of trump being president crazy yet AOC being a great choice in 5 years time

[Rob Dylan]

I hope for all our sakes that putting amendments on a bill takes a little bit longer than typing three words.

My position is, as it always has been - Pelosi got nothing and rolled over. This isn't some extreme leftist position, there are a ton of people mad at her for this. And it's all she does. All the time. Your defense of her is essentially"she could do no more", which nobody else really agrees with. It smacks of bootlicking to be honest. You get more by delaying, obstructing, harrassing. Make it difficult for Trump to get anything. And if ultimately you end up in the same place, at least you have earned the respect of the people beneath you, instead of their contempt or outright rage.

I guess the difference is you think she tried and failed. I doubt she tried all that hard. I think she's complicit (alongside a lot of Dems) and would rather play by the rules and be a good politician than stand up for something.

My bad, sorry for that. And sorry to Rob too.

No worries.

Look, I get why people are frustrated and angry about it, and I'm certainly not saying that Pelosi is perfect. But I think you have to treat each situation on its own merits, and sometimes continuing to fight can be counter-productive. If this was just a normal bill that they were 100% against that had nothing positive in it, and they had no time constraints, then of course they could and should delay it, frustrate it, etc etc. But that wasn't the situation here. There was an urgent need for some funding to ease the situation at the border. This bill offered some funding - not in the form that the Democrats wanted, but better than no funding at all. Once it became clear that the Democrat bill had no chance of passing, and given the urgent need and the fact that they had to do some kind of deal before the recess, it was always going to be the Republican bill, in some form or another, which got passed.

Without knowing exactly what was or wasn't discussed in the negotiations, what Pelosi did or didn't try to get, what was on the table and what was never possible, neither of us can really say whether she tried hard enough or did enough. We just don't know. What we do know is that the Democratic bill was never going to pass, and that the Republicans will always refuse to make any major concessions - there's no incentive for them to do so, because they have the majority in the Senate, and they probably didn't even care if the bill went through - if it passed, they could take the credit, if it didn't, they could blame the Democrats.

So once it was clear there would be no major concessions from the GOP, they had a choice - keep fighting in the knowledge you won't get anything, or support the bill. If you keep fighting, one of two things will happen - either the bill will pass anyway, and the GOP will accuse you of being hypocrites who are only interested in political posturing but refused to provide any funding when it came to the crunch; or the bill would fail, and there would be no funding at all to help the migrants at the border - AND the GOP would blame you and accuse you of hypocrisy etc. Neither outcome is ideal. It's all very well earning people's respect by acting tough, but if it doesn't get the outcome you want, or worse still, doesn't provide any funding at all, it's pretty worthless - you look tough but could potentially worsen the situation for those at the border.

To say that Pelosi is 'complicit' in Trump's crimes is inaccurate as well. If she'd voted for a bill which brought in the family separation policy and putting kids in cages, then yes I'd agree with you. But just voting for a bill that doesn't end those policies is not the same thing, given that they were never going to be changed by this bill. She has ensured at least some funding for the border situation, which is better than nothing.

It's also wrong to say that she 'always' rolls over - for example, she didn't do that with the government shutdown, and Trump was made to look a fool when he eventually agreed to the deal he had rejected weeks before.

People are entitled to be angry about all this and I get why they're using Pelosi and this specific situation as a focus for their frustration, but just because they're angry it doesn't necessarily mean they're 100% right.

Anyway, each day brings a new sack of Trump-related shit, maybe we should move on to whatever his latest atrocity is!

[Red Beret]

Agree. I half think that Trump entertains his base with rallies and red meat in order to keep GOP politicians in check rather than as an election strategy. They fear his base.

I agree with that assessment also.

[Rob Dylan]

Pelosi introduces a motion condemning Trump's comments and calling them racist, Republicans try to have her words stricken from the record, House votes not to do so. Still awaiting the vote on the motion to denounce Trumps comments. What a farce American politics is.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/16/pelosi-trump-racism-resolution-1417365

https://mobile.twitter.com/kylegriffin1