Trump presidency

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:27 pm UTC

Or how about Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, who 'misplaced' a hundred million dollars in assets instead of declaring it before his confirmation hearing!

THAT SWAMP SURE LOOKS DRY KIDS
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

User avatar
WibblyWobbly
Can't Get No
Posts: 506
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 1:03 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby WibblyWobbly » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:33 pm UTC

I forgot about Mnuchin. I'm going back to the fetal position now.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:36 pm UTC

WibblyWobbly wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Honestly, Jeff Sessions is one of the better picks, because at very least he has attorney experience. Which is more than what can be said than like... every other pick. A lot of the attorney general job description involves not just policy, but a lot of day-to-day leadership and groundwork. Ex: Picking which cases the US Government focuses on (ex: Muslim Ban), as well as leading various intelligence agencies (FBI). Its the chief lawyer position.

Jeff Sessions got grossly different policy ideas, but he's actually qualified.

In contrast, we've got Betsy "I don't know crap about public schools", Dr. Ben Carson leading Urban Development, etc. etc.

Being a lawyer certainly isn't enough to give Sessions a pat on the back and carte blanche, but your point is fairly well taken, what with DeVos, Carson, and let's not forget Secretary of Energy nominee Rick "Wait, I'm in charge of the nukes?" Perry. That last one continues to scare me to no end.


Perry has a long history of governance however in one of the largest states. He was a Presidential candidate and not a terrible one either. Texas has the largest Compressed-Air Energy Storage plant in the USA (300+ MW of battery power stored inside of pipes inside of repurposed mines).

I dunno if Rick Perry had much to do with it, but the CAES plant was built while he was governor. At very least, he's not against (profitable) renewable energy and would understand the importance of energy storage in today's modern world.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:38 pm UTC

Rick Perry has a long history of governance in a state that has voted some real idiots into the governorship (cough*GWBush*cough) so, whatever.
Yes he was a terrible Presidential candidate. If you think otherwise you are braindead. Texas has some real good industry in it. You have got me there. I see no reason to connect that industry to Rick Perry the moron.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:40 pm UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:Yes he was a terrible Presidential candidate.


I'd basically pick Rick Perry over the next 5 options that were offered to me in the 2016 election.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
WibblyWobbly
Can't Get No
Posts: 506
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 1:03 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby WibblyWobbly » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:40 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
WibblyWobbly wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Honestly, Jeff Sessions is one of the better picks, because at very least he has attorney experience. Which is more than what can be said than like... every other pick. A lot of the attorney general job description involves not just policy, but a lot of day-to-day leadership and groundwork. Ex: Picking which cases the US Government focuses on (ex: Muslim Ban), as well as leading various intelligence agencies (FBI). Its the chief lawyer position.

Jeff Sessions got grossly different policy ideas, but he's actually qualified.

In contrast, we've got Betsy "I don't know crap about public schools", Dr. Ben Carson leading Urban Development, etc. etc.

Being a lawyer certainly isn't enough to give Sessions a pat on the back and carte blanche, but your point is fairly well taken, what with DeVos, Carson, and let's not forget Secretary of Energy nominee Rick "Wait, I'm in charge of the nukes?" Perry. That last one continues to scare me to no end.


Perry has a long history of governance however in one of the largest states. He was a Presidential candidate and not a terrible one either. Texas has the largest Compressed-Air Energy Storage plant in the USA (300+ MW of battery power stored inside of pipes inside of repurposed mines).

I dunno if Rick Perry had much to do with it, but the CAES plant was built while he was governor. At very least, he's not against (profitable) renewable energy and would understand the importance of energy storage in today's modern world.

But the Department of Energy also manages some of the largest budgets for basic scientific research in the US, not to mention a number of very important national laboratories which also perform some basic research of fundamental importance. Is he going to respect the role of research in technological innovation, or is he going to start slashing research because of climate change paranoia and the inability to understand the types of research that are going on? Are we going to shift to a paradigm of "Make it profitable in two years or GTFO"?

A history of governance is a very poor substitute for actual expertise when leading a cabinet-level department. Very poor.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:43 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
Fantastic Idea wrote:Yes he was a terrible Presidential candidate.


I'd basically pick Rick Perry over the next 5 options that were offered to me in the 2016 election.

That's not an argument for Rick Perry, though, you just say that you like him, that's just an argument that you have horrible opinions.
Are you in Texas, is that why?
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:46 pm UTC

WibblyWobbly wrote:But the Department of Energy also manages some of the largest budgets for basic scientific research in the US, not to mention a number of very important national laboratories which also perform some basic research of fundamental importance. Is he going to respect the role of research in technological innovation, or is he going to start slashing research because of climate change paranoia and the inability to understand the types of research that are going on? Are we going to shift to a paradigm of "Make it profitable in two years or GTFO"?

A history of governance is a very poor substitute for actual expertise when leading a cabinet-level department. Very poor.


I AM A MAJOR PROPONENT OF MAINTAINING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP IN THE AREA OF SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY. I SUPPORT THE ACADEMIC AND THE GOVERNMENT MISSION OF BASIC RESEARCH, EVEN WHEN YOU MAY NOT SEE THE RESULTS OF THAT FOR A GENERATION. OUR SCIENTISTS AND OUR LABS ARE THE ENVY OF THE WORLD I LOOK FORWARD TO VISITING THOSE LABS THIS YEAR.


Apologies for all caps, its how CSPAN formats their transcripts.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?421782-1/ ... on-hearing

I know this sounds pretty low-bar, but Rick Perry actually prepared for his confirmation hearing and had decent words to say. The same can't be said for other nominees.

Are you in Texas, is that why?


No.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:47 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Dark567 » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:47 pm UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:Sure, Dubya was an idiot and he was manipulated by fascists, but he made some effort to govern.

I think people calling W a fascist were mostly crying wolf, and just pissed about his policies. W really was never a threat to American democratic norms, institutional trust etc. etc. Trump on the other hand completely destroys institutional trust, actively tries to tear down democratic norms, tries to apply big lie tactics and out strong man opponents. I think the crying wolf on Fascism has made the word lose much of its meaning and now that an actual fascist is in power, people continue to just think we are crying wolf.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:53 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
I AM A MAJOR PROPONENT OF MAINTAINING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP IN THE AREA OF SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY. I SUPPORT THE ACADEMIC AND THE GOVERNMENT MISSION OF BASIC RESEARCH, EVEN WHEN YOU MAY NOT SEE THE RESULTS OF THAT FOR A GENERATION. OUR SCIENTISTS AND OUR LABS ARE THE ENVY OF THE WORLD I LOOK FORWARD TO VISITING THOSE LABS THIS YEAR.


Apologies for all caps, its how CSPAN formats their transcripts.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?421782-1/ ... on-hearing

I know this sounds pretty low-bar, but Rick Perry actually prepared for his confirmation hearing and had decent words to say. The same can't be said for other nominees.

Rick Perry also spent some of his time as governor opening up new Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites right up on top of very large very heavily used aquifers -not because it was good science, considering that the people he appointed to approve the project ignored the environmental review- but because the people sending Texas said waste were his donors.
That's a nice swamp he's got down in Texas, can't wait till he brings it to Washington.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Whizbang » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:54 pm UTC

I think people take the wrong message from that fable. Yes the moral is not to falsely alarm people for selfish reasons, but, even more importantly, if someone is set to watch for wolves, you fucking come running every time they call, no matter how many false positives. If you have a problem with false positives you replace or correct the watcher, not ignore the calls.

Of course this analogy breaks down somewhat because the watcher in this scenario is actually a large, shifting population, and there are other safety measures in place to prevent wolves, but still. Neglecting the outcry is not the answer.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:55 pm UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
Fantastic Idea wrote:Yes he was a terrible Presidential candidate.


I'd basically pick Rick Perry over the next 5 options that were offered to me in the 2016 election.

That's not an argument for Rick Perry, though, you just say that you like him, that's just an argument that you have horrible opinions.


I don't think you quite understand where I'm going with that. Actually list out the top five options of 2016.

* Trump
* Clinton
* Ted Cruz
* Kasich
* Rubio

Cruz and Rubio have proven themselves to be a spineless. Clinton had a lot of baggage, and Trump is Trump. Kasich was probably the least flawed of the final candidates, so its really between Kasich vs Perry. I know that Perry lost rather early in the 2016 cycle (like... dropped out in Oct 2015 or something like that IIRC).
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
WibblyWobbly
Can't Get No
Posts: 506
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 1:03 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby WibblyWobbly » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:55 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
WibblyWobbly wrote:But the Department of Energy also manages some of the largest budgets for basic scientific research in the US, not to mention a number of very important national laboratories which also perform some basic research of fundamental importance. Is he going to respect the role of research in technological innovation, or is he going to start slashing research because of climate change paranoia and the inability to understand the types of research that are going on? Are we going to shift to a paradigm of "Make it profitable in two years or GTFO"?

A history of governance is a very poor substitute for actual expertise when leading a cabinet-level department. Very poor.


I AM A MAJOR PROPONENT OF MAINTAINING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP IN THE AREA OF SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY. I SUPPORT THE ACADEMIC AND THE GOVERNMENT MISSION OF BASIC RESEARCH, EVEN WHEN YOU MAY NOT SEE THE RESULTS OF THAT FOR A GENERATION. OUR SCIENTISTS AND OUR LABS ARE THE ENVY OF THE WORLD I LOOK FORWARD TO VISITING THOSE LABS THIS YEAR.


Apologies for all caps, its how CSPAN formats their transcripts.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?421782-1/ ... on-hearing

I know this sounds pretty low-bar, but Rick Perry actually prepared for his confirmation hearing and had decent words to say. The same can't be said for other nominees.


Hmm, thanks for the quote; I didn't get to see any of the hearings. I will then hope that he means what he says; this kind of quote is often what funding agencies tell scientists and academics before slashing their budgets to the bone, especially when research is handed over to managers and not scientists (the lab I work for is going through the same sort of transition, and it's hurting everyone), which is the absolute most one can say about Perry's experience. Our scientists and labs are (I feel) still the envy of the world; let's hope he actually plans to continue that.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:57 pm UTC

Dark567 wrote:
Fantastic Idea wrote:Sure, Dubya was an idiot and he was manipulated by fascists, but he made some effort to govern.

I think people calling W a fascist were mostly crying wolf, and just pissed about his policies. W really was never a threat to American democratic norms, institutional trust etc. etc. Trump on the other hand completely destroys institutional trust, actively tries to tear down democratic norms, tries to apply big lie tactics and out strong man opponents. I think the crying wolf on Fascism has made the word lose much of its meaning and now that an actual fascist is in power, people continue to just think we are crying wolf.

Really? Everyone I know in other countries is like "Woah, you should do something, you've got a little fascist on you" so no, I don't agree that we're seen to be crying wolf.
But sure, he wasn't a fascist. (I didn't say he was, just some who manipulated him, but whatever.) But uhh Dubya was a threat to many institutional norms in America. Like how we vote, remember how we voted and then didn't get to actually have a President Gore? Or how Dubya tried to nominate someone completely astoundingly unqualified for the Supreme Court? Oh, and the time he started two illegal wars?
Those really get me, the illegal wars.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

Mutex
Posts: 1492
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Mutex » Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:02 pm UTC

Whizbang wrote:I think people take the wrong message from that fable. Yes the moral is not to falsely alarm people for selfish reasons, but, even more importantly, if someone is set to watch for wolves, you fucking come running every time they call, no matter how many false positives. If you have a problem with false positives you replace or correct the watcher, not ignore the calls.


My problem with that fable is, if the village is so dependent on the sheep, they need to be able to very quickly respond to a wolf attack. So by crying wolf, the boy was ensuring they were well practised in responding to an actual wolf attack. He should have been praised for proactively preparing the village for an emergency. It's basically the same as a fire alarm drill.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:07 pm UTC

WibblyWobbly wrote:[snip] is he going to start slashing research because of climate change paranoia and the inability to understand the types of research that are going on? Are we going to shift to a paradigm of "Make it profitable in two years or GTFO"?


I know I responded to your post already. But I found the other quote you were looking for:

Rick Perry wrote:“I believe the climate is changing. I believe some of it is naturally occurring, but some of it is also caused by man-made activity. The question is how do we address it in a thoughtful way that doesn’t compromise economic growth, the affordability of energy or American jobs.”


Which is a far more reasonable response than say... Trump's pick for EPA.

Also, on the DOE Climate Change questionnaire:

“That questionnaire went out before I was ever selected,” Perry said. “I didn’t approve it. I don’t approve of it. I don’t need that information. I don’t want that information.” He added, “I have a history of working with people to deal with the challenges that face us.”
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:10 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:09 pm UTC

Has Scott Pruitt agreed to stop suing the EPA yet, or is he seriously suing his own agency at this point?
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:45 pm UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Pivoting happens in politics a great deal. And it's something that can be done now, not a last election thing.

No I know that, except it doesn't happen half as much as people suggest that it does.
Every pundit said Trump was going to pivot to less-fascist policies. He uh, did exactly not that. Now I can't wait to watch Jeff Sessions make voting harder in this country for black people, his favorite activity!
Unless we think Jeff, Betsy, various Steves, and Tim are all gonna 'pivot' to be less self-serving and obtuse? You say every administration has a pile of hacks, this administration has LITERALLY NOTHING ELSE. There's nothing not to focus on. Everything he has done needs to be undone and we aren't even a month into this garbage.


Oh, the left were always going to call him fascist. Feh. That's as meaningless as the right calling someone a socialist or what have you.

Sessions is reasonable. I'd rather he wasn't so into asset forfeiture, but...such is life, I suppose. It's rare that you see people you agree with 100%. The guy has experience though.

Much like I won't deny that Clinton had experience, despite disagreeing with her on plenty of things. Yes, yes, everyone is partisan, but not everyone is equally unqualified.

Fantastic Idea wrote:Actually shitstain, my side 'lost' an election before, back in 2000 when the supreme court gave the win to the loser, and then when he got reelected.
This kind of tearing down of the government didn't happen. Not to this extreme extent. But back then the Senate still contained some people who thought 'Jeff Sessions is too racist for this position' so maybe they were making better decisions.
Sure, Dubya was an idiot and he was manipulated by fascists, but he made some effort to govern.


No, Gore did lose. Just as Clinton lost. Majority vote is interesting and helpful in some respects, but it doesn't make you the winner. People really did seem to hate Dubya at the time, though. Just like now.

I presume whoever wins in 2040 will also be denounced as Hitler, and worse than whoever preceded him as well.

Fantastic Idea wrote:Or how about Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, who 'misplaced' a hundred million dollars in assets instead of declaring it before his confirmation hearing!

THAT SWAMP SURE LOOKS DRY KIDS


I suspect that what Democrats and Republicans mean by draining the swamp are very different. Democrats have this idea of separating rich capitalists from political power as important. Leaving aside the question of how successful that is, Republicans do not appear to pursue this nearly so much. They seem to worry a great deal more about regulatory cost and such. Literally talking about different things, most of the time. Sure, sure, everyone's against corruption, but they don't even label the same things as corruption.

Whizbang wrote:I think people take the wrong message from that fable. Yes the moral is not to falsely alarm people for selfish reasons, but, even more importantly, if someone is set to watch for wolves, you fucking come running every time they call, no matter how many false positives. If you have a problem with false positives you replace or correct the watcher, not ignore the calls.

Of course this analogy breaks down somewhat because the watcher in this scenario is actually a large, shifting population, and there are other safety measures in place to prevent wolves, but still. Neglecting the outcry is not the answer.


Nah. Seriously, it's human nature to adjust reaction to reliability of something. If *anything* is wrong most of the time, it mostly gets ignored. Do you really think most people think twice before, say, clicking "ignore" on most security warnings from their browser? They don't care about how certificates are signed, so the more errors that pop up, the more they ignore them. It's fundamental to nearly anything.

The logical solution might be that this guy is pretty crap at watching for wolves, and maybe should be replaced.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:52 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
Fantastic Idea wrote:Or how about Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, who 'misplaced' a hundred million dollars in assets instead of declaring it before his confirmation hearing!

THAT SWAMP SURE LOOKS DRY KIDS


I suspect that what Democrats and Republicans mean by draining the swamp are very different. Democrats have this idea of separating rich capitalists from political power as important. Leaving aside the question of how successful that is, Republicans do not appear to pursue this nearly so much. They seem to worry a great deal more about regulatory cost and such. Literally talking about different things, most of the time. Sure, sure, everyone's against corruption, but they don't even label the same things as corruption.


That's actually a solid point.

In the Republican's minds... regulation in the EPA were designed to enhance solar companies at the cost of 'fair market' stuff. Republicans will see Scott Pruitt as a "Drain the Swamp" pick for the EPA, since he's clearly going to cut regulations and probably stop money going towards Solar companies that were allied with Obama.

Democrats are allergic to rich people however.

So the language "Drain the Swamp" really just means different things to the two groups. In fact, I'd bet you that some Republicans see Mnuchin as the "Outside of Washington CEO" and don't give a shit about conflicts of interest. The very fact that he's from the corporate world is seen as fulfillment of the "Drain the Swamp" promise.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:54 pm UTC

Wow, so 45 talked about the problems with Wall Street and said he'd drain the swamp in the same breath, but taking someone from Goldmann Sachs and putting them in charge of the Treasury is a fulfillment of his promise to drain the swamp? Ok, glad at least the voters know how to pivot.
He's put his family in his cabinet, refused to divest himself from his businesses, uses the office of the presidency to chastise companies for dropping his daughter's clothing line, given positions to people whose spouses or companies helped him on his campaign, happily directs foreign representatives to stay in the hotels he owns, but you believe he's 'draining the swamp'?

Democrats like to breathe clean air and drink clean water also! It's not JUST that we're allergic to rich people. We like the EPA cause we hate it when rivers catch on fire.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Feb 09, 2017 8:14 pm UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:Actually shitstain


Fantastic Idea wrote: If you think otherwise you are braindead.


Fantastic Idea wrote: that's just an argument that you have horrible opinions. Are you in Texas, is that why?


Fantastic Idea wrote:but you believe


Dude, I know a losing argument when I see one. I don't see any point in trying to defend myself against your accusations.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Soupspoon » Thu Feb 09, 2017 8:16 pm UTC

If Trump ever does drain the swamp, it seems it's because he's going to pump the water out to fill a different patch of damp ground, so as to benefit his own favoured species of 'gator that have unto now had to suffice with living in ponds of their own creation.

(And destroy at least two sort-of-livable-for-the-locals ecosystems in the process.)

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 09, 2017 8:23 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:Dude, I know a losing argument when I see one. I don't see any point in trying to defend myself against your accusations.

In my defense I meant the 'braindead' comment for the general you, as in 'anyone'.
No one is requiring you to reply to me. Least of all, me.

Soupspoon wrote:If Trump ever does drain the swamp, it seems it's because he's going to pump the water out to fill a different patch of damp ground, so as to benefit his own favoured species of 'gator that have unto now had to suffice with living in ponds of their own creation.

He's draining the Washington swamp and sending it to New York, which is much classier, and has huge office high-rises.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Feb 09, 2017 8:25 pm UTC

If we're going to be discussing this seriously, then perhaps we should be discussing things with actual rigor.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-rele ... -the-swamp

First: I am going to institute a 5-year ban on all executive branch officials lobbying the government after they leave government service.

Second: I am going to ask Congress to institute its own 5-year ban on lobbying by former members of Congress and their staffs.

Third: I am going to expand the definition of lobbyist so we close all the loopholes that former government officials use by labeling themselves consultants and advisors when we all know they are lobbyists.

Fourth: I am going to issue a lifetime ban against senior executive branch officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government.

Fifth: I am going to ask Congress to pass a campaign finance reform that prevents registered foreign lobbyists from raising money in American elections.


Democrats are the ones who have manipulated the message to make it seem like something else.

EDIT: Oh right, and the headline is for Congressional Term Limits. Believe it or not, Trump has moved forward on these five points as promised. Congressional Term Limits was never going to happen though.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 09, 2017 8:40 pm UTC

He did the first thing, at least
Also this article calls into question the usefulness of his new longer ban
http://www.newsweek.com/2017/02/17/dona ... 53809.html
Excerpt behind the spoiler, with relevant points about the new loopholes and old problems.
Spoiler:
It’s true that Trump’s ban, which restricts officials in his administration from lobbying their agency after they leave office, is longer—five years. It also permanently bans administration officials from lobbying for a foreign government and requires them to recuse themselves from any policymaking related to their former employers for their first two years in the administration. Watchdog groups cheered those measures but said they do little to close loopholes and opens some new ones.They point out that when Trump declared that “most of the people standing behind me will not be able to go to work” as lobbyists, that statement assumed the assembled staff would follow existing disclosure laws. The truth is, they’ll be able to use the “Daschle loophole,” as it’s become known, and claim they are “special advisers,” not lobbyists, even as they advocate for their corporate conglomerate clients with former colleagues. The president “could have closed loopholes” in the 2007-amended Lobbying Disclosure Act, says a release by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Chair Norm Eisen and Vice Chair Richard Painter. So while they credit the new order for “some positive features,” it “does not live up to his promise to drain the swamp.”
Lobbyists, meanwhile, say they have had little trouble gaining access to the Trump team. While transition officials instituted rules requiring registered lobbyists working on the transition to temporarily suspend their work and barred meetings with lobbyists at transition headquarters, it did nothing to stop them from advocating for their clients remotely. And as one senior lobbyist notes, “We did a lot of phone conversations” with Trump transition staff.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6598
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Thu Feb 09, 2017 8:44 pm UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:THAT SWAMP SURE LOOKS DRY KIDS


Well, considering Trump's cabinet picks have more wealth than the poorest one third of Americans combined, it looks to me like there was a ton of cash at the bottom of that swamp.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Zamfir » Thu Feb 09, 2017 8:47 pm UTC


Fantastic Idea, if you return to shitstain insults, you'll get a ban.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 09, 2017 8:48 pm UTC

Sorry sir.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Feb 09, 2017 11:37 pm UTC

US Court of Appeals: Washington v Trump -- Unanimous decision (3-0) to deny the temporary stay on Trump's executive order. (EDIT: Uggghhhh... the double-negative is the most precise way of saying what is going on).

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/o ... -35105.pdf

EDIT: The 9th Circuit Court also has a nifty timeline: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/content/vi ... 0000000860

In essence: a lower court ruled that Trump's executive order was overly broad. Team Trump appealed, and lost its appeal. The only option left is the Supreme Court, which would be silly and a waste of everybody's time.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4896
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: Trump presidency

Postby HES » Thu Feb 09, 2017 11:47 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:The only option left is the Supreme Court, which would be silly and a waste of everybody's time.

As if this was ever not going to the Supreme Court...
He/Him/His Image

User avatar
Liri
Healthy non-floating pooper reporting for doodie.
Posts: 1113
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 8:11 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Liri » Thu Feb 09, 2017 11:49 pm UTC

SC typically declines to hear cases that were unanimously decided in the Appeals Court, unless there's some overriding reason.

I may be talking out of my ass.
There's a certain amount of freedom involved in cycling: you're self-propelled and decide exactly where to go. If you see something that catches your eye to the left, you can veer off there, which isn't so easy in a car, and you can't cover as much ground walking.

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4896
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: Trump presidency

Postby HES » Thu Feb 09, 2017 11:54 pm UTC

Liri wrote:unless there's some overriding reason.

Does POTUS throwing a tantrum count?
He/Him/His Image

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Feb 09, 2017 11:59 pm UTC

HES wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:The only option left is the Supreme Court, which would be silly and a waste of everybody's time.

As if this was ever not going to the Supreme Court...


The Executive order, as awful as it was, is temporary. So Trump's team needs to get a move on immediately and that means working with a 4-4 Supreme Court. Even if Neil Gorsuch’s were confirmed tomorrow, it will be a 4-4 court due to how quickly Trump's team needs to act. Apparently... it takes a lot of time to go from nominee -> Supreme Court Justice

The executive order dies today, unless one of the liberal justices have a heart attack and a 4-3 decision becomes likely.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Dark567 » Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:45 am UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:
Dark567 wrote:
Fantastic Idea wrote:Sure, Dubya was an idiot and he was manipulated by fascists, but he made some effort to govern.

I think people calling W a fascist were mostly crying wolf, and just pissed about his policies. W really was never a threat to American democratic norms, institutional trust etc. etc. Trump on the other hand completely destroys institutional trust, actively tries to tear down democratic norms, tries to apply big lie tactics and out strong man opponents. I think the crying wolf on Fascism has made the word lose much of its meaning and now that an actual fascist is in power, people continue to just think we are crying wolf.

Really? Everyone I know in other countries is like "Woah, you should do something, you've got a little fascist on you" so no, I don't agree that we're seen to be crying wolf.
But sure, he wasn't a fascist. (I didn't say he was, just some who manipulated him, but whatever.) But uhh Dubya was a threat to many institutional norms in America. Like how we vote, remember how we voted and then didn't get to actually have a President Gore? Or how Dubya tried to nominate someone completely astoundingly unqualified for the Supreme Court? Oh, and the time he started two illegal wars?
Those really get me, the illegal wars.

Although we should definitely not ignore other countries when they call us fascist, that hardly means it is really the case.

Even in retrospect the result of the 2000 election, is very much up in the air:
Spoiler:
wiki wrote: Under the strategy that Al Gore pursued at the beginning of the Florida recount — filing suit to force hand recounts in four predominantly Democratic counties — Bush would have kept his lead, according to the ballot review conducted by the consortium. Likewise, if Florida's 67 counties had carried out the hand recount of disputed ballots ordered by the Florida Supreme Court on December 8, applying the standards that election officials said they would have used, Bush would have emerged the victor by 493 votes. On the other hand, the study also found that if the official vote-counting standards had not rejected ballots containing overvotes (where a voter marks a candidate's name and also writes it in) a statewide tally would have resulted in Gore emerging as the victor by 60 to 171 votes. These tallies conducted by the NORC consortium are caveated with the statement: "But no study of this type can accurately recreate Election Day 2000 or predict what might have emerged from individual battles over more than 6 million votes in Florida's 67 counties."
I would hardly call the fact it came out in Bush's favor fascist.

Yes, W tried to nominate someone unqualified to SCOTUS... and the GOP helped reject that person. Once the GOP rejected him, Bush moved on to a new nominee. Do you think Trump would do that and not bitch and moan about how the GOP(and the Dems) are lying and slandering his nominee?

Two illegal wars??? Come on. Yes he did not officially declare war, but the last time the US declared war was against Nazi Germany. This means Korea, Vietnam, and the Gulf War(and others) were all illegal by that standard. Congress gave him the authority to conduct military operation in Afghanistan and Iraq like they did for all those previous wars. If this is a breaking of norms, they were broken long before GWB took office.

In another period of time I would tell you to stop crying wolf against fascism. Unfortunately, this time with our current President you would be right.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6814
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Fri Feb 10, 2017 5:30 am UTC

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/09/worl ... etter.html
After some schooling, Trump's administration had Trump pledge to a 1 China policy. This marks a departure from the crazy couple weeks where he wanted to kick off World War III in Asia. Is this a betrayal of his white uneducated factory workers? Who cares, war averted for another couple months.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Fri Feb 10, 2017 3:41 pm UTC

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... 456a4021da

Here's an important tidbit:

4. The court isn’t sure — at this stage — whether there is proof that the executive order discriminates against Muslims.


So judges don't like setting precedent when they don't have to. So in short, Trump remains able to just rewrite the executive order and issue a new one. Especially since the underlying constitutionality of the executive order hasn't been technically ruled on in court yet.

I've heard on the news that there's a set of judges looking into the executive order from a constitutional perspective, which would generalize to future EOs the President writes. But for now, "Washington v Trump" is purely about temporary rulings and doesn't have any broad applicability. So the "war" isn't over yet... see "Washington v Trump" as only the first of many battles.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
WibblyWobbly
Can't Get No
Posts: 506
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 1:03 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby WibblyWobbly » Fri Feb 10, 2017 4:28 pm UTC


User avatar
MartianInvader
Posts: 809
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 5:51 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby MartianInvader » Fri Feb 10, 2017 6:53 pm UTC

So we're comparing Trump to George W Bush now? Sure, Bush was more competent, but let's not forget that he set the "horrific" bar pretty high at torturing people. I'm unhappy with almost everything Trump has done so far, yet I'm still not sure I find it as bad as the torture program W implemented and the precedent it set.
Let's have a fervent argument, mostly over semantics, where we all claim the burden of proof is on the other side!

Mutex
Posts: 1492
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Mutex » Fri Feb 10, 2017 7:22 pm UTC

Well, if anything remotely like 9/11 happens with Trump in power, W's torture program will look like a walk in the park. W had some restraint at least, he made a point of not blaming all muslims for 9/11 for a start.

User avatar
kingofdreams
Posts: 437
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 4:31 pm UTC
Location: An avatar making factory

Re: Trump presidency

Postby kingofdreams » Fri Feb 10, 2017 8:16 pm UTC

I can believe the Bush-era torture program would pale in comparison to Trumps. It doesn't mean it was any less a betrayal of what were supposed to be American values, nor that it didn't undermine American credibility world wide. If one had a mind to one could say it normalized the behavior so as to be more palatable to U.S. voters since there's precedent (but that feels like a crock of shit, extremists likely don't really care about precedent).
Picard- I shall appoint you my executive officer in charge of radishes


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests