Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)

[Karl Henning]

Karl, a question if I may: judging from the articles you link to, it's obvious that Trump is a disaster and a disgrace both for the US and the world at large, and possibly a strong indicator of humanity's failure as a species. Now, my question is: what's to be, or can be, done about it? More articles being written on the topic, and linked to here, is obviously not going to make Trump resign or the Congress impeach him. Anti-Trumpsters will rejoice in reading them and Trumpsters will rejoice in ignoring, mocking or refuting them, while Trump will still be in the White House. In the current situation, is there any legal, constitutional way of deposing him, other than electing another POTUS in 2020? If there is, then all time and energy should be dedicated to taking the necessary actions in order to achieve the desired result; if there is not, than all time and energy should be dedicated to finding and promoting the candidate which has the most chances of winning against him, Democrat or Republican. Other than that, all the talk and the indignation in the world will amount to nothing but words, words, words.

Impeachment is unlikely, firstly, Andrei, because the Republican Congress is fully immersed in the tank with The Reality TV Prez;  and not really desirable, in the second, because then we have President Pence.  On the one hand, it is unfortunate that  El Tupé is a laughable incompetent;  on the other, he is probably (yea, even to Liberals) preferable to Pence, because he (the President) is a laughable incompetent.

The odds are good that the Democrats will make substantial gains in Congressional representation in the mid-term elections;  but it remains rather a slender chance that they may become the majority party in the House of Representatives.  If that should happen, impeachment becomes a possibility.

This being an Internet thread about El Presidente Tupé, the medium is words, words, words—mutual information, and perhaps even discussion;  so I am not sure what your objection is 

[Todd]

If that should happen, impeachment becomes a possibility.

What about conviction by the Senate? 

[Todd]

From Comedy News Network (though it's all over the place): IMF: Trump tax cuts will boost global economy

The world is winning. 

(Before anyone offers a complaint that it's a short term boost, remember the immortal words of Lord Keynes: In the long run we are all dead.)

[zamyrabyrd]

The discussion between Dave Rubin and Gad Saad was a pleasant surprise and worth continuing once started.
As a scientist whose expertise has to do with human behavior, Saad gave some very good reasons why Trump is hated on a visceral level. DT simply "offends the aesthetic sense" of those who would like to breathe the rarified air of academe unpolluted by the realities of even where their salaries are coming from.

I thought I would stop with the ridiculous sounding "Ostrich Parasitic Syndrome" but instead gave it a listen.
Once what he calls post-modernism's declaration that there are no objective truths, it is easy to trace the evolution of feeling based beliefs rather than those predicated on reality. In other words, if I understand it correctly, if reason is no more an arbiter, then anything goes. Hence the easily offended sensibilities of those who don't have a structure of values to fall back on.

One can tie this in with attitudes towards Trump and Saad's ideas resonate with mine though he is Canadian and can't vote in a US election.  He says something about choosing a candiate based on a hierarchy of what a voter would like to see done. If it is immigration (could be something else like the economy) is at the top of the list, then between Clinton and Trump the person strongest on that issue would get the vote, NOT BECAUSE OF LOVE OR EVEN LIKE.

Please get that into your heads when mentioning "Tuperos". I really don't give a damn about Trump's personal life, although it is nice to know he doesn't drink nor smoke. If he does the job well, that is ALL I care about. In other words, I am NOT emotionally invested in him, either for or against.

Saad does make reference to the vile screeds he himself gets for just stating an opinion. There is something very wrong with not being able to discuss things civilly and agree to disagree.

I listened to this three-way discussion in the morning and was astonished at the acceptance of violence as a way to solve problems or get what you want. It shows a serious deterioration of civil society.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqsA0CBAzRg&t=2717s

[zamyrabyrd]

Funnier still is an email of Stormy Daniels from "many, many, many, years ago," published by Mother Jones, describing a sex act with Trump which caused Stephen Colbert to say: "We owe Oedipus an apology." I'll let Colbert explain: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-gMiiZOSYQ

Not funny at all - scurrilous, lowest level potty talk.

[kishnevi]

Trump does not offend my aesthetic sense.
Unless bigoted ignorance, executive incompetence, sociopathic narcissism,  and the morals of a con man are aesthetic matters.

[Florestan]

Impeachment is unlikely, firstly, Andrei, because the Republican Congress is fully immersed in the tank with The Reality TV Prez; and not really desirable, in the second, because then we have President Pence.  On the one hand, it is unfortunate that  El Tupé is a laughable incompetent;  on the other, he is probably (yea, even to Liberals) preferable to Pence, because he (the President) is a laughable incompetent.

Now you made me curious:

1. What could be worse than a laughable incompetent?

2. If Trump is actually not as bad a POTUS as Pence would be, then all time and effort should be dedicated to keeping Trump as POTUS for as long as possible, ie until the 2020 elections --- including praying for his health. Or not?

The odds are good that the Democrats will make substantial gains in Congressional representation in the mid-term elections;  but it remains rather a slender chance that they may become the majority party in the House of Representatives.  If that should happen, impeachment becomes a possibility.

Then until mid-term elections it is not possible to realistically evaluate the chances of an impeachment in any other way than by saying (as you did above) that for the time being, it is entirely possible that even a Democrat majority in the Congress might find Trump's removal undesirable and will not take any action in this respect; is this correct?

This being an Internet thread about El Presidente Tupé, the medium is words, words, words—mutual information, and perhaps even discussion;  so I am not sure what your objection is 

Technically it's not an objection but rather an observation: for a whole year you have been starting, spending and ending your GMG day by posting links to anti-Trump articles. I was just wondering whether you do it as a constructive action tending to a net result. That is all.

[Florestan]

The latest crop of Lefties do not understand that the only legitimate response, in a free and open society, to speech you find objectionable is more, not less, speech, as the Supreme Court has ruled on more than one occasion.

You're wrong. What they don't understand is the very concept of "a free and open society", or rather they understand it as a society where they alone should be both free to speak up their mind and free from any criticism, and where academic venues and careers should be open to them alone.

This site might be of relevant interest: https://heterodoxacademy.org/

[Karl Henning]

This is making the rounds, not without reason.  Not that his supporters mind yet another flip-of-convenience  0:)

[Karl Henning]

Trump does not offend my aesthetic sense.
Unless bigoted ignorance, executive incompetence, sociopathic narcissism,  and the morals of a con man are aesthetic matters.

That aside, he is the best President we've ever had.

[Karl Henning]

This is making the rounds, not without reason.  Not that his supporters mind yet another flip-of-convenience  0:)

"A shutdown falls on the President's lack of leadership. He can't even control his party and get people together in a room. A shutdown means the President is weak"

-Donald Trump 2013#TrumpShutdown #GOPshutdown #shutdown #governmentshutdown

[ritter]

This past Sunday on CBS Sunday Morning the feature story was about the issue of free speech on college campuses, especially the elite universities: it is being threatened as students protest speakers, shut down events and refuse to allow the expression of opinions that do not parrot the hard left.

They focused on Charles Murray who had been invited to speak at Middlebury College about his latest book, Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960–2010 (2012).  He was being introduced by the professor, whose Liberal credentials, according to CBS, are unimpeachable, when a student claque began chanting loudly and shut down the event.  While they were leaving the stage, some of the protesters physically attacked them, inflicting a concussion and whiplash on the professor, a middle-aged woman.

(What is ironic, these same students often chant slogans of an anti-fascist nature even while they represent the current form of fascism in our society.)

The professor stated later that it was unfortunate that the talk did not take place since she and other students had prepared hard questions for Murray, most likely about his earlier controversial book, The Bell Curve.

The latest crop of Lefties do not understand that the only legitimate response, in a free and open society, to speech you find objectionable is more, not less, speech, as the Supreme Court has ruled on more than one occasion.

However, there was one bright spot in the report.  Somewhat of a backlash is beginning to form; CBS cited the University of Chicago's letter to prospective students explaining that the school does not support "trigger warnings" or the creation of "intellectual safe spaces", nor does the school uninvite speakers or cancel scheduled talks.

Most interesting, San Antone. Thanks. And it's great to see my alma mater, the UofC, not falling into this trap.

I, being let's say of "center-left" inclinations myself, am horrified by these kind of attitudes. There's nothing new under the sun, though. Here in Spain, in 1936 (when the civil war had just broken out), philosopher Miguel de Unamuno could not finish a speech on a solemn occasion at the University of Salamanca because the fascist thugs, led by José Millán-Astray (founder of the Spanish Legion) would interrupt him (shouting, among other things, "Death to intelligence!"  ). Unamuno had to be escorted out of the hall by none other than Carmen Polo (wife of dictator-to-be Francisco Franco).

On the other side of the spectrum, let's not forget that even Theodor W. Adorno had to call the police to evict radical leftists from his lecture hall in 1969...

[Marc]

Apparently, too many Dems don't see much advantage coming from the shutdown i.c. the immigration debate: government is going to be open again. I guess this will be seen as a huge loss for Schumer.

[Florestan]

I, being let's say of "center-left" inclinations myself, am horrified by these kind of attitudes. There's nothing new under the sun, though. Here in Spain, in 1936 (when the civil war had just broken out), philosopher Miguel de Unamuno could not finish a speech on a solemn occasion at the University of Salamanca because the fascist thugs, led by José Millán-Astray (founder of the Spanish Legion) would interrupt him (shouting, among other things, "Death to intelligence!"  ). Unamuno had to be escorted out of the hall by none other than Carmen Polo (wife of dictator-to-be Francisco Franco).

You can safely bet that, were Unamuno to appear on campus today and began to speak, his speech would be soon disrupted and he'd have a hard time ever speaking again; not to mention that there would not be any Left equivalent of Carmen Polo to rescue him.

On the other side of the spectrum, let's not forget that even Theodor W. Adorno had to call the police to evict radical leftists from his lecture hall in 1969...

Yes, but he was the last person in the world entitled to complain about that; they just administered him a dose of the medication he prescribed to others. 

[Todd]

First, the bad news: Senate Votes Overwhelmingly to End Government Shutdown

Next, the good news: it's another continuing resolution that expires in February.  Jimmy Carter's one year shutdown record can still be broken.  Fingers crossed.

[Baron Scarpia]

Apparently, too many Dems don't see much advantage coming from the shutdown i.c. the immigration debate: government is going to be open again. I guess this will be seen as a huge loss for Schumer.

Whether it is a loss for Schumer depends on what happens during this short extension.

[Christabel]

Impeachment is unlikely, firstly, Andrei, because the Republican Congress is fully immersed in the tank with The Reality TV Prez;  and not really desirable, in the second, because then we have President Pence.  On the one hand, it is unfortunate that  El Tupé is a laughable incompetent;  on the other, he is probably (yea, even to Liberals) preferable to Pence, because he (the President) is a laughable incompetent.

The odds are good that the Democrats will make substantial gains in Congressional representation in the mid-term elections;  but it remains rather a slender chance that they may become the majority party in the House of Representatives.  If that should happen, impeachment becomes a possibility.

This being an Internet thread about El Presidente Tupé, the medium is words, words, words—mutual information, and perhaps even discussion;  so I am not sure what your objection is 

Not "discussion" so much as invective and abuse, I would say. 

[Christabel]

Karl, a question if I may: judging from the articles you link to, it's obvious that Trump is a disaster and a disgrace both for the US and the world at large, and possibly a strong indicator of humanity's failure as a species. Now, my question is: what's to be, or can be, done about it? More articles being written on the topic, and linked to here, is obviously not going to make Trump resign or the Congress impeach him. Anti-Trumpsters will rejoice in reading them and Trumpsters will rejoice in ignoring, mocking or refuting them, while Trump will still be in the White House. In the current situation, is there any legal, constitutional way of deposing him, other than electing another POTUS in 2020? If there is, then all time and energy should be dedicated to taking the necessary actions in order to achieve the desired result; if there is not, than all time and energy should be dedicated to finding and promoting the candidate which has the most chances of winning against him, Democrat or Republican. Other than that, all the talk and the indignation in the world will amount to nothing but words, words, words.

Good argument, as opposed to the emotion and intolerance displayed here by anti-Trump forces.  The Left's first and last refuge is emotion.  And that will be their undoing.

[SimonNZ]

Good argument, as opposed to the emotion and intolerance displayed here by anti-Trump forces.  The Left's first and last refuge is emotion.  And that will be their undoing.

Fact checking, calling out lies and debating is "doing something" and requires more than just emotions. A pretty rich accusation considering Trumps rally style and race baiting is strictly an appeal to emotions, and the lowest emotions at that.

...which may well be your undoing.

[Baron Scarpia]

Karl, a question if I may: judging from the articles you link to, it's obvious that Trump is a disaster and a disgrace both for the US and the world at large, and possibly a strong indicator of humanity's failure as a species. Now, my question is: what's to be, or can be, done about it? More articles being written on the topic, and linked to here, is obviously not going to make Trump resign or the Congress impeach him. Anti-Trumpsters will rejoice in reading them and Trumpsters will rejoice in ignoring, mocking or refuting them, while Trump will still be in the White House. In the current situation, is there any legal, constitutional way of deposing him, other than electing another POTUS in 2020? If there is, then all time and energy should be dedicated to taking the necessary actions in order to achieve the desired result; if there is not, than all time and energy should be dedicated to finding and promoting the candidate which has the most chances of winning against him, Democrat or Republican. Other than that, all the talk and the indignation in the world will amount to nothing but words, words, words.

Huh? No one "finds and promotes" the right candidate. The candidate emerges. That's what the words, words, words are for, so that the one that emerges is the right one.