What Do You Think Of Donald Trump?

Love this Jonathan Pie, uses my favourite word, inbetween expressing his madness, anger towards D. Turmp! Hahaha!!! Did you hear it?? 2'16"
I know it's bad, but couldn't help posting the link here!!!


 
  • Like
Reactions: DocMcStuffins
Whats most funny to me is how Trump lives in people's heads rent free.
Well, in a way it was also true with his predecessor. Including living in Trump's head (all his tweeting about him, paying detectives to prove he was not born in the U.S etc... the guy was clearly obsessed by Obama)
 
"A New York Times report on Trump’s remarks said it “was more typical of North Korean propagandists than it was of past American presidents.” Even Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) expressed displeasure at the remarks, saying, “all it’s going to do is bring us closer to some kind of serious confrontation.”

But back in 1993, President Bill Clinton gave perhaps an even starker warning to North Korea. In a trip to Seoul, South Korea, Clinton said that if North Korea gained and used a nuclear weapon “we would quickly and overwhelmingly retaliate.”

“It would mean the end of their country as they know it,” he said, according to a New York Times report at that time."

The only difference is Trump using Twitter.
 
"A New York Times report on Trump’s remarks said it “was more typical of North Korean propagandists than it was of past American presidents.” Even Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) expressed displeasure at the remarks, saying, “all it’s going to do is bring us closer to some kind of serious confrontation.”

But back in 1993, President Bill Clinton gave perhaps an even starker warning to North Korea. In a trip to Seoul, South Korea, Clinton said that if North Korea gained and used a nuclear weapon “we would quickly and overwhelmingly retaliate.”

“It would mean the end of their country as they know it,” he said, according to a New York Times report at that time."

The only difference is Trump using Twitter.

... and now the North-Korean regime does have the bomb, despite all the various forms of rhetoric by successive US presidents
 
He's been an extremely ineffective and incompetent president. I think if he solves the North Korean crisis somehow he'll save whatever legacy he has, but I doubt we'll see it come to resolve peacefully. Hoping that everyone in Japan stays safe, because if there's a war I know Seoul will be dust, not sure what would come of Japan though.
 
He's been an extremely ineffective and incompetent president. I think if he solves the North Korean crisis somehow he'll save whatever legacy he has, but I doubt we'll see it come to resolve peacefully. Hoping that everyone in Japan stays safe, because if there's a war I know Seoul will be dust, not sure what would come of Japan though.

Do you have any statistics/comparisons between his ineffectiveness and previous presidents?
 
Do you have any statistics/comparisons between his ineffectiveness and previous presidents?

If i recall, obama only passed one major piece of legislation in his first two years - obamacare. By that measure Trump is behind but it's early.

His legacy so far is the supreme court. But that was achieved by him getting elected, not much else.

But who cares? We all know he is an idiot and a grave threat to world peace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AliceInWonderland
a grave threat to world peace.
Thats a popular opinion with some people but in actuality its purely speculative.

Of course people also said the same thing about Obama. During his administration the US increased drone strikes by several hundred percent including killing a US citizen w/o court approval, Russia upped it proxy war in the Ukraine and annexed Crimea and the Syrian civil war intensified. Not to mention the increases in the conflicts he inherited in Afghanistan & Iraq despite his bullshit promises to exit the region.
 
During his administration the US increased drone strikes by several hundred percent including killing a US citizen w/o court approval, Russia upped it proxy war in the Ukraine and annexed Crimea and the Syrian civil war intensified

But it's OK because he looked so good on TV!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheScientist
and he got a Nobel Peace prize!
Hmmmm it's like everybody forgot the global financial crisis he inherited... and also Bin Laden was still alive at that time, if I remember well.
I'm not puppy fan of Obama , but frankly he could have done much worse given the cards he was handled at the beginning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: meiji
Hmmmm it's like everybody forgot the global financial crisis he inherited... and also Bin Laden was still alive at that time, if I remember well.
I'm not puppy fan of Obama , but frankly he could have done much worse given the cards he was handled at the beginning.
the 2008 crash was unrelated to the level of war. I'm glad he authorized the mission on Bin Ladin and increased drone strikes but was just pointing out that despite all the hype around POTUS Trump and potential war, people ignore the recent past so easily.

Also as @ShowaJidai pointed out, the threat of response to the DPRK isn't new either.
 
Russia upped it proxy war in the Ukraine and annexed Crimea and the Syrian civil war intensified
I could sound very biased (considering where I'm originally from), but I see this to be more of a failure of American government. It was possible to establish more or less balanced relationship back in 1991, but unfortunately that opportunity was not exercised.
 
I could sound very biased (considering where I'm originally from), but I see this to be more of a failure of American government. It was possible to establish more or less balanced relationship back in 1991, but unfortunately that opportunity was not exercised.
Don't know where you are from but I do personally remember several attempts to rebalance the US/RU relationship at and since 91. I'm also aware of multiple major shifts domestically in RU which make it impossible to lay the blame on the US's doorstep.
 
several attempts to rebalance the US/RU relationship at and since 91
None of them worked though and expansion of NATO along with forced independence of Kosovo didn't help either.
That being said, if Trump would be able to keep US/RU relationship at acceptable not leading to war level this would already be an achievement.
 
None of them worked though and expansion of NATO along with forced independence of Kosovo didn't help either.

If RU would stop being so worried about the "near abroad"/FSU/former colonies and focus on actual domestic matters, that would help a lot more. But thats not going to happen, it would be a completely ahistorical event for RU.

That being said, if Trump would be able to keep US/RU relationship at acceptable not leading to war level this would already be an achievement.

First off while RU has done quite a bit to modernize its military, they are still nowhere near the level of being able to engage with the US military. Their capability vs the US is now old school Moscow Center disinformation/kompromat level stuff and thats not going to get a shooting war going.
 
If RU would stop being so worried about the "near abroad"/FSU/former colonies and focus on actual domestic matters, that would help a lot more. But thats not going to happen, it would be a completely ahistorical event for RU.

I'm not defending the Russians by any means, but from a historical and geopolitical perspective, none of this is surprising. The main reason they had puppet states after WWII is that they lost 40 million people in the war and they didn't exactly want to deal with that again. After that was the US policy of containment, which to them looked a lot like 'encirclement'. The US set up treaties in Europe, South Asia, Southeast Asia, and East Asia with the explicit purpose of beating back any expansion of the USSR's sphere of influence. Then after the Soviet Union crumbled, you had a re-unified Germany, which Russia hasn't had great relationships with for a long long time, you had countries that were former Soviet client states joining NATO, including former USSR republics to the point where NATO is bordering most of Russia to their west.

Combine that with their rather crappy geography - they have maybe one or two ports they can use year-round, they have oil and gas pipelines that run mostly through territories that aren't exactly friendly and in a number of cases are politically volitile, and what's worse oil and gas prices are falling through the floor pretty much permanently. Given this it's really no surprise at all they aren't just 'focusing on actual domestic matters', and they are trying to disrupt a relatively united Europe, take over the Crimea, be a major player in the Middle East (war tends to improve oil prices), etc.

There's lots of people out there that look at Russia or China or even countries like Iran and attribute evil or even irrational intentions because they don't understand the history and geopolitical environment in which they are making the decisions they make.
 
but from a historical and geopolitical perspective, none of this is surprising.

Right, thats why I said "completely ahistorical". Not just 20th century, but in the full history of Russia.

a re-unified Germany, which Russia hasn't had great relationships with for a long long time,

This is a bit more complicated with the post reunification "Ostpolitik" tendency in Germany.

Given this it's really no surprise at all they aren't just 'focusing on actual domestic matters',

OK but understand in context that I was replying to the comment about "post 91" above in the comments.

There's lots of people out there that look at Russia or China or even countries like Iran and attribute evil or even irrational intentions because they don't understand the history and geopolitical environment in which they are making the decisions they make.

Its precisely because I make a point to learn history that I can see something as both evil and rational at the same time. o_O
 
Thanks for the explanation. I don't know who is doing the dividing. But the sharply divided media sources seem to be driving us apart. I can't talk with my conservative acquaintances any more - we see two completely different sets of facts for any issue.

I'm moving my response to a more appropriate thread, rather than the Trump mail order bride thread.

The media, in my opinion, share the blame regarding divisiveness. Controversy is news and Trump has been a ratings builder for years.

Now that he has his bully pulpit, Trump's actions and words make headlines every single day. I've never seen "Breaking News" so often.

I watch both CNN and Fox News just to keep informed. I'll have to say, at times, Fox News seems divided between Trump supporters and conservative Republican critics of Trump.

As for me, Trump's own words, not the ones he reads off the teleprompter reflect the evil in his heart. Pretty strong words, yes, I know, but in ways, not strong enough.

Putin must be a very happy man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AliceInWonderland
I can see something as both evil and rational

No doubt - the most evil people in history have operated on a very rational basis. Rationality has little to do with morality.
 
Trump's handling of the Charlottesville situation is a bit infuriating. There are also things that the Alt-Right did that really pisses me off on top of their tasteless and senseless memes that they posted. With all that being said, I will do a play from their play book in judging everyone from a group based off the actions of a few and apply it to all of them because it is only fair and call them all Racist.