The Trump Presidency

[ThunderHorse]

Here's a better over/under: Democrats, who do poorly in mid-terms, winning back control of the Congress?

Also, people who think California is secure for the Dems maybe want to tell moonbeam to stop calling his citizens "freeloaders."

 

[Ooh-Rah]

Also, people who think California is secure for the Dems maybe want to tell moonbeam to stop calling his citizens "freeloaders."

Assuming you are talking about Governor Jerry Brown? Cause you know, using his real name would have been too easy, and I enjoy having to Google have your posts just to get whatever obscure reference you are trying to make.

 

[Marauder06]

Here's a better over/under: Democrats, who do poorly in mid-terms, winning back control of the Congress?

I think that's highly likely.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

Slight thread drift, but I am looking for a few trusted online sources to read daily. A friend recommended Foreign Policy | the Global Magazine of News and Ideas.

Any experience with this site, and is it worth the $6/month subscription?

 

[ThunderHorse]

Assuming you are talking about Governor Jerry Brown? Cause you know, using his real name would have been too easy, and I enjoy having to Google have your posts just to get whatever obscure reference you are trying to make.

Sadly, because of clickbait, it took me more than a few minutes to find a source that wasn't quoting Breitbart. The original source is the OC Register: Gov. Brown defends gas tax, local legislator – Orange County Register

Tax burden in California is getting ridiculous. Most of it's their own damned fault.

@Ooh-Rah is it $6/month only for the online subscription or does that include the hard copy? There's a lot of good writing that hits their hard copy.

 

[Salt USMC]

Here's a better over/under: Democrats, who do poorly in mid-terms, winning back control of the Congress?

Also, people who think California is secure for the Dems maybe want to tell moonbeam to stop calling his citizens "freeloaders."

I'm going to use the Montana and Georgia special elections as a barometer for the midterms. If both Quist and Ossoff win, I think that's a pretty good indicator that the Trump presidency is going to significantly weigh down house republicans in 2018. Really though, only the house is up for grabs. There are 33 senate seats up for re-election in 2018, but most of them have democrat incumbents. If I recall, there's a max of 8 seats that the democrats could gain, and they would need to get half of those PLUS win every democrat senate race in order to retake the senate. I think that's quite unlikely.

 

[Il Duce]

Slight thread drift, but I am looking for a few trusted online sources to read daily. A friend recommended Foreign Policy | the Global Magazine of News and Ideas.

Any experience with this site, and is it worth the $6/month subscription?

I subscribe to that service and really like it. I don't read every issue cover to cover - as some of the articles are better than others - but I find a lot of the stuff really interesting. I especially like the article critiques - then letters back and forth arguing over the points. I get a lot from hearing really smart people argue about important topics - you really get a sense of what meaningful disagreement can yield, versus the largely emotion-driven disagreement I feel like we see everywhere else. I also really like their periodic 'explainer' pieces. It's been several years for me since grad school and it's very helpful to get a refresher on key concepts and arguments in international relations and political science. They did one on the liberal order - as in, what are political scientists referring to when they use that term - that was very helpful. I think a lot of times when it's referred to in the news people focus in on the word 'liberal' and don't recognize the importance.

Just my $0.02

EDIT: @Ooh-Rah I am totally fucked up. I subscribe to Foreign Affairs and get that stuff - not Foreign Policy. My apologies. This reading shit is hard - that's the 2nd time in a couple months that's happened. Time to look into some hooked on phonics or something.

 

[racing_kitty]

^^^ @Il Duce might want to look into a crayon supplement for his diet. It seems to be helping the Marines rather well.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

I subscribe to that service and really like it.

@Il Duce - Many thanks for the recommendation! They offered me an unrefundable lifetime subscription fee, and if someone of your stature, intellect and accomplishments read it, it was a no brainer! Best $1k I ever spent!!!!

 

[Dienekes]

Slight thread drift, but I am looking for a few trusted online sources to read daily. A friend recommended Foreign Policy | the Global Magazine of News and Ideas.

Any experience with this site, and is it worth the $6/month subscription?

I use that fairly often. I get their daily Sitrep and the DefenseNews Early Bird Report. FP does a good job of having some very interesting articles explaining international relations experts' views on things because it comes directly from them but in a way that the non-scholar can understand. I also like their blog channels like Best Defense, Elephants in the Room, Shadow Government, Economy, etc. It really is a great resource.

ETA: Your new subscription post came up as I finished writing.

 

[Marine0311]

^^^ @Il Duce might want to look into a crayon supplement for his diet. It seems to be helping the Marines rather well.

Did someone say "crayon"?

 

[Il Duce]

@Il Duce - Many thanks for the recommendation! They offered me an unrefundable lifetime subscription fee, and if someone of your stature, intellect and accomplishments read it, it was a no brainer! Best $1k I ever spent!!!!

Glad to be of assistance but I have to run, a very nice Bangladeshi IRS agent has called and it turns out I owe the IRS a ton of money. I need to run out and buy iTunes gift certificates to read to him over the phone so I don't get arrested. I think I'm really dodging a bullet here.

First though, let me grab a purple and magenta for energy.

 

[Marauder06]

Slight thread drift, but I am looking for a few trusted online sources to read daily. A friend recommended Foreign Policy | the Global Magazine of News and Ideas.

I hear The Havok Journal is pretty good. ;)

 

[AWP]

This reading shit is hard.

You're ready for a brigade. No question.

 

[Il Duce]

You're ready for a brigade. No question.

I was thinking healthcare policy - but I'll take it.

 

[ThunderHorse]

So now we have an "American Official," rather than a "Former White House Official." Paywall is down for me so I'm actually able to read this: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1

This is some bizarro world shit right there...still waiting for the name of said official who's willing to go to jail.

 

[Salt USMC]

So now we have an "American Official," rather than a "Former White House Official." Paywall is down for me so I'm actually able to read this: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1

This is some bizarro world shit right there...still waiting for the name of said official who's willing to go to jail.

Dude, the words come from an OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE TRANSCRIPT of the meeting. Sean Spicer even confirmed it. This is not some anonymously-sourced statement; this is the White House saying that the president may have admitted to obstruction of justice.

Come on dude.

 

[Il Duce]

I'm not sure those statements amount to obstruction of justice - they just add more proof that President Trump has been saying a bunch of different shit on the Comey thing.

Still, it's pretty telling the topics he chose to speak on with the Russians and the reasoning he gave. I'm still not convinced of the Russia collusion thing on President Trump's part (parts of his administration, yes) - but he makes it really hard to believe there's nothing there. I think regardless of what's actually there the administration's - and especially the President's - activities in trying to squelch this thing are going to send some folks to jail.

 

[Salt USMC]

I'm not sure those statements amount to obstruction of justice - they just add more proof that President Trump has been saying a bunch of different shit on the Comey thing.
.

When taken in context of the statements made to Lester Holt, wherein he said that he intended to fire Comey even before the the deputy AG's recommendation came down, it certainly begins to sound like it.

 

[Il Duce]

When taken in context of the statements made to Lester Holt, wherein he said that he intended to fire Comey even before the the deputy AG's recommendation came down, it certainly begins to sound like it.

I think that Lester Holt interview is the perfect encapsulation of President Trump's tendency to lie continuously - and thus at the heart of most of the problems he's had. The interview is a perfect example of how President Trump starts out with pretty bold untruths (Comey asked for a meeting because he was concerned about..), is called on it by Holt immediately in a non-threatening way to 'clarify' as he knows they'll come up later, and President Trump adjusts to smaller lies, or gives himself wiggle room immediately - but keeps saying things that are false but harder to prove (Comey brought up the investigation, or President Trump brought it up but with caveats about only in a legal way).

It's exactly what journalists who covered President Trump as a real estate magnate the last 25 years have talked about (Fresh Air did a number of great interviews with folks like that during the campaign). President Trump, during his business career, was an exceptional marketer and promoter - but did so through the tricks of a con artist. He was a serial exaggerator/fabricator/liar in service to his brand and business - and it generally worked out.

I can definitely see how those skills and tendencies would follow someone into the oval office - I mean, why change if it got you that far? But, it's untenable in the job from a competency perspective. Time will tell how tenable it is from a political perspective. I've read most of the conservative media covered the Lester Holt interview as 'look how much this asshole liberal media guy interrupted the President.' I'm not sure there is a volume of untruths or scandals that will drop the President below 38% approval - and he's already proven he can win with that.