Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Which in turn leads to a higher likelihood of impeachment anyway.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/09/health-care-bill-conservative-senators-revolt-239364
The Senate still doesn't seem to be having much luck with healthcare. According to this, the current form of the Senate healthcare bill already has two Republican senators ready to vote no with others potentially willing to do so, which would doom its passing.
edited 10th Jun '17 6:20:24 AM by sgamer82
From the previous page:
"Though I'm fairly certain I already know the answer, were the GOP already branding Obama the worst president ever at this point in his presidency?"
Yes. There were a couple sketches on Late Night with Conan O'Brien and The Tonight Show With Conan O'Brien making fun of this.
One was interviewing people on the street in late January '09 what they think of the president so far. They all have bad things to say about him, most of them using unfair measuring methods ("I judge Obama solely by how my finger smells on a daily basis! [sniff] NOT GOOD!")
Another, from June '09, was an attack ad showing Obama making honest mistakes like tripping or reading a name off the teleprompter wrong, and the ad ends with: "Barack Obama just might be the WORST. PRESIDENT. EVER."
edited 10th Jun '17 6:56:01 AM by speedyboris
Impeachment has no chance until and unless the special prosecutor comes back with something damning — either that Trump directly worked with Russia during the election, or knew that his staff was and covered it up. That will be the time to call for impeachment. Try to do it before then and the public will write it off as a political stunt. Do it after the investigation has released its findings, and Republicans in Congress are forced to either help remove their own president, or go on record as defending him even after an independent investigation has concluded against him. Either way, the Trump administration will be effectively neutered and it's going to play very badly for the Republicans next election.
More importantly, it underlines the seriousness of the situation and of impeachment proceedings. Impeachment should not be used as a blunt tool to bludgeon your opponent with to score political points. But if the investigation into Trump finds credible evidence of serious wrongdoing, then he absolutely should be impeached for them. The Democrats need to keep the moral high ground here, make it clear that they're putting the interests of the country first and foremost, not just playing politics.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.Cutting off from the impeachment talk for a bit (though I'd advise you all to read this if you're thinking about it
), former President of Mexico Vicente Fox did 2 videos mocking Trump, first is called A Message for Donald Trump from Former Mexican President Vicente Fox
, and the second is Another Message for Donald Trump from Former Mexican President Vicente Fox
. They're good for a couple laughs.
![]()
But it may not be enough to patch things over with his NATO allies after his visit last month to Brussels, where Trump gave a public tongue lashing that surprised NATO leaders and his national security team alike — because behind closed doors, things were even worse.
After a public showing on May 25 in which Trump refused to endorse NATO’s collective defense clause and famously shoved the Montenegrin leader out of the way, leaders of the 29-member alliance retired to a closed-door dinner that multiple sources tell Foreign Policy left alliance leaders “appalled.”
Trump had two versions of prepared remarks for the dinner, one that took a traditional tack and one prepared by the more NATO-skeptic advisors, Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon. “He dumped both of them and improvised,” one source briefed on the dinner told FP.
During the dinner, Trump went off-script to criticize allies again for not spending enough on defense. (The United States is one of only five members that meets NATO members’ pledge to spend 2 percent of GDP on defense.)
Several sources briefed extensively on the dinner say he said 2 percent wasn’t enough and allies should spend 3 percent of GDP on defense, and he even threatened to cut back U.S. defense spending and have Europeans dole out “back pay” to make up for their low defense spending if they didn’t pony up quickly enough. Two sources say Trump didn’t mention Russia once during the dinner.
“Oh, it was like a total shitshow,” said one source, who spoke on condition of anonymity as they weren’t authorized to discuss the closed-door dinner.
“The dinner was far worse than the speech,” said a former senior U.S. government official briefed on dinner. “It was a train wreck. It was awful.”
NATO headquarters declined to comment on the dinner. “This was a confidential dinner of allied leaders and we respect their confidence,” a NATO spokesperson said.
Trump’s actions during his Brussels visit, both in public and behind closed doors, shed light on how the transatlantic relationship has soured in just the few short months since Trump took office.
His decision to deliberately omit a line of his speech in which he pledged to honor NATO’s Article 5 collective defense clause also showcases another example of Trump going off script — a move that blindsided his national security team, as Politico reported.
Jim Townsend, the former top Pentagon envoy to NATO during President Barack Obama’s administration, said the visit damaged Washington’s standing with its closest allies. “[Trump] has no self control,” Townsend said. “He made his point — rudely, I thought — so why not use the dinner behind closed doors to talk about anything: Russia, strategy, Afghanistan. He didn’t.”
After Trump’s performance in Brussels, top European leaders including German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron publicly criticized Trump in unusually stark tones. Meanwhile, just two weeks after the Brussels visit, Canada announced it would boost defense spending because it can no longer rely on the United States for global leadership.
On Friday, he reiterated claims — widely debunked — that NATO allies “owe” back pay for years past it didn’t reach its 2 percent defense spending threshold. “Do we ever go back and say how about paying the money from many many years past?” Trump said. “Now I know no president has ever asked that question. But I do,” he added. “Perhaps you should pay some or all of that money back.” (As former officials pointed out, Washington decides for itself how much it spends on NATO, and defense spending in NATO isn’t a financial transaction where allies “buy into” U.S. defense commitments.)
He also took credit for the alliance’s decision to boost defense spending. “Because of us, money is starting to pour into NATO,” Trump said.
NATO first announced a plan for all of its members over the course of the next decade to reach the 2 percent threshold in September 2014, over two years before Trump was elected. Experts and NATO officials say Russia, not Trump, prompted the move.
In fact, the president’s hounding of allies to spend more on defense could have the opposite effect in Europe.
“The public lecturing is counterproductive,” said Ivo Daalder, former U.S. ambassador to NATO, now with the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Boosting defense spending is an uphill political battle in many parts of Europe. Trump’s deep unpopularity on the Continent doesn’t help the matter, particularly in Germany, the Continent’s economic and political powerhouse. That means leaders could walk away from pledges to increase spending “because they don’t want to appear to be bowing to Trump,” Daalder told FP.
“President Trump could not have chosen a worse strategy to getting Germany to spend more on defense,” said Tomas Valasek, who served as Slovakia’s ambassador to NATO for four years up until April.
Earlier this week, Vice President Mike Pence was deployed to clean up the diplomatic carnage Trump left behind in Brussels. During an Atlantic Council awards dinner Monday night, Pence pledged “unwavering” U.S. commitment to NATO. He also lavished praise on the prime minister of Montenegro, whom Trump shoved aside in Brussels during a photo op. But “allies were taking [Pence’s speech] with a grain of salt,” Alexander Vershbow, former NATO deputy secretary-general, told FP.
And Trump’s remarks Friday may not cut it. “He gets partial credit for finally saying it,” said Julie Smith, a former senior White House official during President Barack Obama’s administration now with the Center for a New American Security. “But many allies felt the right time to say it was on his first trip to NATO when all members were present. They won’t easily forget that he deliberately removed that line when he spoke in Brussels.”
And the fact that his pledge to Article 5 was prompted by a question from a journalist instead of in prepared remarks won’t help the matter, said Jorge Benitez, a NATO expert at the Atlantic Council. “Trump’s improvised and conditional statement about NATO’s Article 5 is not how to reassure allies and certainly not how to deter Russian aggression,” said Benitez.
edit: ugh, page topper. This was the article from the last page about how Trump made an even bigger mess at the NATO dinner.
edited 10th Jun '17 10:24:24 AM by nightwyrm_zero
The article is right about Germany, btw. Germans are always very much against high defence spending - not because they think that the US will protect them, but because they feel that the simple protection of the country doesn't require a ridiculously big military. Plus, it is common wisdom that starting a competition with Great Britain over who has more ships was one of the factors which lead to World War I. Throw in the experience of the Cold War in which Germany was pretty much the main battle ground where never fell a shot, from the point of view of a German spending more on military only leads to other following suit, which then leads to a spiral of spending more and more on something which isn't really needed if you can just as well say: Yeah, attack us and become the pariah of the world while your economy falls apart since you just cut off your supplier.
Thus said, the government did raise the spending in the last years, but they sold it as "yeah, this is because of Syria and we really need to modernize our military". It would have been bad enough if any US president had made the mistake of drawing the attention of the German population to the fact that it is specifically the US which wants a higher spending, since this gets immediately interpreted as "oh, great, the US has messed up the middle east and now want our soldiers to die to clean up their mess". That Trump is the one doing it makes it so much worse. If Merkel wins, she will have to be very careful now to push through the money. If she looses the result will most likely be the SPD saying "yeah, we don't think so".
"Ryan's defense of Trump being "new to this" is just the latest in a long line of Republicans expecting us to coddle the President of the United States"
Also, is the tendecy of the GOP to see populism as doing something, "Trump told is he love america and want to make him great again, he is the BEST!" as far they are concern, him boasting is pretty much something.
And in case M85 look this, yes this is another of "trump look is like latin american demagogue", he really tick all the boxes, dosent he?.
"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"

Personally, while perhaps not the best long term, I'd like to see the Republicans do the impeaching. Even if it is only an ass-covering gesture of self preservation, the very fact they needed to go that far to save their necks could possibly penetrate even their reality proof skulls.