US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Debates are not part of the electoral process. There is no provision in the Constitution for convincing people to vote for one candidate or the other, just as there is no provision for the People to vote for President at all. They made it so the States elect the President, and later the States made it so the people voted for the Electors who in turn elect the President. Popularity has nothing to do with it.

True, but they do play a role in the battle for what we think.

OPINION
The History of Presidential Debates

https://observer.com/2016/10/the-his...ntial-debates/

The first debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump was a record breaker, attracting over 84 million viewers. The second debate attracted an even larger audience.

Perhaps Hillary Clinton injected some deliberate sarcasm into Sunday night’s debate when she referred to President Lincoln. While the debates between Mr. Trump and her are the low point in presidential debates, they now have their place in history as the most well viewed and entertaining ones. However, the presidential debates between Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Douglas remain the most famous debates in American history.

Political debates have become an integral part of the American election process. In many cases, they represent the best opportunity for voters to see the candidates up close and learn about their opinions on the key issues.

I have since reconsidered my first thoughts for a recall as other countries have due to the majority rules problem in America, but a debate today could surely show the American people if Trump is sane or not.

I'm glad he won ... Clinton would be impeached for sure based on the reported hacked Clinton emails by China alone that resulted in the untimely deaths of many CIA agents within that country

[em2nought]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

a debate today could surely show the American people if Trump is sane or not.

If Trump had said GDP growth would reach a 4.2% pace during his administration everyone would have called him insane. I think I prefer Trump's brand of "sane" to "status quo", "low energy", "I'm with her", "feel the bern", or "spare change".

I would have preferred it to come in a "Ross Perot" wrapper though. lol

[August]

Originally Posted by Hawk66

@August...so all is fake news...Bob Woodward, NyT, all the secretaries who have left/were fired for the very same reasons , e.g. Tillerson.

Well it's either fake news or it's evidence of the existence of the deep state that some here dismiss as a crazy conspiracy theory.



Put your Trump hatred aside for a moment and consider what this anonymous NYT writer is saying here. This letter claims that there is a shadowy group of high level government officials who have taken it upon themselves to usurp the authority of the President of the United States, the elected leader of our country whenever they feel like it. You and many here in my country seem fine with it because it's against a President you don't like but what happens if one of these anonymous officials feels that the President should push the nuclear button on North Korea and decides to do it for him? You still going to be ok with it then?



If this isn't just another piece of fake news, and that remains a definite possibility given the people publishing it, then it is a huge threat to my country. The faster we can get these subversives out of there the better so I see a high turnover as a good thing.

And all words, sorry, tweets from Trump are the truth..I see

Sorry, you only have to watch him on TV, read his tweets, realize what 'knowledge' he has from internal or external affairs....then you do not come to the same conclusions ?

Apparently not.

The right wing movement (I am not talking about conservatives because Trump is not a conservative, else he would respect common values) in Germany and the US is pretty the same: The root cause is not Migration or economics in general... it is just plain hate and the complete inability to differentiate and searching for comprimises... We have seen what consequences could arise from this in the last century.

I think you have a misguided viewpoint. Trump is not right wing, nor is he left wing, he's a business man with what I believe is a genuine desire to help his country. Unfortunately he's running into a lot of resistance from the establishment political class trying to do it.



One other thing, I don't know how it is in your country but the only ones here (with any political power) that are preaching the politics of hate and division is the left. To our Democrats people are white or black or straight or LGBTQ4tuesday!X or whatever little box they can think up to categorize and segregate them so they can play one group off against each other.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by u crank

In a Democracy opinion does not overrule elections and the rule of law. When they do you have a problem.

Thats neither an exhaustive decription of hre basics of "democracy" (which doe snot exist in the Greek ancient understanding anywhere in the world anyway - , nor a description that would not also fit other systems.

Yes you are correct.The question is how should this be done? In the US there are Congressional elections every two years. There are Presidential elections every four years. There is freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Protests against the government are legal. Anyone can run for office. All those rights and freedoms have not been exhausted.

And having the money to run especially for the higher ranking offices certainly never is an issue... As I see it, the campaign mode in the US never ends, but runs four years per four year. Every two years there are major elections of any kind, affecting the WH office, Senate, Congress. And campaigning is anything but an argument for poltics. its hilarious BS, and unscrupulkously promsing the Blue down from the sky.


Very big problem. It corrupts what so far may have remained of politics.

The system did not fail this person, the anonymous source. This person failed to take advantage of the possibilities available. If necessary he/she should have resigned their position and went to the media with the story. That would be showing the courage of your convictions. Instead what they did do was create another crisis when one was not needed.

The system has failed, and thats why this person thinks falling back to these desperate means is the only option left. The system fails your whole nation and people. The safeties it included to protect itself, get worked around, eroded. In the thread on Germn poltics I recently mentioned Jaspers findign on how the takeover worked in Germany, in the 30s. By law and roder. And in the name of protecting the constitution. You can see the same corrision being used by Erdoghan in Turkey. He travelled in on the sailbook named democracy. And what has it given Turkey? A de facto dictatorship of a corrupt family clan and the ultra-orthodox religious, and the deconstruction of the - former - constitutional order.



What you want is that the anonymous source volunteers for standing up against the wall and does not move, so that he or she can be easier shot. How stupid you think this person is? He or she said they do a job - trying to sabotage the worst of all stuff Trump spits on his table. Damage containment. Different to do if you hand yourself over.

There is a reason why reporters and journalists protect their sources as best as they can. Else it would be the end of - especially investigative - journalism and free press. What is left then, is propaganda and agitation the kind of which Trump lives from.

[ikalugin]

I’m really bewildered at the number of smart people who think a politburo of unelected bureaucrats stealing **** off the presidents desk is admirable and the right way to run our democratic government at this time.

- a quote from the internet

[Catfish]

^ You should introduce this in Russia

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Thats neither an exhaustive decription of hre basics of "democracy" (which doe snot exist in the Greek ancient understanding anywhere in the world anyway - , nor a description that would not also fit other systems.

Nor was it meant to be. I simply made a statement which I believe is true. Yes you can have an opinion in a Democracy but that opinion does not overrule elections and the rule of law.

Every two years there are major elections of any kind, affecting the WH office, Senate, Congress. And campaigning is anything but an argument for poltics. its hilarious BS, and unscrupulkously promsing the Blue down from the sky.

Statements like this make me wonder about your understanding of the US political system. The election of the House of Representatives which occur every two years does not 'effect the WH office'. Only one third of the Senate is up for election every two years. Presidential elections are held every four years. Though this system is not perfect it works well to check executive and legislative power. A good example would be the 2010 midterms when the policies of President Obama were sternly rebuked by the people. President Trump may suffer the same fate in November.

The system has failed, and thats why this person thinks falling back to these desperate means is the only option left. The system fails your whole nation and people. The safeties it included to protect itself, get worked around, eroded.

That is a bold statement but where is the proof. Can you give some concrete examples? What exactly do you mean?

The US has had a peaceful transfer of power for over 200 years. Even during a civil war. I expect it will continue.

What you want is that the anonymous source volunteers for standing up against the wall and does not move, so that he or she can be easier shot. How stupid you think this person is?

That's pretty dramatic but fortunately not true.

He or she said they do a job - trying to sabotage the worst of all stuff Trump spits on his table. Damage containment.

This person was hired, not elected, by the Trump administration to do a job. That would not be in the job description. You and others are assuming that this person, who is an employee, knows what is best and can be trusted while remaining anonymous. Excuse me for being a little skeptical. Let's ask a simple question. Has this person ever confronted Trump face to face with their concerns and criticisms? Course we don't know but my guess is no. Instead they go behind his back which only increases the Presidents' distrust. It is sad but also very silly.

They do not know what to do so they act in a hysterical or overly dramatic fashion. This plays well on CNN and MSNBC but gives Trump exactly the narrative he needs.

A perfect example of this is Sen. Cory Bookers' performance at the Supreme Court nomination hearing. It is hard to take people like this seriously. I've said it before and I'll repeat it. Progressives/Democrats/liberals have no clue about what to do about Trump.

It shows.

[Platapus]

Over the past decade, it appears that we have had a serious ( in my opinion) degradation of professionalism.

Being a professional is not just being paid for something, but it is also voluntarily abiding by a set of ethics of that profession even if they differ from your own.

But more and more we read stories about people violating the ethics of the profession they voluntarily joined because of personal feelings.

I only see this getting worse.

Anyone who has read my posts here knows that I don't approve of Trump as our president. I think he is a buffoon and emotionally unsuited for the position. But, at the same time, I am upset that professionals (so called professionals) in his administration are doing such things.

1. If you don't approve of what Trump is doing, then resign from your Trump administration position

2. If you feel that Trump is doing something illegal, then there are multiple appropriate venues for reporting such suspected illegal activities.

But what you should not be able to do is stay in a Trump Administration position, garnering the benefits (financial and other) of that position, while at the same time sabotaging that administration.

That is not what a professional does nor is that how professionals should act. It is dishonorable conduct.

But I am seeing more and more examples of people who should be professionals allowing their personal feelings affect their professional conduct.

I don't like Trump as our president
I want Trump out of office as soon as possible
I never want Trump to have any type of federal political power ever again

But, what is happening to Trump by people in his administration is not right.

Trump normally gets no sympathy from me, but on this one instance. He has it.

I want a Trump Administration to end... but this is the wrong way.

[Jimbuna]

^

[Mr Quatro]

Quote:
I’m really bewildered at the number of smart people who think a politburo of unelected bureaucrats stealing **** off the presidents desk is admirable and the right way to run our democratic government at this time.

Originally Posted by ikalugin

- a quote from the internet

President Trump said that didn't happen and that if it did happen that person would've been fired immediately.

The truth in the news has always been suspected and now even more ... the truth is now up to us to discern and I for one do not have the time to do the necessary investigation into the truth.

I will wait for this op-ed person to reveal himself to make any further decisions, but these are very serious times, uh?

[Skybird]

Germany has had two examples in just 2-3 generation where democracy was fully abused - right by following its paper rules down to the last letter and paragraph.

The same happens currently in several countries, Turkey being just my most used example. The letters of the country'S laws followed down to the last dot above the i.

I understand the American election system, u_cranck, its not as if it were Cricket rules. And every two years major parts of the institutionalised national political leadership level - consisting of POTUS-Senate-Congress - gets re-elected. Every two years a huge share of office holders campaign for getting re-elected. Which means that practically this leadership level and thus the nation is to huge part in a notorious campaigning mode. And politians in campaign mode - don't get me started. You know my song.

You play the Vulcan here by acting innocently and sober, fact-oriented. But I think we both know that you know very damn well what I am abaut and what I said and meant, don't you.

I agree on one thing, your indication about the left not knowing about Trump. I would say it deifferently, and alreay have said itg int hse words in the past: Trump not os much is strong by himself, but due to the weakness of the kleft, and the fact that the Demcratrs still are unable to produce a challenger/candidate accpetable for protest voters whop voted for Trump.

However, due to the change in demograohy and ethnic mix, more and more gfuture voters - as long as they care to vote at all - will vote left and will want socialist policies, hoping they financially get something out of it. The traditional conservative white audience of the Republicans, is dying out.

And that will show. Without manipulating the system, they will find it harder and harder to win elecitons in the future, if they do not turn their policies, like Merkel has pushed our former conservative party into all-embracing mainstream socialism as well. Trump'S triump may be just the last resistence of an old lion whose best days already are over. Republican condidates will either adapt to their new voters cnaging demands, or lose. Mind you, by pure ballot count, Trump already was defeated by Clinton: it was gerrymsandeirng what saved him, and Russian interference (I take that as granted, yes). And politicians who seem to be far more left than Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama, have become popular amongst the young. There seems to be a left scene that even is left of Bernie Sanders.

I remind of this:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...postcount=5217


A tinsoldier's pride in standing upright and tall, will not adress any of these problems, nor does it mark a noble or honoruable character. Any soldier - literally as well metaphorically seen - should be very picky whom he stands up for and stays loyal to. Kadavergehorsam, a word that knows no 1:1 translation in English, paves the way to the worst and most malicious deeds committed and accepted in the name of the good and light. Loyalty to oaths and obedience to superiors must know limits.

[mapuc]

I see only one word in this

disloyalty

This person male or female and where ever this person work in the White House and what ever this person works with has an

Loyalty to the country and the people who have chosen the sitting President, who is Mr. Trump, and that is important.

If this person have some problems with this then this person should have resigned.

This is how I see it.

Markus

[August]

Originally Posted by Skybird

A tinsoldier's pride in standing upright and tall, will not adress any of these problems, nor does it mark a noble or honoruable character. Any soldier - literally as well metaphorically seen - should be very picky whom he stands up for and stays loyal to. Kadavergehorsam, a word that knows no 1:1 translation in English, paves the way to the worst and most malicious deeds committed and accepted in the name of the good and light. Loyalty to oaths and obedience to superiors must know limits.

Of course there is no 1:1 translation Skybird. We're not Germans .



Americans barely tolerate properly constituted authority, let alone be some kind of mindless regimented robots who will kill or die at the whim of a prince or dictator.

[August]

Interesting piece from another Trump official who tells quite a different story:

When I challenge the president, I do it directly. My anonymous colleague should have, too.

By Nikki Haley



September 7 at 3:09 PM
Nikki Haley is U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

We have enough issues to deal with in the world, so it’s unfortunate to have to take time to write this, but I feel compelled to address the claims in the anonymous “resistance” op-ed published this week in the New York Times. The author might think he or she is doing a service to the country. I strongly disagree. What this “senior official in the Trump administration” has done, and is apparently intent on continuing to do, is a serious disservice — not just to the president but to the country.
I, too, am a senior Trump administration official. I proudly serve in this administration, and I enthusiastically support most of its decisions and the direction it is taking the country. But I don’t agree with the president on everything. When there is disagreement, there is a right way and a wrong way to address it. I pick up the phone and call him or meet with him in person.
Like my colleagues in the Cabinet and on the National Security Council, I have very open access to the president. He does not shut out his advisers, and he does not demand that everyone agree with him. I can talk to him most any time, and I frequently do. If I disagree with something and believe it is important enough to raise with the president, I do it. And he listens. Sometimes he changes course, sometimes he doesn’t. That’s the way the system should work. And the American people should be comfortable knowing that’s the way the system does work in this administration.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.ea65b2796e1d

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I understand the American election system, u_crank, its not as if it were Cricket rules. And every two years major parts of the institutionalised national political leadership level - consisting of POTUS-Senate-Congress - gets re-elected.

If you insist. POTUS - President of the United States. Presidential elections are every four years.

...don't get me started. You know my song.

Yes I do. I've heard it before and I am not requesting that you to sing it again.