Trump

[Morkonan]

Take that back right now. My AK47 is a legal immigrant. You hurt her feelings. She is as American as either of us.

Well, she's cheap... but well built.

(Just thought about something: What if you could describe women by the model of a gun? ie: "Ex-girlfriend was like an AK-47 - Well built, cheap, but used by everyone..." )

I have figured out how to solve the Government Shutdown problem and save us a ton of money while still giving Trump his wall!

Trump's Solution: "Give me 5 billion dallars two built Teh WALL!"
Mork's Solution: "Pay Mexico $137.59 to build the wall."

WIN! And, they'd paint it whatever color we'd like for an extra five bucks!

[BugMeister]

- the face of cruel dictatorship:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lasps7I6xo

- developing since 1917
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q05rMyTzMrM

- the Romeo brigades..
- the 2016 US election wasn't anything new, they've been at it for years..
- Bettina and the NRA is an example..
- the Trump Tower meeting is also under review..

meanwhile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51LroAfZ_8k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N4U5YBm7SM

- it is worth remembering, whatever your persuasion, that ignorance is no defence in law..

[Bishop149]

Walls do not discriminate. I doubt very much that those in favor of a wall are concerned about the race of those affected by it.

If this was true then it would be even more pointless than it already is.
I think you'll find the entire idea to separate one place into two, so that those on one side can discriminate against those on the other.
Of course a border already does this, the wall it to try and make it do it more.

Definition: "Borders" are imaginary lines which humans use to enforce different social realities in different places.

If your goal is to prevent "illegal" immigration then its worth reminding everyone that the vast majority of such people arrive in the US by aircraft.
No, the border wall is all about preventing the entry of a VERY specific type of person.

[Masterbagger]

No, the border wall is all about preventing the entry of a VERY specific type of person.

You mean the sort of guy that made El Chapo a billionaire?

[fiksal]

It was pointed out to me that the hypothetical wall has a problem of Fifth Amendment.
Lots of the territory where they supposedly want to put the wall is private land. Taking that land forcefully would be a lot of work, that many won't like.

And another issue, people seem to be (maybe) realizing how much 5 billion dollars is. As shown by the gofundme campaign that ended quite a bit (250 times) short.



On unrelated, did you guys see the fast food table at the white house? Is that how it always goes there? I have to admit, even for me, that's a bit on a gross side.

Speaking of cars, Mustang doesn't deserve the label of a wasteful car. Compare it to same class cars, like a big BMW, Mercedes, and their numbers will be similar, for efficiency, pollution, safety. There's is even a more efficient trim too.

I was curious about what my mustang was running so I did the math when I filled the tank this morning. I got 232 miles out of 11.19 gallons. I got 20.7 miles per gallon. Not too bad for a falling apart 20 year old machine running on sheer hatred.

20 is good, I think that is my average, give or take.

[pjknibbs]

On unrelated, did you guys see the fast food table at the white house? Is that how it always goes there? I have to admit, even for me, that's a bit on a gross side.

I assume he had to do that because the proper White House catering staff are part of the shutdown and ain't going to work for nothing.

[fiksal]

On unrelated, did you guys see the fast food table at the white house? Is that how it always goes there? I have to admit, even for me, that's a bit on a gross side.

I assume he had to do that because the proper White House catering staff are part of the shutdown and ain't going to work for nothing.

That sounds very plausible. But you'd think, there's another take out in the DC area.

[pjknibbs]

That sounds very plausible. But you'd think, there's another take out in the DC area.

Probably not one Trump knows anything about--he's allegedly very fond of Maccy D's.

[Morkonan]

..On unrelated, did you guys see the fast food table at the white house? Is that how it always goes there? I have to admit, even for me, that's a bit on a gross side...

Trump is a reported connoisseur of "fast food." In some cases, he's quite paranoid about it, feeling that if the people don't know who the food is for they won't tamper with it. AFAIK, McDonald's and KFC are his primary food groups... Not even kidding. (He was known for sending "anonymous" gophers for fast-food so the people preparing it wouldn't know who it was for.)

So, to Trump, that heart-attack-inducing buffet was the height of culinary art.

PIC - Fast-food Trump

I enjoy fast-food from time to time, but this is pretty disgusting.

[BugMeister]

- how long before we are all being offered Drumpf trademarked Donny-burgers..??

and here's how it works:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuhgFNmdQCY

Mitch McConman: Hiya Oleg - welcome aboard - we've just granted you free license to rob the USA - screw the Magnitsky Act..!!
Wilbur TeaLeaf: Our mob-king has already given the rest of us oligarchs a trillion pound tax-break - why not join the party, old chum..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zudvCy9MFlo

- is this the "art of the deal"..?

the reply..
Donny Drumpf: Emoluments Act? What's an Emoluments Act..

Exit pursued by a bear.. yeehaw..!!

[felter]

That burger thing or as Trump called them Hamberders was quite disgusting, who wants or expects cold burger and fries to be served to you at a institute like the Whitehouse. Before they got to see all of those Hamberders (that had sat there for who knows how long), Trump gave them a speech where he told them he had personally bought them all Hamberders and French fries, one of them was recorded as saying, 'I thought it was a joke' when they entered the room and got to see their lavish meal. So at least one of them was not too happy about it but I reckon it was more than just one of them. It also turns out Trump invited all of the top Democrats to lunch at the Whitehouse, I think it was the next day and no surprise, none of them turned up, Can you blame them, they probably thought that they were just going to be served left over Hamberders and Fries.

The other day there he got asked by a reporter about the Whitehouse currently being in Chaos right now due to the shutdown, where Trump replied 'Fake news, no chaos, especially seeing as I'm basically the only person there right now.' if that's not Chaos in the Whitehouse I don't know what is seeing as a good definition of Chaos:

a state of utter confusion or disorder; a total lack of organization or order.

But then again Trump is pretty ignorant to the meanings or proper use of words.

[fiksal]

I like how Trump's strategy to sweet talk Democrats is to pick a few and take them to lunch.
Good plan.


There seem to be a faint indication that Democratic party at least is changing strategy somewhat. They are looking at possibly ignoring Trump. (or rather ignoring what he says, not what he does)
Which seems is not a terrible plan

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

“It was as if he didn’t exist if he wasn’t being noticed. Irrelevance is, I think, more painful to him than failure.”
...
“Simply being anti-Trump isn’t enough to win the Democratic nomination and won’t be enough to win” in 2020, said Guy Cecil, chairman of Democratic super PAC Priorities USA Action. “Democrats need to tell their own story and share a forward-looking vision for where they want to take the country.”

[felter]

Ignoring Trump is quite possibly the worst but best thing to do to him. I think that when he is kicked out of the Whitehouse, it will be the thing that hurts him the most as he will no longer have the cameras and press following him and reporting on every little thing he is doing, he will no longer be the centre of attention and he craves that sort of attention. About the only thing that would hurt him more is sending him to gaol, though I do think he would get plenty of attention there, just not the kind he would like to have and of course no more McDonalds.

The press should have a no Trump day or better still a week, where they don't do any kind of reporting on him at all, no matter what he does or says, it would drive him nuts.

[Morkonan]

I like how Trump's strategy to sweet talk Democrats is to pick a few and take them to lunch.
Good plan.

That's like the few free lunches I went on with salespeople I already knew I wasn't going to buy a darn thing from... Most of them knew that anyway, but just wanted to establish a closer relationship they could maybe leverage later. Stuff like that is a "good sales tactic." Or politics... Well, maybe a good political move with some individuals if you haven't already taken a huge dump in their bowl of Cheerios, which Trump has already done.

And, that's Trump's terrible domestic politics problem - He pisses in everyone's bowl of soup and then expects that they're going to like it? He acts as if he can treat people however he wants and somehow they're supposed to actually, really, like him for it. I think that it's because he only seems to admire people who do the same thing, so that's the interpersonal style he likes. He's probably a closet masochist.

..There seem to be a faint indication that Democratic party at least is changing strategy somewhat. They are looking at possibly ignoring Trump. (or rather ignoring what he says, not what he does)
Which seems is not a terrible plan...

IMO, ignoring Trump is the wrong move. Trump is the kind of guy that everyone at the party hopes will go away, so they purposefully ignore him. Then, he works himself up enough, having only himself to play with, that he starts a dumpster fire on purpose just to get the cops to show up... just to get any kind of reaction he can. Anything. Good or bad, just anything but an indifferent reaction.

"I WANT A WALL AND I'M GOING TO MAKE PELOSI BUILD IT!"

/crickets

"LET'S BOMB CANADA!"

/panic

"YAY! I WIN!"

That is EXACTLY what I would expect from Trump if he truly gets ignored by all the meaningful factions in Congress. That's exactly what I expect him to do if the Dems take a "hardline" stance with him and refuse to come to the table unless he makes them an offer that doesn't include "The Wall."

Give him some increased monies for "Border Security," but mandate that the lion's share has to go towards hiring more agents. (The "Jobs" tactic, which all politicians love, even if the jobs are crap.) He can have some extra money that is dedicated to renovating existing fencing, if he wants, and then he can lie to his base and tell them he "won" money for his "Wall."

Trump can't be counted on to do the rational thing. I sort of like Canada, so I don't want the Dems to think that Trump is going to come crawling to them and that he's willing to accept a deal that doesn't let him at least lie about some false victory. If they do that, he's going to bomb something and goodness knows wtf he'll pick. I ain't kiddin' I'm expecting an announcement of "the next big distraction" any moment and that will be when Trump has finally fallen off his gold-plated commode in frustration.

[felter]

That is EXACTLY what I would expect from Trump if he truly gets ignored by all the meaningful factions in Congress. That's exactly what I expect him to do if the Dems take a "hardline" stance with him and refuse to come to the table unless he makes them an offer that doesn't include "The Wall."

They were at the table, it was him that slammed it and walked out, not the other way around like you are trying to make out.

And they want him to go over the edge, as that is their best way to win the next election against him, so ignoring him is the best way to go. Confronting him does not work, so what else is there to do.

[Observe]

...so ignoring him is the best way to go. Confronting him does not work, so what else is there to do.

I agree and I imagine there are lots of people who are beyond tired of seeing and hearing Trump and his never-ending tantrums. You are right about confronting him does not work. This is something I hope his opponents in the next election realize. The best chance of winning against Trump, is to marginalize him by turning a deaf ear to him, while being civil. There is nothing wrong with ignoring the monkey in the corner. Don't try to fight Trump in the gutter, because that's a losing proposition.

[Morkonan]

That is EXACTLY what I would expect from Trump if he truly gets ignored by all the meaningful factions in Congress. That's exactly what I expect him to do if the Dems take a "hardline" stance with him and refuse to come to the table unless he makes them an offer that doesn't include "The Wall."

They were at the table, it was him that slammed it and walked out, not the other way around like you are trying to make out.

Like I am trying to make out? WTF? And, how in the heck did you manage to read English and come up with that interpretation? I meant nothing of the sort.

And they want him to go over the edge, as that is their best way to win the next election against him, so ignoring him is the best way to go. Confronting him does not work, so what else is there to do.

So, you're saying they want him to start a huge dumpster-fire and "go over the edge?" That's stupid, if true.

Their best bet is to present him something that he can then lie about, claiming a "victory." Then, after he postures about it, they can come back and show why it's not a victory at all and what they came away with from his "Deal" is a much, much, better outcome for him.

The idea being that burning down the country around this issue will ultimately help nobody win anything. That's the passive, "do nothing" strategy that leaves EVERY OPTION in your opponent's hands. It's the sort of option that is written on the tombstones and monuments of defeated troops... "We did nothing and look what happened!"

One should never allow the opponent to be able to freely choose their next course of action. You just don't do that. You present them them with the options you want them to choose from and give them the path of least resistance to the choices you really want them to make.

Give Trump a hollow victory, something like more financing for restoration of existing structures and more financing for additional jobs, but NONE for "new construction." Make a claim that it has to be discussed and a CLEAR budget exam needs to be done on it. (There isn't one, right now, just a bunch of handwavy crap from Trump, himself.) Force that particular issue to make him think a complete victory is possible, later, while achieving a "semi-victory" increased funding, even if it can't be used for new construction, and then let him sit-and-spin over any future Wall Deal with nothing to use as additional leverage... That's what I'd rather try than "doing nothing."

[fiksal]

IMO, ignoring Trump is the wrong move. Trump is the kind of guy that everyone at the party hopes will go away, so they purposefully ignore him. Then, he works himself up enough, having only himself to play with, that he starts a dumpster fire on purpose just to get the cops to show up... just to get any kind of reaction he can. Anything. Good or bad, just anything but an indifferent reaction.

In theory, if everyone cared about what he says, then paying attention to what he says would do the trick. But it did not.

Without having a good leverage against him, I think it's worth to try ignoring him.

Speaking of the dumpster fire - we are already in it. Yes it can get worse. But again - no leverage, and no control.

Trump can't be counted on to do the rational thing.

Exactly, so dont play his game, play to beat him.

One should never allow the opponent to be able to freely choose their next course of action. You just don't do that. You present them them with the options you want them to choose from and give them the path of least resistance to the choices you really want them to make.

Okay, good fighting technique. I am not sure Democrats are in that spot to use it though. Their last attempt to give money to the border security instead was shut down, and maybe even more than once. Trump doesnt want border security or to deal with illegal immigration, he wants the wall that he promised.

And I for one think that the Democrats, that were freshly elected especially, owe to those who elected them, to show a spine.


EDIT: edited for clarity

[felter]

You know what really gets me, is that the Republicans held all the cards for two full years and they never gave Trump the money for the wall and there was no real issue, then the Democrats get some real power and they are at fault for not giving him the money. So why did the Republicans not give him the cash when they could, and why are those exact same Republicans blaming the Democrats for shutting the US Government for doing the same thing, then I have to ask, why did Trump wait till the Democrats could thwart him to take the stance he currently is, why did he not get the money from the Republicans.

[Mightysword]

You know what really gets me, is that the Republicans held all the cards for two full years and they never gave Trump the money for the wall and there was no real issue, then the Democrats get some real power and they are at fault for not giving him the money. So why did the Republicans not give him the cash when they could, and why are those exact same Republicans blaming the Democrats for shutting the US Government for doing the same thing, then I have to ask, why did Trump wait till the Democrats could thwart him to take the stance he currently is, why did he not get the money from the Republicans.

Because political capital is not an unlimited resource, while I wouldn't considered it to be called rare, it's not common either to hold both legislative and executive power at the same time. When that happens, there is a very limited window (2 years, because rarely a party can hold it for longer than that) for the party in power to push through what they considered the most important thing on their list. Republican didn't push for border control as hard for the same reason Democrat didn't push for citizenship path way as hard when they had sweeping power, both party trumpets their respective issue but it's not the main agenda. For Democrat the last time it happens, it was Obamacare, for Republican this time it was to tilt the supreme court to the conservative side.