International News Donald Trump 🍊🇺🇸

[Wandering Yellow]

Record on what? Lies? Try and find 5 out and out false things Obama or Biden or Trump have said. I’ll give you a head start on Biden (he plagiarised kinnocks speech on his background, so arguably a lie, certainly unethical. I bet you find it easier to find them for trump. Not because the media report them, but because trump can’t stop telling them.

I mean for example:

Job creation
Unemployment
Economy
War
Spending

A side by side comparison of each would be interesting. I don't doubt you that Trump is outwardly less of a "nice bloke" than the others.

 

[Wallop]

Genuine question for any US Constitution experts out there - if Trump gets elected, is there a potential route to him attempting to install himself as President for Life? I can see him trying it but don't know if there is any method by which he could try.

 

[Wandering Yellow]

Genuine question for any US Constitution experts out there - if Trump gets elected, is there a potential route to him attempting to install himself as President for Life? I can see him trying it but don't know if there is any method by which he could try.

This is nigh-on impossible due to the separation of powers. If the Republicans won a clean sweep and had a majority of favourables in the Supreme Court then maybe. It's not worth worrying about though because it just won't happen. Despite what the media might say Trump isn't *literally Hitler*

 

[Wandering Yellow]

@Wallop You can imagine we have a similar thing here with the Lords being a "check and balance" on the power of the Commons. That veto power likely to block any perceived anti-democracy moves.

Trying to subvert democracy is possible, as we saw with Brexit. But it's painful and it's difficult.

 

[Eric Blair]

Genuine question for any US Constitution experts out there - if Trump gets elected, is there a potential route to him attempting to install himself as President for Life? I can see him trying it but don't know if there is any method by which he could try.

That is a good question. One of the nerdy things about me is I am a US president geek. The two term limit is an amendment in the US constitution (the twenty second) which was brought in by the early 1950s (after FDR won four elections). Before that the two term thing was a convention only. It takes a huge amount to overturn a constitutional amendment (this is where I get sketchy without looking it up) but I think it is two thirds of congress and then a majority of US states.

 

[Wallop]

@Wallop You can imagine we have a similar thing here with the Lords being a "check and balance" on the power of the Commons. That veto power likely to block any perceived anti-democracy moves.

Trying to subvert democracy is possible, as we saw with Brexit. But it's painful and it's difficult.

Thank you for your responses - very interesting. Do the Lords have a veto power in our constitution? I ask because they appear to be against the Rwanda Bill but don't actually seem to have any power to stop it if the Commons votes for it?

 

[Wandering Yellow]

That is a good question. One of the nerdy things about me is I am a US president geek. The two term limit is an amendment in the US constitution (the twenty second) which was brought in by the early 1950s (after FDR won four elections). Before that the two term thing was a convention only. It takes a huge amount to overturn a constitutional amendment (this is where I get sketchy without looking it up) but I think it is two thirds of congress and then a majority of US states.

The written constitution in of itself would make it harder to become some kind of "USA dictator"

Putin has shown some exemplary form subverting democracy when he put Medvedev ""in charge"" in 2008 IIRC.

 

[chuckbert]

I mean for example:

Job creation
Unemployment
Economy
War
Spending

A side by side comparison of each would be interesting. I don't doubt you that Trump is outwardly less of a "nice bloke" than the others.

I gave a link earlier which supported the fact that trump is the only president other than hoover to lose jobs. Where is your issue with that fact?
Why do you say “less of a nice bloke” when his actions and words clearly reveal him to be a liar and a narcissist? Why can’t you be more critical of him? What’s stopping you?

 

[Wandering Yellow]

Thank you for your responses - very interesting. Do the Lords have a veto power in our constitution? I ask because they appear to be against the Rwanda Bill but don't actually seem to have any power to stop it if the Commons votes for it?

No problem my friend.

We do not have a written constitution like the USA so its not possible to answer in direct terms. Politicians sometimes cite the Magna Carta which was published in 1205 to this day!

The Lords Veto power isn't really like it used to be in the old days. They can "hold the government to account" supposedly by reviewing and challenging legislation. You would imagine if some extreme party in the UK got in charge the Lords would start flexing it's muscles somewhat more than it does today.

 

[Wandering Yellow]

I gave a link earlier which supported the fact that trump is the only president other than hoover to lose jobs. Where is your issue with that fact?
Why do you say “less of a nice bloke” when his actions and words clearly reveal him to be a liar and a narcissist? Why can’t you be more critical of him? What’s stopping you?

I've not met Trump, I do suspect he IS a narcissist. And is he a good person? I highly highly doubt he's not up to all kinds of sh!t.

He is more openly a liar and a narcissist. Politics is packed full of narcissists, because the kind of people who think they should tell other people what to do and want power tend to have those traits.

I wonder what a psychologist would make of US presidents over the last 50+ years? How many weren't narcissists who lied.

 

[Eric Blair]

@Wallop You can imagine we have a similar thing here with the Lords being a "check and balance" on the power of the Commons. That veto power likely to block any perceived anti-democracy moves.

Trying to subvert democracy is possible, as we saw with Brexit. But it's painful and it's difficult.

This is where I become (even more) boring. It all depends on what you mean by democracy. A referendum is democracy but is a really bad way for a country to make decisions. The First Past the Post system is democracy which has good points and many bad. There are many different types of democracy some good and some awful. Democracy per se isn't good. It depends on the type. Tyranny of the majority and all that.

I dont think trying to overturn the Brexit vote was anti-democratic. That was the problem. It was using one form of flawed democracy (first past the post) to over turn a decision made by (an even more) flawed type of democracy. It failed ultimately because the national will (majority of voters, government and most media) still and unfathomably in my view wanted Brexit.

 

[Wandering Yellow]

This is where I become (even more) boring. It all depends on what you mean by democracy. A referendum is democracy but is a really bad way for a country to make decisions. The First Past the Post system is democracy which has good points and many bad. There are many different types of democracy some good and some awful. Democracy per se isn't good. It depends on the type. Tyranny of the majority and all that.

I dont think trying to overturn the Brexit vote was anti-democratic. That was the problem. It was using one form of flawed democracy (first past the post) to over turn a decision made by (an even more) flawed type of democracy. It failed ultimately because the national will (majority of voters, government and most media) still and unfathomably in my view wanted Brexit.

Referendums are one of the purest forms of democracy. If not the purest.

Explain why you think referendums are a more flawed form of democracy than FPTP? I'd be pretty concerned if your answer is "I don't like people thicker than I think I am" having an opinion?

Edit: Tyrany of the majority... is somewhat what democracy always has been.

 

[Sheik djibouti]

This analysis on Trumps achievements was done by Politico shortly after the end of his Presidency.

https://www.politico.com/news/magaz...tration-biggest-impact-policy-analysis-451479

Pretty damning really. I mean OK I guess if you don't mind the planet continuing to boil and the most powerful, richest nation on earth and one of the biggest polluters actually going backwards in its efforts to tackle it. Pure greed and playing to those who fund you, rather than putting greater interests of your people and the wider world at the heart of your public service. Also good for the Evangelists who make up his core, as he made sure there was MORE religion (of the right kind of course) taught in schools.

His administration did also start the move to ignore congressional oversight. No doubt he will go even further on this if he gets back in.

He also curbed relief on loans for defrauded students who had enrolled in fraudulent universities. Probably because his organisation set up its own fraudulent university a few years back.

He also cut back on the food safety net for those in poverty and restricted overtime pay for long hours.

My personal favorite was his attempt to roll back Obamacare and actually inadvertently making it stronger

So yeah - real man of the people . . .

 

[Eric Blair]

Referendums are one of the purest forms of democracy. If not the purest.

Explain why you think is is a more flawed form of democracy than FPTP? I'd be pretty concerned if your answer is "I don't like people thicker than I think I am" having an opinion?

Edit: Tyrany of the majority... is somewhat what democracy always has been.

Ha! Don't worry - it's not "I don't like people thicker than I am having an opinion". That would be outrageous and is not where I'm coming from. I also dont consider myself cleverer than the average.

I think there there are two reasons why it's more flawed:

1. The world is insanely complex. To make good decisions you need access to lots of information, lots of time to understand and speak to people and to basically live and breathe a variety of issues. You need to make sure you talk to people outside your bubble and be willing to engage on all sides of the argument. I dont have time to do that and nor do most people which is why I prefer representative democracy i.e. voting for someone who can represent my views in parliament and who has the time to study everything.

2. And the second point is the tyranny of the majority issue. We need a democratic system that protects minorities who would always be outvoted by the majority through no fault of their own (just because they are a smaller group). So, for example, my son is disabled. I want his rights protected despite the fact he is in a minority and I dont want a majority just thinking about themselves and just their taxes (not saying you are like this by the way!!).

FPTP not perfect at all but I think (but can definitely be persuaded) that it is better than proportional representation and definitely better than a series of referenda on major issues.

 

[Eric Blair]

This analysis on Trumps achievements was done by Politico shortly after the end of his Presidency.

https://www.politico.com/news/magaz...tration-biggest-impact-policy-analysis-451479

Pretty damning really. I mean OK I guess if you don't mind the planet continuing to boil and the most powerful, richest nation on earth and one of the biggest polluters actually going backwards in its efforts to tackle it. Pure greed and playing to those who fund you, rather than putting greater interests of your people and the wider world at the heart of your public service. Also good for the Evangelists who make up his core, as he made sure there was MORE religion (of the right kind of course) taught in schools.

His administration did also start the move to ignore congressional oversight. No doubt he will go even further on this if he gets back in.

He also curbed relief on loans for defrauded students who had enrolled in fraudulent universities. Probably because his organisation set up its own fraudulent university a few years back.

He also cut back on the food safety net for those in poverty and restricted overtime pay for long hours.

My personal favorite was his attempt to roll back Obamacare and actually inadvertently making it stronger

So yeah - real man of the people . . .

If you had US relatives @Sheik djibouti I'd be quite happy to see you US President

 

[SteMerritt]

Referendums are one of the purest forms of democracy. If not the purest.

Explain why you think referendums are a more flawed form of democracy than FPTP? I'd be pretty concerned if your answer is "I don't like people thicker than I think I am" having an opinion?

Edit: Tyrany of the majority... is somewhat what democracy always has been.

Referenda result in people who don't have all of the relevant data being asked to make complex decisions that have been boiled down to Yes/No, In/Out, Option A/Option B binary decisions. They are a terrible way to make big decisions. We elect governments to do this on our behalf. The way we elect our governments however...

 

[MustardYellow]

I disagree. This is just false equivalence stuff. I don’t turn a blind eye to corruption. I don’t “feel” that Trump is bad: I have seen the evidence from his own mouth, not just via journalists but via his own press conferences, court utterances and his unfiltered social media posts. This guy is bad and I wish otherwise intelligent people wouldn’t fall into the hole of “they’re all just as bad as each other” which lends him support. They really aren’t. This guy’s one for the history books and not in a good way.
The USA is heading towards a situation where they’ll get rid of the establishment because they think power is concentrated in the hands of too few, and replace it with a system where it is concentrated in the hands of just one, and they may realise too late that the one is not interested in their issues, but only his own.

Isn't what's 'bad' or 'worse' completely subjective? Some of the examples you gave as to why you think he's 'bad', like social media posts for example, some people just won't really care about. People put weight on different things.

 

[MustardYellow]

Ha! Don't worry - it's not "I don't like people thicker than I am having an opinion". That would be outrageous and is not where I'm coming from. I also dont consider myself cleverer than the average.

I think there there are two reasons why it's more flawed:

1. The world is insanely complex. To make good decisions you need access to lots of information, lots of time to understand and speak to people and to basically live and breathe a variety of issues. You need to make sure you talk to people outside your bubble and be willing to engage on all sides of the argument. I dont have time to do that and nor do most people which is why I prefer representative democracy i.e. voting for someone who can represent my views in parliament and who has the time to study everything.

2. And the second point is the tyranny of the majority issue. We need a democratic system that protects minorities who would always be outvoted by the majority through no fault of their own (just because they are a smaller group). So, for example, my son is disabled. I want his rights protected despite the fact he is in a minority and I dont want a majority just thinking about themselves and just their taxes (not saying you are like this by the way!!).

FPTP not perfect at all but I think (but can definitely be persuaded) that it is better than proportional representation and definitely better than a series of referenda on major issues.

This only works if the politicians don't act on self interest, which we all know they do. We also know they make decisions despite there being evidence it's a bad idea/won't work. The issue is also that MP's rarely change their mind on things because they know they've been voted in based on their views, even if the evidence suggests that view is counterproductive.

On your second point, I'm not really sure what that solves? People are always going to vote primarily for what is best for them and their family. If there is a party that better protects you and your family, you'll probably vote for them. I think you get into dangerous territory when specified groups have their votes weighted over others.

 

[Sheik djibouti]

Isn't what's 'bad' or 'worse' completely subjective? Some of the examples you gave as to why you think he's 'bad', like social media posts for example, some people just won't really care about. People put weight on different things.

When looking at criminal psychology, you have to look at patterns of behaviour and patterns of offending to inform the offender profile. Safe to say, you could have a field day with Trump.

It's not just a few indiscretions is it, it's a life long pattern of offence (in both meanings of the word) and we have got to the stage where many will just shrug their shoulders/turn a blind eye, or worse still, try to draw a false equivalence between his behaviour and the behaviour of his rivals/enemies (as he sees them and he wants his supporters to see them) because they've been convinced he's "their guy".

He's still really salty about his election loss in 2020 and is vowing revenge. He's a petty child who holds a grudge. Not really the type of character you want in charge of the most powerful nation on the planet . . ..

 

[chuckbert]

Isn't what's 'bad' or 'worse' completely subjective? Some of the examples you gave as to why you think he's 'bad', like social media posts for example, some people just won't really care about. People put weight on different things.

I think lies are bad, yes.