The Trump Presidency – 2016

[CrimsonFox]

Governor of Illinois bought a lot of PPE from China in secret and SECRETLY had them flown in directly to Illinois under high security.

WHich is nice that they were able to get their stuff without Trump and FEMA stealing it to sell

[stevew]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

Governor of Illinois bought a lot of PPE from China in secret and SECRETLY had them flown in directly to Illinois under high security.

WHich is nice that they were able to get their stuff without Trump and FEMA stealing it to sell

Ah the Patriots model.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Edward64

So my conclusion is sure the US doesn't have pure capitalism (so what?). But it does have mixed capitalism. So one can complain about the mix but let's not say arbitrarily say "there's nothing capitalist about our system today".

Fine, the GOP turn the dial on it as is convenient for the marketing trope at the time. When they need a bailout they dial it way over to socialism. I mean shit, they basically just agreed to UBI which is 100% socialism but come August they'll be telling people to vote for them because a vote for anything but is a vote for France or Switzerland.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Fine, the GOP turn the dial on it as is convenient for the marketing trope at the time. When they need a bailout they dial it way over to socialism. I mean shit, they basically just agreed to UBI which is 100% socialism but come August they'll be telling people to vote for them because a vote for anything but is a vote for France or Switzerland.

Yup, I guess the mixed model and degree/position of Left-Right-dial is dependent on the political environment (or crisis) at any given time.

Of course we are a capitalist society. Of course there is a mix of socialism. Let's not crap on it just because there is hypocrisy in the system and it doesn't do what you want. There's a ton of worse systems out there in the world.

[Flasch186]

I crap on it because of the hypocrisy of one party that uses it's marketability to their whim and win and then actually goes the entirely opposite direction when it suits their needs only to abuse it again to divide the country and get votes.

I'm sorry but I see through the hypocrisy. At least the Dems and Bernie Sanders (whom I'm not a fan of) will actually say it. The GOP simply use the headlines of "We're the greatest because of capitalism" and we hate socialism and evil empire except with their other hand they're absolutely for socialist ways to 'win' in their wallets.

Who gets fucked? You and I do but then come November people will ignore the hypocrisy (which should make you not believe anything the mfers say) and vote because 'Soshalism'!!!!!

Whatever? At least people that vote on only one topic can (if they're honest) say I don't care about who lies about what as long as they don't keel babies. Theyre honest.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

So the person who gets a more fair sentence gained nothing because Trump had the wrong motive? That's useless to them? I'd wager they'd say otherwhise. I mean, nobody has perfectly pure motives for doing anything, so that means everything is useless. Nihilism FTW!!

Of course they gain something but that isn't the point.

The discussion began because Edward was demanding people also point out the good things Trump has done and give him credit. What I am saying, and seemingly others, are he doesn't deserve credit for those because he didn't do them because he felt it was the right thing, he did them because it benefited him in that moment. You get zero credit for that in my book.

A true leader does what they feel is right, damn the consequences. Look at your state right now. The governor is doing what she feels is right for her citizens. She had to know it would be criticized, and it could quite possibly cost her a VP nomination, but it seems to me anyway she is doing it for the good of her constituents. Oppose that to Trump who literally changes his mind hour to hour based off what he thinks will gain him the most praise from Fox News. Occasionally those changes are actually good ones, but they were accidents.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by Lathum

A true leader does what they feel is right, damn the consequences. Look at your state right now. The governor is doing what she feels is right for her citizens. She had to know it would be criticized, and it could quite possibly cost her a VP nomination, but it seems to me anyway she is doing it for the good of her constituents. Oppose that to Trump who literally changes his mind hour to hour based off what he thinks will gain him the most praise from Fox News. Occasionally those changes are actually good ones, but they were accidents.

The thing is, as I mentioned before, this is completely unknowable. You can't know why people take actions for sure, ever. As I stated before, neurological science has shown repeatedly that we don't even properly understand why we do things, much less that of anyone else. Therefore, under your stated standards here, you can't ever give someone credit for anything, or criticize them for anything, because we can't accurately assess their reasons. That's a totally untenable approach.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

The thing is, as I mentioned before, this is completely unknowable. You can't know why people take actions for sure, ever. As I stated before, neurological science has shown repeatedly that we don't even properly understand why we do things, much less that of anyone else. Therefore, under your stated standards here, you can't ever give someone credit for anything, or criticize them for anything, because we can't accurately assess their reasons. That's a totally untenable approach.

Trump has shown us who he is enough times that I think we can make an assumption.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

I crap on it because of the hypocrisy of one party that uses it's marketability to their whim and win and then actually goes the entirely opposite direction when it suits their needs only to abuse it again to divide the country and get votes.

I'm sorry but I see through the hypocrisy. At least the Dems and Bernie Sanders (whom I'm not a fan of) will actually say it. The GOP simply use the headlines of "We're the greatest because of capitalism" and we hate socialism and evil empire except with their other hand they're absolutely for socialist ways to 'win' in their wallets.

Who gets fucked? You and I do but then come November people will ignore the hypocrisy (which should make you not believe anything the mfers say) and vote because 'Soshalism'!!!!!

Whatever? At least people that vote on only one topic can (if they're honest) say I don't care about who lies about what as long as they don't keel babies. Theyre honest.

I am reacting to below statement which started this line of discussion and thought it worthwhile to define what capitalism is.

There is nothing capitalist about our current system. Government propping up zombie companies by printing money and bailing out their mistakes. If companies are not allowed to fail, how is it any way capitalism?

I agree with much you say but probably not to the degree/extent you mean it. I am generalizing to help provide some context and visual ... whereas I see the mix being 80-20 or maybe 70-30 I think many on this board would prefer it if was the other ratio if not far more extreme. We come from different perspectives. Whereas many on this board see doom-and-gloom in the US, I see a land of opportunity regardless of the inequities we have (and the jerk we have the in WH).

[PilotMan]

The appropriate response to trump from China in all this would be to strongly criticize his failure to contain the virus as well as they did and criticize the US form of government that lead to all those deaths (compared to whatever the false, but accepted public numbers in China are).

[Bee]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

The thing is, as I mentioned before, this is completely unknowable. You can't know why people take actions for sure, ever. As I stated before, neurological science has shown repeatedly that we don't even properly understand why we do things, much less that of anyone else. Therefore, under your stated standards here, you can't ever give someone credit for anything, or criticize them for anything, because we can't accurately assess their reasons. That's a totally untenable approach.

I'm guessing there are a lot of criminals in jail right now that wish your logic was applied to their crimes...

[Brian Swartz]

Huh? What does that have to do with anything? Criminals are in jail for their actions. Motive is an element of jurisprudence to be sure, but lots of people have motives and don't act on them. The act is what you go to jail for or not - my continued opposition to the jail system in its entirety notwithstanding.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

It sometimes feels like we are beta-testing a political sim. And the feedback is going to be like "First, this is a really fun idea, and I'm excited for when this gets released! I do think, though, that there are some issues with the 'stickiness' of the parties' bases. Last night, I ran a scenario where I made a candidate who had very low intelligence and temperament and wisdom and ethics. I gave him high charisma and gave his opponent maximum unlikability so he could just barely get elected. I then wanted to see how badly he could lose re-election. So I pretty much set major scandals and crimes to be revealed every week (I'm talking like collusion with enemy countries and stuff and pictures of him with human traffickers). And I also just had him do nothing (I know that the the developer said that he was going to come up with effects for the 'executive time' setting, but I'm just using it in beta to fill out the schedule with no actual work (In my head, I'm pretending that the President is just sitting in bed watching TV for 8 hours a day, lol)). And every time he meets with a foreign leader in a summit, I have nothing happen from it.

"It would seem that this should tank his approval, right? But it is just sitting at 45%, and nothing is changing it. I understand that each party has a 'base' and the engine won't have a guy get, like, zero votes. But I am wondering how much our actions will matter if someone trying to lose cannot get below 45% approval. What do y'all think about that?"

OK. We get it, Gary. You are a very thorough beta tester. But the game is broken. We all get that the game is broken. You can stop trying to break the sim any time now, ok?

[JPhillips]

The protests are so discouraging. It's one thing to argue for reducing restrictions, it's a whole other thing o gather closely together in groups as if you're standing up to the virus.

[QuikSand]

I realize that stupid things happen in government sometimes. And this might just be a blunder, an oversight, or a poorly thought out way to follow a well intentioned guideline. Or something...

FEMA gave a $55,000,000 no-bid contract to a bankrupt company with no employees for N95 masks – which they don't make or have – at 7x the cost others charge.https://t.co/59IXV4c1y3

— Jesse Lehrich (@JesseLehrich) April 16, 2020

But these shitheads have earned the place where everyone's first assumption will and should be that the White House people are, yet again, profiteering thieves who are unethically helping out a donor/supporter or actually lining their own pockets here.

[JPhillips]

Multiple GOP political operatives suddenly went into the medical supply business in March. There's a very high chance of corruption.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Multiple GOP political operatives suddenly went into the medical supply business in March. There's a very high chance of corruption.

Yup. You know your friend who started his own business? And how did he’s pretty much lost everything now? And you’re legitimately concerned about how he’s going to provide for his family and for his mental health? It turns out that was pretty much also some GOP operatives could make a killing in the medical supply business. And Trump want you to think it’s your governor’s fault.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Yup. You know your friend who started his own business? And how did he’s pretty much lost everything now? And you’re legitimately concerned about how he’s going to provide for his family and for his mental health? It turns out that was pretty much also some GOP operatives could make a killing in the medical supply business. And Trump want you to think it’s your governor’s fault.

Yup. Good friend of mine and her husband own an upholstery shop. Their SBA loan application was delayed by the bank because the infrastructure wasn't there. Got a message today basically saying they are SOL because there is no money left. So while they have been in their basement the last month making masks out of their own materiel because our government can't provide basic PPE the same government has been doing squat for them. They don't know what they are going to do.

[Bee]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Huh? What does that have to do with anything? Criminals are in jail for their actions. Motive is an element of jurisprudence to be sure, but lots of people have motives and don't act on them. The act is what you go to jail for or not - my continued opposition to the jail system in its entirety notwithstanding.

Criminal intent. Big difference between involuntary manslaughter and murder one.

[Brian Swartz]

Sure, but again I don't see the relevancy. Intent is about what you are trying to do, whether something is purposeful or incidental, etc. Motivation is about why you did it. In the example being used for this discussion, that would be like saying the First Steps act was passed on accident vs. doing it on purpose. That's not even an issue - we know it was done on purpose, the issue is how much we can know about the why and how relevant that is.

[JPhillips]

Corruption everywhere. From Politico:

Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs Tara Sweeney is among a small group of Interior officials advising the Treasury Department on how to distribute $8 billion in rescue funding Congress earmarked for Native American tribes — an allocation that some lawmakers now say they intended solely for the 574 federally recognized tribes hit hard by the economic shutdown.
But the Trump administration indicated this week that it also plans to include more than 200 for-profit Alaska Native corporations among the eligible recipients based on a strict reading of language Congress included in its $2.2 trillion coronavirus rescue package — including corporations that rank among the largest businesses in the state. That’s outraged many tribal leaders who say the decision could divert nearly half the funding away from tribes and into the coffers of the corporations.

Sweeney’s role has since come under intense scrutiny, with Democrats and several tribal organizations seizing on the financial interest she retains as a shareholder of her former employer, Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, according to financial disclosure forms.

[panerd]

Who could have ever predicted a 2 trillion dollar stimulus plan wouldn't go to ordinary American people? Shocking I tell you, shocking! What's the only solution? Bigger government!!!

[molson]

Does concern for fed corruption count as sincere? Or is that just fear mongering? Still trying to figure out the rules here.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by molson

Does concern for fed corruption count as sincere? Or is that just fear mongering? Still trying to figure out the rules here.

Absolutely. Here's the deal... you know those pesky Libertarians who won't shut up about the L/R paradigm and never have a solution for anything? Well maybe their warnings aren't just because they read Atlas Shrugged or heard an old Richard Nixon speech. Maybe they see the problem of big government and what happens when the electorate votes in a moron like Donald Trump. All those executive orders and executive powers that maybe weren't abused by Bush Jr. or Obama? (well they were but nothing like this guy) You mean somebody like Trump can abuse them? The "independent" federal reserve printing press? That can actually be manipulated and abused for corrupt means? It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad. And the funny part is a lot of people (including very smart people on this board) think the solution to a government that is too big and easily corrupted is more government.

People were actually shocked (and I really think they were shocked) that this 2 trillion dollars started going to corporations and people that didn't even need it. I mean I can't say I am the biggest fan of Bernie Sanders' solutions but I think he pretty fairly describes how this country is run.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by molson

Does concern for fed corruption count as sincere?

FWIW, any opinion counts as sincere in my book. Not my place (or anyone else's) to judge whether it is or not. A false argument should be refuted, and attacking the person making it has no place in that discussion.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by panerd

Absolutely. Here's the deal... you know those pesky Libertarians who won't shut up about the L/R paradigm and never have a solution for anything? Well maybe their warnings aren't just because they read Atlas Shrugged or heard an old Richard Nixon speech. Maybe they see the problem of big government and what happens when the electorate votes in a moron like Donald Trump. All those executive orders and executive powers that maybe weren't abused by Bush Jr. or Obama? (well they were but nothing like this guy) You mean somebody like Trump can abuse them? The "independent" federal reserve printing press? That can actually be manipulated and abused for corrupt means? It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad. And the funny part is a lot of people (including very smart people on this board) think the solution to a government that is too big and easily corrupted is more government.

People were actually shocked (and I really think they were shocked) that this 2 trillion dollars started going to corporations and people that didn't even need it. I mean I can't say I am the biggest fan of Bernie Sanders' solutions but I think he pretty fairly describes how this country is run.

I fail to see how the sarcastic bolded part is refuted by the rest of the post.

SI

[panerd]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I fail to see how the sarcastic bolded part is refuted by the rest of the post.

SI

Make Congress declare war, revoking king/dictator-like status of the president.
Require balanced budget, audit federal reserve which shockingly people now think might not be independent.
Campaign finance reform, might see some differences in future trillion dollar bailouts.
Term limits for lifelong members of congress...

[JPhillips]

There's an absurdity to these protests, that are coordinated, or at least blessed, by the WH. The official policy of the WH is to isolate until the end of April, but Trump is also encouraging these protests demanding an end to isolation now.

[Bee]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Sure, but again I don't see the relevancy. Intent is about what you are trying to do, whether something is purposeful or incidental, etc. Motivation is about why you did it. In the example being used for this discussion, that would be like saying the First Steps act was passed on accident vs. doing it on purpose. That's not even an issue - we know it was done on purpose, the issue is how much we can know about the why and how relevant that is.

So if I understand correctly, you are ok with making assumptions about someone's state of mind when evaluating the intent or purpose of what they are doing, but not making similar assumptions about the motive? ok, you be you man.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by panerd

Make Congress declare war, revoking king/dictator-like status of the president.
Require balanced budget, audit federal reserve which shockingly people now think might not be independent.
Campaign finance reform, might see some differences in future trillion dollar bailouts.
Term limits for lifelong members of congress...

Hey, those are all great ideas! I disagree with exactly one of them and we could haggle about those details. But I'd be fine with a lot of those in law or in a platform. However your previous post had nothing about them and was just preening as being above the fray

Neither post addresses the current situation. What's the libertarian way of dealing with a pandemic and subsequent recession? That seems like a couple of problems that aren't exactly in the wheelhouse of a super small government.

SI

[Brian Swartz]

Nice try, but not at all. I'm for not making assumptions about state of mind at all due to the breathtaking arrogance involved in doing so. The corollary being drawn here is completely false. Criminal intent is about actions that directly bear on the crime … i.e. if you shoot a gun while pointing it at someone it's not reasonable to claim that you didn't intend to cause harm with it. The statements being made in the political realm here are not about a direct connection to a specific action with a causal link, etc. They are literally casting a shadow on every single action taken, regardless of circumstances. They're in the category of 'all the neighbors say so and so is a jerk, therefore they must be the killer', absent any consideration of the actual circumstances of the crime itself. It's an approach that completely ignores basic understandings of the human psyche and cannot be honestly appraised in terms short of the pathological.

[Lathum]

Trumps psyche is easily the most transparent thing about him

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Neither post addresses the current situation. What's the libertarian way of dealing with a pandemic and subsequent recession? That seems like a couple of problems that aren't exactly in the wheelhouse of a super small government.

SI

Well here's a libertarian response to that statement

Libertarianism and the Coronavirus Pandemic | Cato @ Liberty

[Lathum]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/17/o...RaTogPcOx3i7FI

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

There's an absurdity to these protests, that are coordinated, or at least blessed, by the WH. The official policy of the WH is to isolate until the end of April, but Trump is also encouraging these protests demanding an end to isolation now.

This is criminal behavior IMO.

The stating of one thing to the public in pressers and in doctrine and then sowing discord through popular means.

Not to mention my complete fantastic befuddlement that they allowed the states to compete for PPE against each other. That alone I feel like is a complete and utter failure of leadership that cost lives. Trump should be run out of dodge for this alone.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

There's an absurdity to these protests, that are coordinated, or at least blessed, by the WH. The official policy of the WH is to isolate until the end of April, but Trump is also encouraging these protests demanding an end to isolation now.

Reddit was doing some digging and there was some obvious proof of astroturfing because of the way the domains were registered for each state's "grassroots" protest. Combine that with the timing of Trump's tweets and it's pretty obvious part of the GOP or Trump's campaign is pushing for civil unrest in swing states.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Not to mention my complete fantastic befuddlement that they allowed the states to compete for PPE against each other. That alone I feel like is a complete and utter failure of leadership that cost lives. Trump should be run out of dodge for this alone.

You assume this wasn't incompetence turned opportunism

SI

[albionmoonlight]

I certainly don’t have hard numbers on these “protests.” But the pictures sure seem like the media is doing everything in his power to make small pathetic little crowds look much bigger than they actually are.

[albionmoonlight]

I used to know someone who worked for a while in debt collection. She tried to help locate the people running away from their debts. One thing she said once was that the amount of work some people did to hide from debt collectors seemed like way more trouble than just getting a job to earn the money to pay back the debt.

I feel like the amount of work this White House is doing to cover up the fact that it has done almost nothing to help mitigate the problem is going to end up being a hell of a lot more work (and much less likely to be politically successful) then if they had just taken steps to mitigate the problem.

But President Trump is a real estate hustler to his core. You never just build the building well & make money that way. You cut corners, line your pockets, and your real work is convincing people that you had nothing to do with it in the first place.

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

You assume this wasn't incompetence turned opportunism

SI

And then stealing the ones that the states are able to grab if they can find a flimsy enough pretense to do so.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

But President Trump is a real estate hustler to his core. You never just build the building well & make money that way. You cut corners, line your pockets, and your real work is convincing people that you had nothing to do with it in the first place.

Friend of mine used to be a union electrician on NYC. Said Trumps job sites were always the best to work on. Clean, safe, catered even. Guys fought to get the jobs.

Probably just another con to make the working man think he is on their side.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Friend of mine used to be a union electrician on NYC. Said Trumps job sites were always the best to work on. Clean, safe, catered even. Guys fought to get the jobs.

Probably just another con to make the working man think he is on their side.

I don’t think that Trump decided to become a populist politician until later in life. I doubt he was playing the long game with the “workingman“ there.

That is interesting information, however. My sense of Trump is that he is the sort of guy who would constantly be fighting to pinch pennies on stuff like that. But apparently I was wrong.

[Flasch186]

When dealing with the union versus a SBO who sent him an invoice I'm sure were very different interactions. My guess is he needed the union and its workers. He could screw the company that sold him sinks.

[cuervo72]

The mother of one of my better friends growing up got into construction/contracting at some point. Word from him was that her company did work on a Trump project and got stiffed.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

The mother of one of my better friends growing up got into construction/contracting at some point. Word from him was that her company did work on a Trump project and got stiffed.

Do some research on the Taj Mahal. It is repulsive what he did. We have a family friend who owned a music store and he almost put them out of business.

[Mota]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Reddit was doing some digging and there was some obvious proof of astroturfing because of the way the domains were registered for each state's "grassroots" protest. Combine that with the timing of Trump's tweets and it's pretty obvious part of the GOP or Trump's campaign is pushing for civil unrest in swing states.

Now here's what I don't understand. By trying to create dissidence in the swing states, the Trump supporters that are protesting are more likely to get COVID-19 and become ill. And if any of them die, he loses them as supporters. Thus making these states more likely to be democratic states.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Mota

Now here's what I don't understand. By trying to create dissidence in the swing states, the Trump supporters that are protesting are more likely to get COVID-19 and become ill. And if any of them die, he loses them as supporters. Thus making these states more likely to be democratic states.

Throughout this the GOP seems to have a playbook that they're struggling to deviate from. The old tried and true GOP methods don't seem to work as well in a global pandemic.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by Mota

By trying to create dissidence in the swing states, the Trump supporters that are protesting are more likely to get COVID-19 and become ill. And if any of them die, he loses them as supporters. Thus making these states more likely to be democratic states.

There's not enough protestors for that to matter. That many people in the streets would be anarchy or a coup.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Throughout this the GOP seems to have a playbook that they're struggling to deviate from. The old tried and true GOP methods don't seem to work as well in a global pandemic.

Yes. This. If we are all working together to fight a common enemy and for our common good, then the GOP loses. The more we are at each other‘s throats, the more likely they are to win. The more the blame goes to Democrats instead of the virus, the more likely they are to win.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Mota

Now here's what I don't understand. By trying to create dissidence in the swing states, the Trump supporters that are protesting are more likely to get COVID-19 and become ill. And if any of them die, he loses them as supporters. Thus making these states more likely to be democratic states.

Once it came out that minorities in urban areas were suffering from the virus disproportionately it was only a matter of time until some white people decided that they were safe.