Trump

[Mithlomwen]

I was worried that in his speech today, he was going to declare a state of emergency to build the wall, and use the same state of emergency to declare martial law, dissolve the Senate and the House, suspend the Judiciary, and essentially make himself President-for-Life.

I have a major in politics, and I know there's no way he could get away with this. But the lunatic is just crazy enough to try it. (And I'm not sure the Republican party has enough of a spine to stand up to him any more.)

He's still threatening to do so.  Diverting monies from the California wildfire relief and monies from hurricane relief as well. 

[Sara Nilsson]

“When during the campaign, I would say ‘Mexico is going to pay for it,’ obviously, I never said this, and I never meant they’re gonna write out a check, I said they’re going to pay for it. They are,” he said as he prepared to visit the war-torn southern border of Texas, CNN reports.

I think my brain just gave up and headed down to the knees for an all night kegger.

https://www.theroot.com/trump-admits-that-he-lied-about-mexico-paying-for-borde-1831644379

[Oniya]

So instead of 'Mexico is going to fund the wall,' - the words of a 'businessman' - he meant 'Mexico is going to *punches palm* pay for this,' - the words of a street-tough.

[Regina Minx]

I think my brain just gave up and headed down to the knees for an all night kegger.

https://www.theroot.com/trump-admits-that-he-lied-about-mexico-paying-for-borde-1831644379

Wonder it would take to find evidence of the contra-OH LOOK I ALREADY FOUND IT ON THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN WEBSITE

[TheGlyphstone]

Politicians lie.

Most politicians have their lies exposed by leaks from staff or persistent investigative reporters.

Trump's lies are exposed by five minutes and access to Google.

[gaggedLouise]

So instead of 'Mexico is going to fund the wall,' - the words of a 'businessman' - he meant 'Mexico is going to *punches palm* pay for this,' - the words of a street-tough.

I was in an argument with two local Trump supporters on a Swedish web forum yesterday about the same thing - how do we understand Trump's statements that "Mexico's gonna pay for the Wall".  Of course, they argued that 1) Mexico as a country is wholly dependent on smuggling people and cheap products to the US, so choking the smuggling lines will force loads of money into Amrican enterprises, and 2) the threat of the unbuilt Wall has somehow forced Mexico to sign the new trade deal, which is going to force them out of the whole unofficial economy and black labour market if they want to sell stuff to the US, and in that sense they will be paying for the wall.

Only a minimal part of those money streams, of course, would ever find their way to the US federal money-chest. Which I pointed out. Ignored of course, and if it had been face to face talk they would no doubt have called me "you liberal cunt".

Well, towards the end of that discussion, I found myself making almost exactly the same point as quoted above. When they were saying/quoting "Mexico's gonna pay for it" they did seem to read it in the street thug sense : "you're gonna pay for this some day" = You will be punished for it!

[TheGlyphstone]

Do people in Sweden think Mexico is like, Somalia? A lawless wasteland whose entire economy is dependent on crime?

[Sara Nilsson]

Do people in Sweden think Mexico is like, Somalia? A lawless wasteland whose entire economy is dependent on crime?

No. Just just idiots think that, and sadly we have a few of those as well. Most swedes just shake their head at trumps stupidity.

[gaggedLouise]

Has anyone managed to figure out (from the NYT article) if the FBI are still actively investigating whether Trump is or has been a Moscow agent? :) The probe started in secret after Comey had been fired, but does it continue on its own, was it dropped or has it been subsumed into the Mueller inquiry?

The FBI are known to have a policy of never commenting in public on ongoing investigations until they have been handed over to a court, and of course, even if the probe was dropped, it could be picked up again... :)

[legomaster00156]

Far as I can tell, they started the probe, but it probably was sent to the Special Counsel following his appointment. Of course, Mueller is quiet about everything he does, so we have no idea of the fate of the probe following the FBI starting it.

[Tolvo]

There were a lot of breakthroughs and people flipping to rat on Trump a month or two ago. As far as I understand it is still going but they're in another quiet phase. Where they are likely analyzing a lot of things and comparing statements and information. It tends to be mostly quiet then there are explosions of questionings, hearings, statements, raids, etc, but then back to quiet. Currently they're probably going over the news that Trump was part of the Moscow Tower deal and was involved even after entering office and going over possible documents from when they raided Trump's foreign bank and Trump's former tax lawyer.

[TheGlyphstone]

Maybe he thinks keeping the government shut down will stop the investigation from advancing.

[Oniya]

Mr. Oniya has told me that if the government shutdown lasts for another 2 weeks, it will cost the economy as much as Trump's wall.

(Link because I found his source.)

[Tolvo]

He will probably say then "See it would have cost less to just give me the wall. So the Democrats were just doing it out of spite and hurt the citizens of the USA." Even though it's completely Trump's fault.

[gaggedLouise]

He will probably say then "See it would have cost less to just give me the wall. So the Democrats were just doing it out of spite and hurt the citizens of the USA." Even though it's completely Trump's fault.

Makes me think of the bank robber who walked into a bank in Copenhagen, tossed a plastic bag in front of one of the bank clerks and called out loud: "Gimme the money!!"

(That guy actually got some cash, not very much, but he was caught soon after on his bike in the afternoon traffic)

[TheHighwayHitman]

Just remember, we're getting Trump for another 4 years, and it's the result of pushback against "the left." I like President Trump. I don't think it matters much, though.

My personal belief is that people, as a rule, are far too entitled, lazy, and self-centered with a much greater desire to bitch and moan than actually acknowledge and fix their poor choices and mistakes. This includes myself. Even I am susceptible to that fallacy.

Here's an issue that I have, that I can't get a leftist, or liberal to give me a straight answer on. With that proposed socialist tax increase (I don't know the details of what it is, how it's figured, or where it comes from. I also don't care because it is neither here nor now. Just bear with me having an issue with it and my reasoning.), I fall into the tax bracket of having to pay an additional 5 to 6 grand in taxes a year.

That's a month of me working 70 hours a week, no friends, family, or life to speak of, for free. My pay for a month. Gone.

Why? Why should I accept or be in favor of that? The only people that benefits are those who sacrifice earning it in exchange for the things I can't have because I do. Yes, I choose to work like I do. I do it so I can retire before 50, and if not be well off, at least be comfortable. I do not choose to do it for people who aren't as productive as me to have a better life than me. Screw that. I'm more productive, more valuable. Take care of me first.

Yes. That is me being selfish and entitled. The difference between me and most people is that right out of the gate I'm acknowledging that I am motivated by looking out for numero uno. I have the moral high ground because I'm not taking away what other people earn to maintain (let alone improve) my position. I'm just trying to keep as much of what I earn as possible.

I'm not sure that this has anything to do with President Trump, really, other than being some insight as to why a casual supporter is okay with him opposed to say, Ocasio or Sanders. I'm also not attacking leftist or liberals. Nor am I clumping everyone together. It's simply convenient grouping of people who (usually) oppose my beliefs in just one example. Dont read too much into it.

[Ironwolf85]

It'd be either 1.9 or 5.9 not 4. Personally I don't know how well he'll do given that most Americans are rightfully blaming him for his shutdown.

as for the "socialist tax increase" I don't know what details you've been reading. Likely hyperbole, given that most of the tax increases proposed are targeted at those people and companies who have received tax cuts over the past 40 years under the trickle down economic model.

which only worked once, then caused a recession. All the other times it just basically gave away your tax money to large companies.

The biggest three things we spend on are the military, the elderly, and corporate subsidies. The last two get lumped together with food stamps whenever a republican needs to bitch about "entitlements" to vastly inflate the numbers.
You aren't going to touch the elderly, they always vote, and no senator will touch them.

So if you want to put some dents in the pork of the budget, you gotta cut corporate subsidies and military spending.


Trump of course would very much like to build a useless wall, but also give away free tax cuts to everyone at the same time, and raise military funding.
While also not paying for any of it. So much for fiscal responsibility.

[TheHighwayHitman]

None of that addresses or answers why I should have to pay more to support the less productive. It actually avoids it. You're not, at least it seems, grasping why people voted for Trump in the first place and subsequently why he will win again.

Most of us understand that greedy corporations are going to get their money, and would rather them have it than simply hand it over to the less fortunate.

Most see the capitalist model as the truest and fairest form of economy there is. Race, religion, etc doesn't matter. The consumer with the dollar has the buying power. Very few of us are worse off than our grand parents. We have iPhones, laptops, cars, microwaves, etc because of innovation and someone's desire to sell stuff for money.

And finally, who says the wall is useless? The only people I see thinking it is a bad idea are people far removed from the border who don't see the irony of saying a wall won't work yet every prison in the country is evidence to the contrary. The wall won't make it worse.

As for the military... well, the United States military is the biggest deterrent to war in the world and in order to stay on top it does need new technology and funding. Because, Space Force. I jest. I have mixed feelings on defense budget myself.

There. I humored you by responding to all of your points. Would you respond to mine about why I should have to pay more or not be taken care of first?

[Iniquitous]

Why? Why should I accept or be in favor of that? The only people that benefits are those who sacrifice earning it in exchange for the things I can't have because I do. Yes, I choose to work like I do. I do it so I can retire before 50, and if not be well off, at least be comfortable. I do not choose to do it for people who aren't as productive as me to have a better life than me. Screw that. I'm more productive, more valuable. Take care of me first.

Yes. That is me being selfish and entitled. The difference between me and most people is that right out of the gate I'm acknowledging that I am motivated by looking out for numero uno. I have the moral high ground because I'm not taking away what other people earn to maintain (let alone improve) my position. I'm just trying to keep as much of what I earn as possible.

Why wouldn't you want to help your fellow man?  Why do you think it is okay for you to ignore the suffering of your fellow man?  Why do you think that it is always 'they are lazy so why should I help them?'  I bust my motherfucking ass off day in and day out, have a chronic medical condition that I cannot even get treatment for because, yeah, our healthcare/insurance system is broken, and can't even afford to live on my own ... but I am lazy and don't deserve a living wage, a place of my own, and healthcare?  I don't deserve to know that I will have food for the week?

Yeah, there are some who are content to let others pay the way for them... but not all of us are like that.  And you might want to stop reciting the bullshit that the repubs constantly spout about socialism and do some research on your own.  ( https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/424911-nordic-lessons-on-aocs-70-tax-proposal ) But that whole 'I got mine, now you get yours' attitude is why we are in the boat we are in now and it sickens me to see so many people that lack empathy and caring for their fellow man.

[Eikichi]

Here's an issue that I have, that I can't get a leftist, or liberal to give me a straight answer on. With that proposed socialist tax increase (I don't know the details of what it is, how it's figured, or where it comes from. I also don't care because it is neither here nor now. Just bear with me having an issue with it and my reasoning.), I fall into the tax bracket of having to pay an additional 5 to 6 grand in taxes a year.

Maybe you can't get a straight answer because such a socialist tax increase doesn't exist? The most socialist tax increase proposed, is the one proposed by AOC which calls for a 70% marginal tax rate. That tax rate would affect less than 1% of american households and only apply to those making above ten million. So I have absolutely zero clue where you're getting your proposed tax increase from. So I'm not sure who told you, or if you did the math yourself, to figure out that you'd be in this tax bracket when, if you were in the tax bracket that was included in the 70% marginal rate. You'd be paying anywhere from 600-700 grand, scaling upwards, for every dollar past ten million.

[TheHighwayHitman]

I said the tax thing was neither here nor now and that I didn't care about details because it doesn't exist. I was using it as an example to drum up a question about an issue. Said issue revolves around socialism. The vast majority of Trump supporters are against socialism. Whether or not they are correctly informed isn't up for debate. They see socialism, say no, and vote for Trump. I understand that logic and understand why people vote for Trump. It has very little to do with racism, sexism, bla bla bla.

Ini: I like you just fine in the shoutbox, but please try to avoid the logical fallacies.

Insinuating people are not charitable or are otherwise obligated to "help their fellow man" is incorrect. I would wager that I am far more charitable with my time and money in a week than most people are in a month. But to answer your question. Asking me why I shouldn't want to help my fellow man doesn't answer the question why I should. So what? I don't know "these" or "those" people. And I surely don't owe them anything. I have me and mine to worry about first.

Let's assume for a minute that okay, I'm a terrible person if I don't give up more, so to not be a terrible person I agree to give up more. When is it enough? When do I have the right to say no way Jose. You've taken as much from me as I'm going to give? At what point does it stop being, "Help me because X!" And turn into "Okay. Time for me to sink or swim." As it stands, I already cough up between 3 and 4 a week in taxes. That is a lot of work I do for nothing other than paying taxes.

Your anecdote about your personal situation doesn't have any relevancy so I'm going to avoid it and say... I never said you don't deserve a livable wage, etc. What I said was, why do you get it at my expense? I'm all about people not being in poverty. But I'm also all about not stepping down out of a content middle class so someone else can leech. Robbing from Peter to pay Paul is still robbing someone.

As for the Republican Dogma statement. Again that's a logical fallacy. There are always going to be those who have and those who have not. Republicans aren't the reason some people suck at life, let alone the reason we're all not equally successful. The reason people are in this state is because of not handling your business and getting your own while worrying about what someone who is better off has.

[Skynet]

Just remember, we're getting Trump for another 4 years, and it's the result of pushback against "the left." I like President Trump. I don't think it matters much, though.

My personal belief is that people, as a rule, are far too entitled, lazy, and self-centered with a much greater desire to bitch and moan than actually acknowledge and fix their poor choices and mistakes. This includes myself. Even I am susceptible to that fallacy.

Here's an issue that I have, that I can't get a leftist, or liberal to give me a straight answer on. With that proposed socialist tax increase (I don't know the details of what it is, how it's figured, or where it comes from. I also don't care because it is neither here nor now. Just bear with me having an issue with it and my reasoning.), I fall into the tax bracket of having to pay an additional 5 to 6 grand in taxes a year.

That's a month of me working 70 hours a week, no friends, family, or life to speak of, for free. My pay for a month. Gone.

Why? Why should I accept or be in favor of that? The only people that benefits are those who sacrifice earning it in exchange for the things I can't have because I do. Yes, I choose to work like I do. I do it so I can retire before 50, and if not be well off, at least be comfortable. I do not choose to do it for people who aren't as productive as me to have a better life than me. Screw that. I'm more productive, more valuable. Take care of me first.

Yes. That is me being selfish and entitled. The difference between me and most people is that right out of the gate I'm acknowledging that I am motivated by looking out for numero uno. I have the moral high ground because I'm not taking away what other people earn to maintain (let alone improve) my position. I'm just trying to keep as much of what I earn as possible.

I'm not sure that this has anything to do with President Trump, really, other than being some insight as to why a casual supporter is okay with him opposed to say, Ocasio or Sanders. I'm also not attacking leftist or liberals. Nor am I clumping everyone together. It's simply convenient grouping of people who (usually) oppose my beliefs in just one example. Dont read too much into it.

How a tax increase socialist in and of itself? To my knowledge no mainstream Democrats are advocating for the abolition of private property in favor of a classless, moneyless society or making every business in the US collectively-managed by every employee working for it.

I know taht Sanders and Cortez self-ID as socialists, although their positions are more in line with Social Democracy (which tries to implement social reform rather than revolution in capitalism) than out and out socialism.

I don't know if you identify as a Republican, but it's common for many US conservatives to define socialism as more government control. Which it's not; otherwise every government that has ever existed would be socialist save for weird anarcho-capitalist communes or small families living in the wilderness.

[TheHighwayHitman]

Socialism is inevitably more government control though. Or rather, it leads to it. Someone had sent me a PM and in the commentary, I said I should have worded the issue differently for better clarification.

Let's suppose I own and operate a successful business that puts me in the 1% that is going to get taxed even more. That is how I should have begun my point. I didn't start that way because I didn't want to be misinterpreted, rather just making a point about taxes.

I digress.

Skynet, I would say it depends on what you feel the government's role is. The Bill of Rights is how, the Declaration of Independence is why.

[RedEve]

The most interesting and clever point that anyone has made about the tax rates discussions is that the era most conservative republicans hold up as the idealized vision of the perfect America is also the period in which the tax rates were significantly higher than they are now. People forget that until 1981 (the economic recovery tax act), the top rate was actually at 70% (which is now hysterically been described as socialist insanity by some sections of the media and the political world).

[lustfulintentions]

The most interesting and clever point that anyone has made about the tax rates discussions is that the era most conservative republicans hold up as the idealized vision of the perfect America is also the period in which the tax rates were significantly higher than they are now. People forget that until 1981 (the economic recovery tax act), the top rate was actually at 70% (which is now hysterically been described as socialist insanity by some sections of the media and the political world).

What they are really lauding from those days is women and POC 'knowing their place' (among other retrograde ideas). Also, they aren't smart enough to realize that a big part of what made households with one working parent feasible was working class jobs paying a real living wage.