|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Trump Presidency | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Try a hard reload.
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
The Twitter war between Trump and four Democrats in the house (Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Ayanna Pressley) continues:
If anyone knows what Trump is referring to when he says the Congresswomen "have been spewing some of the most vile, hateful, and disgusting things ever said by a politician in the House or Senate", please enlighten us. His reference to "shouting the F...word" refers to Tlaib's promise to "impeach the motherfucker" when speaking to a small gathering shortly after the 2018 election where she was not shouting, video in this tweet:
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Tr‘mp in 2020!
Edited by Percy, : Try some color.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2
|
Participants who cannot be civil and constructive will be asked to leave this thread, as Faith was a couple years ago.
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
It isn't fair to mention Faith since she's banned from this thread.
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Trump's possible purchase of Greenland from Denmark is brilliant. It seems a safe bet that global warming will make this a very different planet by 2100, and increasingly different after that, so the US needs more living space, or in the words of an illustrious German, lebensraum.
Greenland is shedding its glaciers at a breakneck pace and faster every year. Even at the ever accelerating rates it will likely take the Greenland ice a couple centuries to completely disappear, but when they're gone sea levels will have risen about 20 feet. Almost all coastal cities in the world will disappear under the waves. San Francisco with its hills would become a series of islands. But Greenland not only has a fair elevation above sea level, isostatic rebound would probably cause its elevation to increase rapidly. This would slow greatly in later years, but the initial rebound rate would be immense. Greenland will definitely remain way above sea level. At least 90% of Greenland is unsettled and cold, but with the glaciers and ice retreating more and more of Greenland would become open to productive settlement. Kansas will become a desert and Greenland will become breadbasket to the world. Denmark will become a world power. So buying Greenland so that US citizens displaced by global warming (due to sea level rise and to parts of the country becoming desert) have somewhere to go, and so that the US can maintain world dominance, would be a brilliant move. Denmark will not give up Greenland willingly, we've tried to acquire it before, so we'll have to take it by force. We could call it a kind of imminent domain. Most of Europe would support Denmark, and things would get kind of messy for a while, but in the end we would have expanded the area of the United States by 20% and guarantee ourselves world dominance for a couple hundred more years. Antarctica is the next big step. International treaty makes Antarctica open to the world, but Trump likes breaking treaties, so he should just claim Antarctica now. Who's going to stop him? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
(To Hyroglyphx: I'm just continuing the subthread, not replying to anything you said)
Many might have assumed that since Trump said it that it must not be true, but it turns out it is: Denmark subsidizes Greenland to the tune of around $700 million a year. What was untrue is Trump's implication that this is a significant drain on Denmark's economy. It isn't. $700 million is about 0.2% of Danish GDP. The $700 million is around $12000 for every man, woman and child in Greenland, and it funds about half the Greenland government, which in turn uses it to fund about 40% of the jobs in Greenland, where typically unemployment is on the higher side, recently around 9% and with many potential workers simply not looking. The US does not pay Denmark anything for the airbase at Thule. This is from the 1951 treaty made in the shadow of WWII while Denmark was still recovering:
quote: Perhaps Denmark should consider withdrawing from the treaty and begin negotiating with the United States for just compensation. Purchasing Greenland makes sense given its proximity, its strategic value, and its mineral resources which will over time become more and more accessible, but as in most things, the way Trump went about it has made a total hash of things, again alienating a close ally and damaging our image around the world. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
quote: It's a self-evident lie about doctors coming out of operating rooms - operating rooms are not near patient rooms, so Trump would have no way of knowing where any doctors who happened to be there came from. By constantly quoting Trump lies the media acts as an extension of his administration's propaganda arm. Instead of having articles with headlines like, "Trump reverses stance on background checks," they should instead say things like, "Trump announces yet another doubtful policy reversal." Traditionally such headlines are reserved for op-ed pieces, but the media has to start adopting a "fool me once, shame on you, fool me a hundred times, shame on me" attitude. They can't just keep running articles that largely just quote what Trump says when most of it either isn't true or will be changed within a day or two. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
JonF writes: What do you think of the headline in this case? Headline's fine, but it's a reaction piece, not the original news report whose headline should have been, "Trump exaggerates crowd size again." It shouldn't have taken the hospital issuing a statement for the media to report the absurdity and sheer tedium of how often he does just this one thing, and then there's the many other repetitive lies he tells. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2
|
Thugpreacha writes: Perhaps he does not have bad motives, but it is clear that he never agrees with the establishment...perhaps because it is largely liberal and educate. The reason people disagree with so much of what Trump says is because he is lying. Most of his lies stand in direct contradiction to reality, i.e., that he lied is not in doubt, for example, that China pays the tariff fees. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
It is a mystery to me why the news media (all of it) continues to report what Trump says, since it has become very clear that he is usually lying, being misleading, or will soon say the opposite. This article from today's USA today, 'They mean business.' Trump tells G7 that Chinese trade officials called to restart talks, provides an example.
quote: Did Chinese officials actually call in the 24 hours before Trump announced this? Possibly. Or is he talking about a call at some other time? Possibly? Did the officials actually say they wanted to restart talks? Possibly. Is Trump just trying to keep the stock market from resuming its downward spiral when it opened Monday. More likely.
quote: If Trump had talked to Chinese President Xi Jinping he would have said so, so he did not.
quote: Possibly true. Who knows? My guess is that the story will change very soon.
quote: In these two paragraphs USA Today is just reciting some factual information.
quote: Did Chinese officials actually call? Do they want to make a deal? Who knows? Stay tuned, the story will change.
quote: Most likely Trump declined to be specific because he's not sure what he's going to make up in the future.
quote: Who knows what "the highest levels" are. What I think is that Trump needed some news to forestall a further stock market collapse, so since undoubtedly someone in the Chinese government is always calling someone in the US government, Trump believes he isn't lying despite creating an impression in people's minds that is contrary to the truth.
quote: Trump said that Chinese officials called and said they want to make a deal, but Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said that discussions "went back and forth." They're saying different things. And where is the Secretary of Commerce in this?
quote: Yeah, right. They called and threw Trump a life preserver just when he needed it. Okay, sure. Like I said, stay tuned, folks. This will change, because whatever truth is in it isn't much. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Breaking news: Trump lies again
That's actually a link to a Washington Post article about Trump's Q&A with reporters at the close of the G-7 conference. About those supposed calls from high-ranking Chinese officials seeking a deal it says:
quote: Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin called them "communications." I have no doubt that the governments of countries as large as the US and China are in constant "communications" at a variety of levels. Human psychology is interesting. Most Trump supporters recognize Trump's problems with truth and women and non-white people and truth and allies and how tariffs work and truth (he loves dictators, though), but they support him anyway. Trump is like the used car salesman who tells you the car will get 100 mpg and never need repairs and will have a resale value twice what you paid. You know he's lying, but you don't call him on it because he's also describing the great deal he's giving you. Only later, too late, do you discover that that, too, was a lie. Some people know in advance to give the used car salesman a wide berth, others not so much. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
The likelihood that Trump flat out lied that there were two calls from high-ranking Chinese officials Sunday night continues to grow. The CNBC article China unaware of any calls to Trump reports these comments from Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang on Tuesday, a day after he first denied the calls ever took place:
quote: State-run media Xinhua reiterated the Chinese position on trade:
quote: Xinhua called Trump's demands that US companies leave China "ridiculous at best." Trump supporters: Does this sound like a country that's ready to talk? Do you still believe Trump's declaration that trade wars are easy to win? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
There's a levee system nearby the River Bend Resort and Golf that was installed by the Bush administration around 2006 to protect against flooding and to provide a boundary for immigration officials to patrol, but though a very visible pathway for the levee is present through the golf course, the levee itself was never built within its confines.
Now Trump proposes building his wall atop the levee, and the plan includes completing the levee within the golf club. You can see the route of the levee on this map. It's the white line passing across the top of the map:
The wall would cut the golf course community roughly in half. This it typical of what Trump's wall would do. The Rio Grande runs not straight but crooked, just like the area shown in the map. Trump's wall will only very roughly follow the river's contours and will leave many Texas communities south of it, suddenly more a part of Mexico than of the US. No wall is necessary along the Rio Grande. The river is already a patrolled barrier, both on the water and beside it. Trump's unnecessary wall, being built by money stolen from funds originally allocated to places as disparate as New York State and needy Puerto Rico, is a tribute to his ego. --Percy Edited by Percy, : Correct text to match the map's actual appearance.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024