What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[viper37]

https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-china-canada-mexico-fentanyl-e526616cdcb7fc596ed999cb89ee2265

White House says Trump tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China will come Saturday. No word on exemptions

Going to buy my last Coppola Cabernet bottle in long while.

Fuck Trump, fuck the GOPTards, fuck Otto and all the morons like him.

[Valmy]

White House says Trump tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China will come Saturday. No word on exemptions

So many great jobs are now going to be created in America!

I am baffled that even Trump thought this was a good idea. All those business people who supported him, enjoy I guess.

Meanwhile the rest of us get to enjoy the high prices.

But really, I can see him rescinding these tariffs after a couple days and being hailed as a hero. But we will see.

[Maladict]

they were founded largely on principles of religious freedom (that's the whole story of the Mayflower and the pilgrims)

The pilgrims had plenty of religious freedom in Leiden. They needed to go somewhere else so their kids would not have the freedom to leave their church.

[DGuller]

The AOC wing is the same as Bernie Sanders and while they may appeal to the young populist, they repulse anyone with an education in economics/finance/business, people from the center, people whom the Democrats absolutely need.

The advantage of the AOC wing is that they are more savvy to how media and politics currently work. The old fossils seem to be stuck in the 1980s. Now I am currently as anti-Joe Rogan as anybody, despite being a longtime fan of his thanks to Newsradio and used to enjoy his podcast, but when Kamala Harris decided (or was advised) that some in person rallies were better uses of her time than going on his show I was worried. That in itself might not be the one thing that lost the election but it showed a...lack of understanding of how to reach the most voters particularly critical swing voters in a modern election. You absolutely hit the podcast circuit, particularly those with millions of viewers.

As for being concerned populism will drive off moderate voters...um tons of moderate swing voters went Donald Trump's way. Appealing to the mythological center that wants old school 1990s liberalism is a proven loser that I can see. If it wasn't Trump wouldn't have won twice.

Besides AOC has proven herself to be very reasonable in supporting more moderate policies when practical. Describing her as some kind of Matt Gaetz of the left isn't accurate.

I agree with your sentiment, I'm not at all sure that sidelining AOC is the right move.  I think we live in the age where being divisive but authentic beats being a milquetoast who says all the right things, after carefully calculating that it won't offend anyone.  I think one of the ironies of the last election is that Harris appeared to be less authentic than Trump, despite Trump being a bullshit factory, because Harris only spoke in controlled settings, so that she can stay on the calculated talking points.  Another factor in AOC's favor is that she has genuine power to inspire, which is in huge deficit in the Democratic party.

[Barrister]

Many people fled England to pursue religious freedom.  Sure, they did not intent to extent that freedom to others in the new colonies they founded, but it was "baked into the cake".

Let's say there is, in our contemporary times, a revolution taking place in Iran, after multiple military conflicts with Israel.  The leaders of the country flee to Afghanistan to pursue religious freedom.  The top echelons of the government and some of those who agree with their visions are fleeing, and are allowed to leave peacefully, within some parameters defined by the new government.

They will be merging with the new government of Afghanistan to recreate an Islamic Republic.

Would you agree they are seeking to recreate an idyllic society based on religious freedom?

1. The 17th century is pretty different from the 21st century.

2. It would be more like, I dunno, Zoroastrians, or Ba'hai, fleeing Iran to set up new colonies to worhip their faiths.

[Valmy]

they were founded largely on principles of religious freedom (that's the whole story of the Mayflower and the pilgrims)

The pilgrims had plenty of religious freedom in Leiden. They needed to go somewhere else so their kids would not have the freedom to leave their church.

They were also worried that their kids were starting to integrate and become Dutch IIRC. The only way to stay English while also having religious freedom (maybe religious freedom to be culty) was to be a colonist. The Mayflower I think more rightly deserves to be remembered for its primitive written constitution, the Mayflower Compact, than the religious freedom thing. And, indeed, when I was in school we had to do a project where each page was a line from the Mayflower Compact and you had to illustrate it or say what it means to you or whatever.

However, there is the fact that with Charles I and William Laud trying to force conformity on the English and, disastrously, the Scottish Church lots of Calvinists DID flee to New England. Oliver Cromwell himself seriously considered it for awhile IIRC. So it isn't like the constant religious nonsense in England at the time, and people trying to flee it to protect their religious beliefs, wasn't a thing. Of course by the 18th century I think people were generally able to worship as they pleased in England, at least to the extent one could in the colonies anyway, and that stopped being a motivator.

[Razgovory]

But I would strongly disagree that is America's "foundation".  That was the failure of the 1619 Project - to view the foundation of America solely through the lens of slavery.

Even putting aside the flowery language of the Declaration of Independence - America was founded on a heritage of religious freedom, self-government and co-operation with the indigenous peoples.

You have the rose tinted glasses of a conservative my friend.

American flourished due to the slave trade, from North to South, and the co-operation with the indigenous peoples from the beginning was to take the lands of other indigenous peoples.

The myth of the Thanksgiving is just a myth, not the reality.
The colonists went to war soon after to exterminate them and take their lands in King Phillip's war.

Yeah, we are all founded on genocide and the like.  Every living person is descended from someone who participated in the destruction of another people.  Your country is founded on the theft of land and the exploitation through unequal treaties of indigenous people who in turn exterminated and enslaved other indigenous people.

[viper37]

Paramount ready to pay Trump lawsuit to get merger.approval


This is what he.meant: Make America.Great.Again
Legalize corruption.

Thank God Israel is saved.

[viper37]

Many people fled England to pursue religious freedom.  Sure, they did not intent to extent that freedom to others in the new colonies they founded, but it was "baked into the cake".

Let's say there is, in our contemporary times, a revolution taking place in Iran, after multiple military conflicts with Israel.  The leaders of the country flee to Afghanistan to pursue religious freedom.  The top echelons of the government and some of those who agree with their visions are fleeing, and are allowed to leave peacefully, within some parameters defined by the new government.

They will be merging with the new government of Afghanistan to recreate an Islamic Republic.

Would you agree they are seeking to recreate an idyllic society based on religious freedom?

1. The 17th century is pretty different from the 21st century.

2. It would be more like, I dunno, Zoroastrians, or Ba'hai, fleeing Iran to set up new colonies to worhip their faiths.

These pilgrims were considered too radical for England's religion at the time and fled to establish their own puritan colony.

[Jacob]

So Trump is picking fights with Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Denmark - and thus the EU, Mexico, Canada, Panama.

What's the status of relations with the UK? IIRC there was some stuff about "regime change" and getting rid of Starmer... but that was Musk, not Trump right?

So which traditional allies are not in Trump's sight yet? Australia and Israel. Anyone else left?

[Barrister]

These pilgrims were considered too radical for England's religion at the time and fled to establish their own puritan colony.

Yes.

And?

[Barrister]

So Trump is picking fights with Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Denmark - and thus the EU, Mexico, Canada, Panama.

What's the status of relations with the UK? IIRC there was some stuff about "regime change" and getting rid of Starmer... but that was Musk, not Trump right?

So which traditional allies are not in Trump's sight yet? Australia and Israel. Anyone else left?

Saudi Arabia.

[Jacob]

Saudi Arabia.

Right you are.

[Barrister]

Saudi Arabia.

Right you are.

The joke of course being nobody would have really considered Saudi Arabia a "traditional ally" - more an ally of convenience.

But I trust you remember about how the Saudis gave Jared Kushner several billion dollars...

[Jacob]

Indeed. And I'm pretty sure there's been significant flows from Saudi Arabia to the Trump organization since then.