What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Oexmelin]

On this, I'd trust Trump's raw animal cunning. If he's fighting this, it's because he feels it would hurt him, whether because he slept with underage girls (quite likely, given his personality), or because he cheered on in a way that leave little doubt about his frame of mind.

As to why this would hurt him, I think we underestimate how much steam the topic of a vast network of elite paedophiles operating in impunity has given to the populist right.

[Razgovory]

Trump is like a hurricane that gathers strength from all these stories.  He's already weathered umpteen things that would end most politicians careers, adding a handful more makes no difference now.

That's my point.  He's built a brand on not giving a shit.  Why is he so bent up about one more public urination charge?

Well, one it may be a crime.  The second is that among the right wing Jeffery Epstein client list is sort of the sanitized Qanon.  The right is convinced this is the smoking gun that will reveal all the satanic pedophile elites.  They have been wanting Trump to release this to bring about The Storm, the final purge of all the evil Hollywood and Political elites ruling over everyone.  The thing is, I don't think there is an "Epstein client list".  So there is nothing Trump could release to satisfy his base here.  I doubt there is anything that could really implicate Trump.  But some of it might be embarrassing, and contradict his statements that he was never "a fan" of Epstein's.  My guess is that he birthday card that WSJ released yesterday was part of documents that either the FBI or SDNY had from the Epstein case.  Nothing criminal, but very embarrassing. 

[Grey Fox]

Someone tell Yi that he's right, it only matters to the MAGA crowd. It's why the movement exist. To expose the powerful and rich of their depravity.

[Sheilbh]

On this, I'd trust Trump's raw animal cunning. If he's fighting this, it's because he feels it would hurt him, whether because he slept with underage girls (quite likely, given his personality), or because he cheered on in a way that leave little doubt about his frame of mind.

As to why this would hurt him, I think we underestimate how much steam the topic of a vast network of elite paedophiles operating in impunity has given to the populist right.

Yeah exactly - and I think he's right. But also more generally I don't think any sex scandal, if you want to view it and Daniels that way, is about the sex.

I'd add that I don't even think you need to go to the populist right. That may be where some of that energy is on the US for the conspiracy theory about elites - but I think there's a far broader popular sense of sort of base layer conspiracy around Epstein. I think probably more because of his death and lack of trial than anything else - there was no answer or end to that story.

I think he's right but as I say I think it's one of a few issues - with the H-1B visas and Israel-Iran - where I think a significant chunk of his MAGA base are starting to radicalise away from him and out of his control. I don't think we've seen that before but it seems to be a feature this term.

[Syt]

[HVC]

orban has some work to do yet.

[garbon]

USA! USA!

[Josquius]

On this, I'd trust Trump's raw animal cunning. If he's fighting this, it's because he feels it would hurt him, whether because he slept with underage girls (quite likely, given his personality), or because he cheered on in a way that leave little doubt about his frame of mind.

As to why this would hurt him, I think we underestimate how much steam the topic of a vast network of elite paedophiles operating in impunity has given to the populist right.

.
I don't know. I have so little faith in the populist right that if it came out without a doubt trump is a core member of an elite paedo ring it would still be a case of "yeah but what about the Clintons" and "that's different. That girl was only a few months shy of her birthday when she'd become a legal adult and clearly a whore"

[The Brain]

True dat.

[celedhring]

It's because of the Spanish-American war. And I'm not completely joking     

Our "old fart" nationalist right has always had an anti-anglosaxon slant due to historical reasons. Add that to the usual anti-US bias from modern far left, and the result is that Spain has always been the most US-skpetic of all major Western nations after France I guess.

[Syt]

[Norgy]

It's because of the Spanish-American war. And I'm not completely joking     

Our "old fart" nationalist right has always had an anti-anglosaxon slant due to historical reasons. Add that to the usual anti-US bias from modern far left, and the result is that Spain has always been the most US-skpetic of all major Western nations after France I guess.

I would think Opus Dei's rise in the United States to stand beside the Religious Reich has mended some fences, though.

Norway's been very pro-American (apart from the far left anti-war movement) since, well, since Norwegians began emigrating to the continent, I suppose. But the US is making it hard to be a good bitch these days. Then again, 80-90 percent of males between 18-40 thinks Trump is great even here. They are not getting laid nearly enough, obviously.

[Zanza]

The most depressing figure there must be the distrust Canadians now feel for the US. One of the most peaceful and deepest partnerships in the world and it's gone within half a year of the Trump regime.

[crazy canuck]

The most depressing figure there must be the distrust Canadians now feel for the US. One of the most peaceful and deepest partnerships in the world and it's gone within half a year of the Trump regime.

While it is undoubtedly true that Trump's 51 state comments are the reason the US is ranked as the greatest threat we face, it is also true that relations with the US have been worsening, and our concerns about the US have been increasing for some time.

[Sheilbh]

I assume Murdoch will fight. He has been terrorising politicians for decades and won't want to lose that power by being revealed as a paper tiger.

Also to give a slightly more positive take on Murdoch - he's had a baleful impact on our public life etc etc. But I think at his core (to an extent that is not true of his kids) he is still a newspaperman - and I think Fox/broadcast is different.

There have been numerous stories over the years, particularly with the Times and WSJ, where people with access to Murdoch ask him to stop a story and basically every time they get knocked straight back. Some for big stories like Theranos, others for smaller ones. He backs his editors, I'm sure there is one but I can't think of an example from an editor or journalist of Murdoch spiking a good, legitimate story. Similarly he puts his editors under a lot of pressure and may have a line (I think the Times is still very good and pretty down the line) - but from everything I've read, and heard in media gossip, the vast majority of the time he is very good at backing his editors against external pressure.