What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Richard Hakluyt]

Trump owns a Nobel Peace prize.

Somebody elses but yes. Sort of like how Putin has a Super Bowl ring.

Utterly ridiculous. I have my father's medals in my study, they are a highly-valued possession, but they are about his military service and say nothing about me at all. Trump may as well start collecting medals, he could get all sorts of stuff and become a military hero by his reasoning.

[The Brain]

I think it's a bad thing that the Peace Prize committee has, for a very long time, strayed from its mission. The Peace Prize is about peace. Not freedom, not democracy, not opposition to oppression. All those were very hot topics during Nobel's later life, if he had wanted to create a Prize for those things he would have. I think the peace movement is wrong, but what I think doesn't matter, it's what Nobel wanted in his will that matters. The committe has taken Nobel's name and money and used it for their own personal agendas. This is a bad thing.

A potential counterargument could be "but freedom etc are good things, and improves the chances of peace". Sure, but when you let your own pet areas trump Nobel's will, then you're fine with political winds deciding the Prize. In the not-too-distant future maybe the idea will be "lasting peace is only possible with racial purity, cleaning the gene pool should therefore be rewarded".

There is a cost to ignoring wills. I for one would be reluctant to set up a Prize that I know is likely to be hijacked for other purposes. So we won't see a Brain Prize for Non-Douchery.

[Norgy]

The Peace Prize is worth as much as a Burger King paper crown or the FIFA Peace Prize now.

And The Brain makes some good points: The "larger concept of peace" has been problematic, to say the least. While plenty of good causes have gotten some welcome attention, these causes have had a rather tenuous connection to peace...

[garbon]

And The Brain makes some good points: The "larger concept of peace" has been problematic, to say the least. While plenty of good causes have gotten some welcome attention, these causes have had a rather tenuous connection to peace...

Agreed. However, I'm not all that bothered if people want to deviate from his will. More than a century on, I'm not sure why we should feel obliged to indulge his personal rehabilitation scheme.

[Legbiter]

He seems genuinely happy.



Oldest Make-A-Wish Foundation recipient? 

[mongers]

He seems genuinely happy.

....snip....

Oldest Make-A-Wish Foundation recipient? 

I wonder if he's ever had a moment of introspection in his entire 'adult' life?

[Crazy_Ivan80]

She doesn't look too happy though.

[Valmy]

She is making the same stupid ass mistake people have made with this guy for 50 years. She thinks if she scratches his back, he will scratch hers. He didn't make it this far in life by being gracious I assure you. The only thing she achieved by doing this is humiliation.

[Oexmelin]

Americans' views on who is most responsible for political violence are deeply polarized, split largely along partisan and religious lines.

Democrats overwhelmingly attribute most responsibility for political violence to right-wing groups (73%), while Republicans attribute most responsibility to left-wing groups (72%).

While more Christians of color and non-Christians attribute most responsibility to right-wing groups for most political violence today, white Christian groups attribute most responsibility to left-wing groups.

Most Christian nationalism Adherents (73%) and Sympathizers (64%) attribute responsibility to left-wing groups, while most Rejecters (72%) attribute responsibility to right-wing groups. Christian nationalism Skeptics are divided.

(...)

Americans' views are strongly divided by party and religion on whether National Guard deployments in American cities cause more violence than they prevent.

A slim majority of Americans (52%) agree that deploying the National Guard to patrol American cities may cause more violence than it prevents. Democrats (80%) and independents (60%) are far more likely than Republicans (23%) to agree.

Most Christians of color and non-Christians agree that these deployments cause more violence, while white Christian groups are far less likely to do so. Agreement is particularly lower among white evangelical Protestants (29%).

Christian nationalism Rejecters (80%) are the most likely to agree, followed by Skeptics (54%), Sympathizers (37%), and Adherents (26%).

Opposition to stripping citizenship and deporting U.S. citizens deemed a threat is widespread, with notable exceptions among Republicans, white evangelical Protestants, and Christian nationalism Adherents and Sympathizers.


Four in ten Americans (41%) favor "stripping U.S. citizens of their citizenship and deporting them if they are determined to be a threat to the country." Republicans (60%) are roughly twice as likely as independents (38%) and Democrats (27%) to agree.

White evangelical Protestants (56%) are the only religious group with majority support for stripping U.S. citizens of their citizenship and deporting them, compared with fewer Hispanic Protestants (49%), white Catholics (48%), and white mainline Protestants (46%). Support among other religious groups is notably lower.

Christian nationalism Adherents (67%) and Sympathizers (57%) are notably more likely than Skeptics (40%) and Rejecters (23%) to favor stripping U.S. citizens of their citizenship.

From:  https://prri.org/about/

[Caliga]

She is making the same stupid ass mistake people have made with this guy for 50 years. She thinks if she scratches his back, he will scratch hers. He didn't make it this far in life by being gracious I assure you. The only thing she achieved by doing this is humiliation.

Well she's gotten him to humiliate himself, too.  He's too idiotic to see that, but anyone else with two brain cells to rub together does.

[grumbler]

Four in ten Americans (41%) favor "stripping U.S. citizens of their citizenship and deporting them if they are determined to be a threat to the country."

How can anyone not read this and despair of ever restoring normalcy in the US? I'd worry if the percentage were 4%.

If such a law were ever passed, I'd hope they at least have the courage to name it "Nuremburg Laws 2nd Edition"

[mongers]

Four in ten Americans (41%) favor "stripping U.S. citizens of their citizenship and deporting them if they are determined to be a threat to the country."

How can anyone not read this and despair of ever restoring normalcy in the US? I'd worry if the percentage were 4%.

If such a law were ever passed, I'd hope they at least have the courage to name it "Nuremburg Laws 2nd Edition"

To be fair to Americans, I think in any population there will be a section that don't care about laws and rights for other people, favouring 'natural justice' instead.

I reckon at least 25% of the UK populations would have answered that poll in a similar way.

[grumbler]

Four in ten Americans (41%) favor "stripping U.S. citizens of their citizenship and deporting them if they are determined to be a threat to the country."

How can anyone not read this and despair of ever restoring normalcy in the US? I'd worry if the percentage were 4%.

If such a law were ever passed, I'd hope they at least have the courage to name it "Nuremburg Laws 2nd Edition"

To be fair to Americans, I think in any population there will be a section that don't care about laws and rights for other people, favouring 'natural justice' instead.

I reckon at least 25% of the UK populations would have answered that poll in a similar way.

Really?  You think that 25% of the British people would say that it is okay for the government to simply "determine" that a British citizen is a "threat," strip them of citizenship, and deport them to wherever the government desires?

[garbon]

Four in ten Americans (41%) favor "stripping U.S. citizens of their citizenship and deporting them if they are determined to be a threat to the country."

How can anyone not read this and despair of ever restoring normalcy in the US? I'd worry if the percentage were 4%.

If such a law were ever passed, I'd hope they at least have the courage to name it "Nuremburg Laws 2nd Edition"

To be fair to Americans, I think in any population there will be a section that don't care about laws and rights for other people, favouring 'natural justice' instead.

I reckon at least 25% of the UK populations would have answered that poll in a similar way.

Really?  You think that 25% of the British people would say that it is okay for the government to simply "determine" that a British citizen is a "threat," strip them of citizenship, and deport them to wherever the government desires?

They didn't deport her (as she was gone) but that is what the UK did to Shamima Begum though used figleaf that they interpreted her to have citizenship for Bangladesh. The latter said no and I guess she will continue to live in a refugee camp?

She was born and raised to 15 in the UK.

[Richard Hakluyt]

The Begum case makes no sense at all to me. We have, rightly imo, said that the grooming and trafficking of minors is one of the worst crimes. This happened to her. Now she was a foolish girl, but foolish teens are ten a penny which is why we try to protect them.

I also hate the idea of stripping people of their citizenship. In the UK at least it seems to be that some people, brown people, have an inferior class of citizenship which is revocable. It is citizenship though, not a golf club membership. If a citizen performs dreadful acts against their country then they should be tried for treason.

We all lose out by treating citizenship as a trivial and contingent thing.