Donald Trump
Comments
-
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.kingstongraham said:
"I don’t know if I’ll do the fighting myself or if other people will."nickice said:
Examples?kingstongraham said:
He's been inciting violence for months. He's only got away with it because he's president.nickice said:
My objection is not to the media not sharing Trump's tweets, it's only to what twitter is doing (I've made the argument before about social media being the new public square) and the power of social media generally. Free speech is interpreted very broadly in the USA so unless Trump is directly inciting violence I don't think he's broken any law. He's behaved irresponsibly and should be condemned but I don't think it should be up to twitter to decide the consequences or claim statements to be false.rick_chasey said:
I mean, there is a public order case in this specific instance.nickice said:I suppose you could look at it the other way round and say that any president who is regularly getting tweets deleted and banned is not fit to be president.
A news team deciding not to share Trump's statements for fear of incitement would not be seen as censorship by most normal people.
I'm not sure either way tbh.
"Liberate Michigan"
“LIBERATE VIRGINIA, and save your great 2nd Amendment. It is under siege!”
He supported Kyle Rittenhouse.
He's been telling his supporters they need to be ready to defend their second amendment repeatedly. What could that mean?
Now: “walk down to the Capitol. You will never take back our country with weakness.”0 -
Aren't you referring to Brexit here?kingstongraham said:
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.
0 -
people on here predicting no Rep President for the forseeable future really do not understand politics in the USA2
-
Who has been killed in / by the Brexit process Rick?rick_chasey said:
Aren't you referring to Brexit here?kingstongraham said:
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.0 -
They were doing. Everyone votes with their wallet unless they have a strong reason not to, so their main challenge is to stop being racist. All of the rich, white members of the Senate and Congress need to understand that the US doesn't all look like them.kingstongraham said:The Republicans could always try doing popular things? Then they might not always get a minority of the vote.
0 -
The MP Jo Cox.Dorset_Boy said:
Who has been killed in / by the Brexit process Rick?rick_chasey said:
Aren't you referring to Brexit here?kingstongraham said:
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.
FWIW not even in the states have they started killing elected political leaders.1 -
The bigger threat to the Republicans would be if Trump runs again in 4 years as an independent and splits their vote.nickice said:One of the more damaging (though not immediately so) things about this is that this must surely lead to a Republican president not being elected for a long time or even being in the running. You only have to look at the SNP in Scotland to see the dangers of not having a decent opposition.
0 -
No Republican président has been as awful as Trump. This is new groundsurrey_commuter said:people on here predicting no Rep President for the forseeable future really do not understand politics in the USA
0 -
They've tried to. Several were shot.rick_chasey said:
The MP Jo Cox.Dorset_Boy said:
Who has been killed in / by the Brexit process Rick?rick_chasey said:
Aren't you referring to Brexit here?kingstongraham said:
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.
FWIW not even in the states have they started killing elected political leaders.0 -
Hence the behind closed doors discussions about impeachment, to bar him from doing that. Won't happen though, beccause it is pointless - if he doesn't run himself, some other Trumpist loonie, who may even have the surname Trump or Kuschner, will do so. There is nothing to stop the man himself from campaigning for someone.Pross said:
The bigger threat to the Republicans would be if Trump runs again in 4 years as an independent and splits their vote.nickice said:One of the more damaging (though not immediately so) things about this is that this must surely lead to a Republican president not being elected for a long time or even being in the running. You only have to look at the SNP in Scotland to see the dangers of not having a decent opposition.
1 -
Mrs's Lincoln and Kennedy would disagree with you about the severity of the shootingnickice said:
They've tried to. Several were shot.rick_chasey said:
The MP Jo Cox.Dorset_Boy said:
Who has been killed in / by the Brexit process Rick?rick_chasey said:
Aren't you referring to Brexit here?kingstongraham said:
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.
FWIW not even in the states have they started killing elected political leaders.0 -
I mean re the Trump election malarky.surrey_commuter said:
Mrs's Lincoln and Kennedy would disagree with you about the severity of the shootingnickice said:
They've tried to. Several were shot.rick_chasey said:
The MP Jo Cox.Dorset_Boy said:
Who has been killed in / by the Brexit process Rick?rick_chasey said:
Aren't you referring to Brexit here?kingstongraham said:
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.
FWIW not even in the states have they started killing elected political leaders.0 -
As discussed on here yesterday this doesn't seem to be the case in the US. Take a look at those rioters yesterday, do you think they've got richer under Trump? They've been brainwashed by the rhetoric of an entitled billionaire to rebel against "the Establishment" (maybe that's what you mean by a strong reason not to though?).First.Aspect said:
They were doing. Everyone votes with their wallet unless they have a strong reason not to, so their main challenge is to stop being racist. All of the rich, white members of the Senate and Congress need to understand that the US doesn't all look like them.kingstongraham said:The Republicans could always try doing popular things? Then they might not always get a minority of the vote.
0 -
I'm not an expert on US law but I don't think any of them would cross the threshold. Not acceptable behaviour but not illegal.kingstongraham said:
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.kingstongraham said:
"I don’t know if I’ll do the fighting myself or if other people will."nickice said:
Examples?kingstongraham said:
He's been inciting violence for months. He's only got away with it because he's president.nickice said:
My objection is not to the media not sharing Trump's tweets, it's only to what twitter is doing (I've made the argument before about social media being the new public square) and the power of social media generally. Free speech is interpreted very broadly in the USA so unless Trump is directly inciting violence I don't think he's broken any law. He's behaved irresponsibly and should be condemned but I don't think it should be up to twitter to decide the consequences or claim statements to be false.rick_chasey said:
I mean, there is a public order case in this specific instance.nickice said:I suppose you could look at it the other way round and say that any president who is regularly getting tweets deleted and banned is not fit to be president.
A news team deciding not to share Trump's statements for fear of incitement would not be seen as censorship by most normal people.
I'm not sure either way tbh.
"Liberate Michigan"
“LIBERATE VIRGINIA, and save your great 2nd Amendment. It is under siege!”
He supported Kyle Rittenhouse.
He's been telling his supporters they need to be ready to defend their second amendment repeatedly. What could that mean?
Now: “walk down to the Capitol. You will never take back our country with weakness.”
Especially the 'enemies of the people' one an supporting someone is not incitement. That would be similar to the French offence of 'glorifying terrorism' which is bad law IMO0 -
That is what I mean, you just do not get how tribal American politics isnickice said:
No Republican président has been as awful as Trump. This is new groundsurrey_commuter said:people on here predicting no Rep President for the forseeable future really do not understand politics in the USA
0 -
It will also galvanise his support.First.Aspect said:
Hence the behind closed doors discussions about impeachment, to bar him from doing that. Won't happen though, beccause it is pointless - if he doesn't run himself, some other Trumpist loonie, who may even have the surname Trump or Kuschner, will do so. There is nothing to stop the man himself from campaigning for someone.Pross said:
The bigger threat to the Republicans would be if Trump runs again in 4 years as an independent and splits their vote.nickice said:One of the more damaging (though not immediately so) things about this is that this must surely lead to a Republican president not being elected for a long time or even being in the running. You only have to look at the SNP in Scotland to see the dangers of not having a decent opposition.
0 -
There was a big Supreme Court case about this. I'll see if I can find it. It isn't actually as clear-cut as you're suggesting.morstar said:
There is going to be a movement towards the likes of Twitter and Facebook having to take more responsibility for what they host. The discussions have been taking place for years but these events are only going to accelerate policy making.Dorset_Boy said:Surprised no one has picked up on the answer to the last YouGov question in Rick's post - 56% think there was enough fraud to have an impact on the result, with only 36% disagreeing. That's pretty worrying.
It will be interesting to see what happens obver the next 14 days. Trump clearly is not fit to remain in office but is anyone prepared to do anything about that?
On the twitter front, who is deciding that his tweets be deleted? Preventing retweets and marking them up for what they are is one thing, but in the near future there will need to be a discussion around who decides what should and should not remain posted, and who actually is responsible for deciding that.
And for fear of repetition, it’s not censorship, the internet is open to host your own platforms.
I do agree it’s a sensitive area though. I have a real fear for the disproportionate prevalence of fringe ideas in our current society but do support free speech. As ever a delicate balancing act to get right.
As for Trump specifically, don’t forget he himself has been very proactive in trying to restrict press scrutiny of his own actions. He is playing both sides of the argument in his usual victim way.0 -
Not doing popular things got them the Presidency and Senate 4 years ago.kingstongraham said:The Republicans could always try doing popular things? Then they might not always get a minority of the vote.
Remember, you don't need to win the popular vote to get in power.
The Reps are the party of money and generally ridiculously rich capitalists are not very nice people. They will finance, support and be loyal to their own to save themselves every dime possible and stuff those who need assistance.
Its the same in the UK with the Tories, but thats for a separate thread..The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
I felt his comment yesterday must have been very close given he made it at a time when the violence was already in progress (I think). Short of saying "grab your weapons and storm the Capitol" I don't think he could have got much more overt. Even in his 'appeal for calm' he was praising the rioters.nickice said:
I'm not an expert on US law but I don't think any of them would cross the threshold. Not acceptable behaviour but not illegal.kingstongraham said:
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.kingstongraham said:
"I don’t know if I’ll do the fighting myself or if other people will."nickice said:
Examples?kingstongraham said:
He's been inciting violence for months. He's only got away with it because he's president.nickice said:
My objection is not to the media not sharing Trump's tweets, it's only to what twitter is doing (I've made the argument before about social media being the new public square) and the power of social media generally. Free speech is interpreted very broadly in the USA so unless Trump is directly inciting violence I don't think he's broken any law. He's behaved irresponsibly and should be condemned but I don't think it should be up to twitter to decide the consequences or claim statements to be false.rick_chasey said:
I mean, there is a public order case in this specific instance.nickice said:I suppose you could look at it the other way round and say that any president who is regularly getting tweets deleted and banned is not fit to be president.
A news team deciding not to share Trump's statements for fear of incitement would not be seen as censorship by most normal people.
I'm not sure either way tbh.
"Liberate Michigan"
“LIBERATE VIRGINIA, and save your great 2nd Amendment. It is under siege!”
He supported Kyle Rittenhouse.
He's been telling his supporters they need to be ready to defend their second amendment repeatedly. What could that mean?
Now: “walk down to the Capitol. You will never take back our country with weakness.”
Especially the 'enemies of the people' one an supporting someone is not incitement. That would be similar to the French offence of 'glorifying terrorism' which is bad law IMO0 -
Errr - wtaf Richard? Seriously?nickice said:
They've tried to. Several were shot.rick_chasey said:
The MP Jo Cox.Dorset_Boy said:
Who has been killed in / by the Brexit process Rick?rick_chasey said:
Aren't you referring to Brexit here?kingstongraham said:
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.
FWIW not even in the states have they started killing elected political leaders.
Martin Luther King and Malcolm X spring immediately to mind together with the two mentioned above.
.The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
two term Dem Pres then Reps back in.surrey_commuter said:people on here predicting no Rep President for the forseeable future really do not understand politics in the USA
.The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
This inside the Capitol is pretty bad.
0 -
People vote for what they think will be better for them, regardless of the reality. You are correct in that most of those people are no hopers who would be better off in a country with a welfare state. But they THINK that the Democrats will tax them more to provide healthcare that they can't afford for themselves and put up barriers to the American dream that they aren't ever going to attain. So deluded or not, they are voting with their wallets.Pross said:
As discussed on here yesterday this doesn't seem to be the case in the US. Take a look at those rioters yesterday, do you think they've got richer under Trump? They've been brainwashed by the rhetoric of an entitled billionaire to rebel against "the Establishment" (maybe that's what you mean by a strong reason not to though?).First.Aspect said:
They were doing. Everyone votes with their wallet unless they have a strong reason not to, so their main challenge is to stop being racist. All of the rich, white members of the Senate and Congress need to understand that the US doesn't all look like them.kingstongraham said:The Republicans could always try doing popular things? Then they might not always get a minority of the vote.
0 -
Cruz is a slime bag who is trying to get himself out of his own grave.briantrumpet said:MattFalle said:
No. Wrong again. You don't understand this for some reason.rick_chasey said:
Yeah, that's why it is in the hands of the Reps. If they all decide to turn moderate tomorrow, they keep the extremists out.First.Aspect said:
You are underestimating how entrenched Rep vs. Dem is. Even now, after the worst president in their entire history, the Republican party has only just lost both houses.nickice said:One of the more damaging (though not immediately so) things about this is that this must surely lead to a Republican president not being elected for a long time or even being in the running. You only have to look at the SNP in Scotland to see the dangers of not having a decent opposition.
The extremists will tie themselves to the Rep party because they believe it is their party.
If the GOP decide to turn moderate the extremists wil just say that they have sold out to the deep state and that they will fight to get "their" party back.
Trump will not set up his own party because that is not how the US political scene works. There are only two parties in the US. End of.
People like Cruz will not turn their back on MAGA or Trumpism because they know they now have no other political route - they tied their colors to the Trump Rep mast and will stay there.
The extremists are 500% against the Democrats, anything socialist and anything that isn't Rep/Trump.
Its not that difficult to get Richard.
Re Cruz - worth reading the replies to his trying to disconnect himself from last night's violence: he's getting attacked from both sides, but especially from the Trumpists who accuse him of betraying 'the cause'.
It is hard to see how the Republican Party can come back together again: Trump's awoken a beast which it's going to be almost impossible to placate, but without which the party will never be electorally successful.
He seems to forget that at the time the protesters were gathering he was in the building saying that the election was stolen.
He's also been supporting - down to the bone - a creature who told him his wife was ugly, hus father was an ilegal and he was an incompetent imbecile.
Cruz is to blame as much as Dotard for this together with Graham..The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
2 -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_shootingMattFalle said:
Errr - wtaf Richard? Seriously?nickice said:
They've tried to. Several were shot.rick_chasey said:
The MP Jo Cox.Dorset_Boy said:
Who has been killed in / by the Brexit process Rick?rick_chasey said:
Aren't you referring to Brexit here?kingstongraham said:
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.
FWIW not even in the states have they started killing elected political leaders.
Martin Luther King and Malcolm X spring immediately to mind together with the two mentioned above.
I think there were also credible threats against Obama
0 -
the "establishment" has disenfranchised and sidelined them. Now the black rights groups are complaining that they were treated worse last year and demanding twitter silence anyone who they (the black rights groups) disagree with.Pross said:
As discussed on here yesterday this doesn't seem to be the case in the US. Take a look at those rioters yesterday, do you think they've got richer under Trump? They've been brainwashed by the rhetoric of an entitled billionaire to rebel against "the Establishment" (maybe that's what you mean by a strong reason not to though?).First.Aspect said:
They were doing. Everyone votes with their wallet unless they have a strong reason not to, so their main challenge is to stop being racist. All of the rich, white members of the Senate and Congress need to understand that the US doesn't all look like them.kingstongraham said:The Republicans could always try doing popular things? Then they might not always get a minority of the vote.
trump was just a lightening rod
Wait till the vile daughter runs
0 -
I thought it was clear he meant in the current campaign?MattFalle said:
Errr - wtaf Richard? Seriously?nickice said:
They've tried to. Several were shot.rick_chasey said:
The MP Jo Cox.Dorset_Boy said:
Who has been killed in / by the Brexit process Rick?rick_chasey said:
Aren't you referring to Brexit here?kingstongraham said:
Plus all the descriptions of groups or individuals as "enemy of the people" even after people have been killed.
FWIW not even in the states have they started killing elected political leaders.
Martin Luther King and Malcolm X spring immediately to mind together with the two mentioned above.0 -
Also one of his sons is likely to be running from what I understanddavid37 said:
the "establishment" has disenfranchised and sidelined them. Now the black rights groups are complaining that they were treated worse last year and demanding twitter silence anyone who they (the black rights groups) disagree with.Pross said:
As discussed on here yesterday this doesn't seem to be the case in the US. Take a look at those rioters yesterday, do you think they've got richer under Trump? They've been brainwashed by the rhetoric of an entitled billionaire to rebel against "the Establishment" (maybe that's what you mean by a strong reason not to though?).First.Aspect said:
They were doing. Everyone votes with their wallet unless they have a strong reason not to, so their main challenge is to stop being racist. All of the rich, white members of the Senate and Congress need to understand that the US doesn't all look like them.kingstongraham said:The Republicans could always try doing popular things? Then they might not always get a minority of the vote.
trump was just a lightening rod
Wait till the vile daughter runs0 -
So they are fighting for a billionaire businessman to fight their corner? That sums up their level of intelligence.david37 said:
the "establishment" has disenfranchised and sidelined them. Now the black rights groups are complaining that they were treated worse last year and demanding twitter silence anyone who they (the black rights groups) disagree with.Pross said:
As discussed on here yesterday this doesn't seem to be the case in the US. Take a look at those rioters yesterday, do you think they've got richer under Trump? They've been brainwashed by the rhetoric of an entitled billionaire to rebel against "the Establishment" (maybe that's what you mean by a strong reason not to though?).First.Aspect said:
They were doing. Everyone votes with their wallet unless they have a strong reason not to, so their main challenge is to stop being racist. All of the rich, white members of the Senate and Congress need to understand that the US doesn't all look like them.kingstongraham said:The Republicans could always try doing popular things? Then they might not always get a minority of the vote.
trump was just a lightening rod
Wait till the vile daughter runs
1 -
they believe that they are fighting for an anti establishment character to fight for them.Pross said:
So they are fighting for a billionaire businessman to fight their corner? That sums up their level of intelligence.david37 said:
the "establishment" has disenfranchised and sidelined them. Now the black rights groups are complaining that they were treated worse last year and demanding twitter silence anyone who they (the black rights groups) disagree with.Pross said:
As discussed on here yesterday this doesn't seem to be the case in the US. Take a look at those rioters yesterday, do you think they've got richer under Trump? They've been brainwashed by the rhetoric of an entitled billionaire to rebel against "the Establishment" (maybe that's what you mean by a strong reason not to though?).First.Aspect said:
They were doing. Everyone votes with their wallet unless they have a strong reason not to, so their main challenge is to stop being racist. All of the rich, white members of the Senate and Congress need to understand that the US doesn't all look like them.kingstongraham said:The Republicans could always try doing popular things? Then they might not always get a minority of the vote.
trump was just a lightening rod
Wait till the vile daughter runs
the fact he shares their abhorrent racist beliefs is just a sideline to the show..The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0
