President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

It’s a worst-case scenario that assumes Republicans can’t stabilize insurance markets during the transition.

Now why would we assume that just because they have no inkling of a plan, and because what ideas they have thrown out there are wildly different between the party crafting the legislation and the president who is supposed to sign it?

 

So was Obama.

 

This discussion will never be productive as long as people insist there's an equivalent to Trump on the other side anywhere in U.S. history.

There isn't.

 

No, but the Lewis example is instructive. When you treat Bush like he's Trump you don't have adjectives left for the real thing.

 

The egregious example is Romney's treatment. The Iraq War was a legitimate clusterfuck of historical proportions, and 43 deserved most of the shit he took for it. Painting Mitt Romney as "scary" and all other assortment of adjectives work at the time - it helped mobilize the base just enough to get Obama re-elected. But it desensitized people enough to pave the way for Trump's candidacy.

 

I'm not seeing the "blood on his hands" part you reference. Seems to me that right wing, pro-settlement Israelis do an awful lot of whining about betrayal whenever people in the U.S. don't blindly follow their lead.

Bibi doesn't like Obama, either. Screw Bibi. He's a clown.

 

Read carefully. I didn't say or imply that he was murderous, but that his hands are bloody from his embrace and advocacy for terrorists and despots.

 

I see that as nothing more than Jimmy Carter playing peacemaker, same as with Arafat. He saw himself as a man of peace. Did he make mistakes, sure, plenty of them, but there were fewer leaders who more earnestly sought peace.

 

I'm not taking a stance on whether it's his ethics or judgement that sucks. I'd guess both.

 

Guy, using those standards, do you have an example of an administration that doesn't embrace terrorists and despots?

 

I'm more offended by his post-President activity.

 

Those are good questions. But I guess you would have to say the tipping point, in Ukraine anyway, was the NATO/U.S. coup that ousted Yanukovich. There was no fighting in Ukraine before that, and there is no fighting in the Baltic states, as there has been no coup there. Yes, there is tension in the Baltics, as there always has been in Ukraine as well.

Ukraine always has been divided. But its presidents were always democratically elected. Some (Yuschenko) West leaning, others (Yanukovich) East leaning. Yuschenko was voted 0ut in 2010 with a 4 (4!) percent approval rating. But things were relatively peaceful during his unpopular term because his government was seen as legitimate. The NATO/U.S. coup in 2014 changed all that. The current government is horribly hostile to the east, which views it as illegitimate.

So I guess my answer would be . . . if you want to keep Russian troops away from the Baltic states, DO NOT cause or support any coups installing anti-Russian governments there, no matter how tempting it may be to poke the bear yet again.