Jump to content

The Tangerine, Ferret Wearing Leader of the Free World


TheAuthority

Recommended Posts

Well we have to accept it, either begrudgingly or in ecstatic fervor, Donald Trump is going to be the President of the United States of America. Regardless if you’re on the “good, the world of politics needs a shake up” side, or in the “ WTF, OMG aaaarrrghghgbsuhckluhdfjnjdfeil!! we’re all doomed” side, I thought that this demanded it’s own thread.

So feel free to post thoughts & observations of the orange, spray-tanned monstrosity here and I guess I’ll see you in the camps after he wins the election for Emperor of the World in 2018, (alongside his Vice-Emperor Farage.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread seems a good place to drop this in, the lecture is about 30 mins before it goes into  Q and A.  

The proposition is that Trump is part of a much broader phenomenon in the West that includes the left and right then gives some possible explanations as to what is causing it. 

It's interesting - if you're a politics geek. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blyth seems to be suggesting that those with a vested interest in the present economic arrangements have good reasons for obfuscating the economic causes of Trumpism and claiming that the only motivation is racism, so his voters can be dismissed as wicked xenophobes.

He identifies the link with poor education and voting patterns, but it is not that they are too thick to vote for the status quo, it is that they are not in jobs which are insulated from the effects of globalisation.

The graph showing the winners and losers in the share of global wealth is very revealing: it's as if the global elite have said, if you want socialism you can have it, but your wealth will be shared with the workers of the third world, while we increase our own.

The elite are brilliant in the way they continue to present their plan in terms of humanist values and ethics, which no one with a socialist moral framework can possibly disagree with.

After all, as Blyth points out, third world workers are slightly better off and inequality has narrowed.

But it is the West's bottom 20% who have paid for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Awol said:

This thread seems a good place to drop this in, the lecture is about 30 mins before it goes into  Q and A.  

The proposition is that Trump is part of a much broader phenomenon in the West that includes the left and right then gives some possible explanations as to what is causing it. 

It's interesting - if you're a politics geek. 

Thanks for posting. It's helpful to hear an unemotional, un-personal analysis of current affairs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheAuthority said:

Thanks for posting. It's helpful to hear an unemotional, un-personal analysis of current affairs.

Probably the most important thing that he pointed out is that the ECB's ruling that, what he calls 'consuming nations' (Italy et al), must operate within strict fiscal rules, means that their economies can only shrink with every cycle of cuts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

Probably the most important thing that he pointed out is that the ECB's ruling that, what he calls 'consuming nations' (Italy et al), must operate within strict fiscal rules, means that their economies can only shrink with every cycle of cuts. 

Yes, Spain, Greece etc. must operate permanent austerity economic policies because of the Euro. If they had their own currency they could devalue it and at least have a little more flexibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://time.com/4587069/donald-trump-pakistan-phone-call-nawaz-sharif/?xid=tcoshare

Quote

There are few foreign policy topics quite as complicated as the relationship between India and Pakistan, South Asia’s nuclear-armed nemeses. Any world leader approaching the issue even obliquely must surely see the “Handle With Care” label from miles away, given the possibility of nuclear conflict.

According to a readout of the conversation from the Pakistani authorities, he apparently agreed to visit the country and said he was “ready and willing to play any role that you want me to play to address and find solutions to the outstanding problems.” He reportedly added: “You are a terrific guy. You are doing amazing work which is visible in every way.”

:lol:

He's so meta at this point that it's impossible to even satirise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/11/2016 at 19:37, MakemineVanilla said:

the ECB's ruling that, what he calls 'consuming nations' (Italy et al), must operate within strict fiscal rules, means that their economies can only shrink with every cycle of cuts. 

The ECB should stick to considering changes to the LBW law, the decline of test cricket and ball tampering!

 

oh, the other ECB. Sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been a lot written on Trump's mental state, and psychologists keep returning to it with a kind of shocked horror, like someone watching their own house burn down.

This piece is a good example of the incredulity of an observer.  Extract:

Quote

...This is not someone who is merely narcissistic in the colloquial, casual sense of the term, meaning that he's selfish or self-centered.  This is someone with a psychiatric disorder in all its flagrant, florid particulars. To grasp its seriousness is to be staggered that someone too disordered and rancid to be a trustee of your condo association will be running our country. How is it possible that almost half the voters, even those who like his values and disliked his opponent, could have listened to him taunt and lie and bully his way through a campaign and then said, Yep, that's who should be in charge of the country?

The implications are nothing short of chilling. It's not just how little he knows, but how little that fact bothers him—the overweening arrogance that leads him to believe he has nothing to learn, that he knows "more about ISIS than the generals do." It's not just that he's an extreme risktaker, but that he takes those risks purely in the service of his own wealth and glory. It's not clear that he has any principles, as such; what he has is an overwhelming need to be the center of attention, to be liked, feared, admired. Apart from considerations of personal profit, his foreign policy is likely to be determined at least in part by which individuals on the world stage stroke his ego and which ones criticize him—never mind that despicable leaders may do the former and reasonable leaders the latter (which is actually more likely than the reverse, if you think about it).

His hunger for approval means he's likely to keep surrounding himself with those who tell him what he wants to hear and flatter him—the engine of Shakespearean tragedies. His belligerence and volatility, that hair-trigger temper, are the last qualities you want to see in someone holding a position of power, particularly when they're coupled with a childish us-versus-them view of the world: xenophobic nationalism and compulsive competitiveness. His disorder leaves no room for consensus and collaboration. How can one not tremble at the thought that someone like this will command the military and have access to nuclear weapons?...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, peterms said:

There's been a lot written on Trump's mental state, and psychologists keep returning to it with a kind of shocked horror, like someone watching their own house burn down.

This piece is a good example of the incredulity of an observer.  Extract:

 

And yet, the world still has nice things to say about what a wonderful peace-loving blessing Fidel Castro was to the people of Cuba and the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

And yet, the world still has nice things to say about what a wonderful peace-loving blessing Fidel Castro was to the people of Cuba and the world.

I can see a park bench from my window.  And yet, somewhere in Rotherham, a man is eating a bacon roll.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he was serious about the presidency, he'd be dedicating his life to learning the role, as someone with zero experience.

Instead he's going on a self-serving 'Thank You Tour'.

Says everything you need to know about the man.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That was in response to this:

Attacking a private citizen who dared call the Carrier deal bad for workers. He even praised him initially, but then realised what a shit deal it was.

He needs to be called on on this bullshit. I've noticed that the responses to this tweets are turning against him though so that's a positive.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

That was in response to this:

Attacking a private citizen who dared call the Carrier deal bad for workers. He even praised him initially, but then realised what a shit deal it was.

He needs to be called on on this bullshit. I've noticed that the responses to this tweets are turning against him though so that's a positive.

 

Like that will stop him!

It'll all be over soon anyway. Until then, at least we have a few months in the camps together to look forward to before the inevitable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2016 at 04:10, StefanAVFC said:

If he was serious about the presidency, he'd be dedicating his life to learning the role, as someone with zero experience.

Instead he's going on a self-serving 'Thank You Tour'.

Says everything you need to know about the man.

You really ought to have a little think before posting biased nonsense like this. It's a "democracy" or a quasi one. Please explain what it is that you think is strange about a politician going and interacting with the electorate post election? Should they only do that when they need our vote?

Also, our all too experienced politicians have not exactly covered themselves in glory in the past 40 years, so your experience thing is a little shaky.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, villakram said:

You really ought to have a little think before posting biased nonsense like this. It's a "democracy" or a quasi one. Please explain what it is that you think is strange about a politician going and interacting with the electorate post election? Should they only do that when they need our vote?

Also, our all too experienced politicians have not exactly covered themselves in glory in the past 40 years, so your experience thing is a little shaky.  

Eh? Not entirely sure what the bolded has to do with anything.

Fact, he is forgoing security briefings. Briefings with essential info for his term. Has any other president ever done this? (They haven't)

More to the point, he's supposed to be a president who represents all of America. Where is his thank-you tour going? States that voted for him.

President for all of America, my ass.

And you finish your post with a jibe about other politicians in the last <arbitrary number> 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â