Trump called Putin today to congratulate him on his election

[Marvin the Martian]

Argue the other side. Just for fun. See what you come up with.

The catch there is I don't want to become a Republican. For 8 years I watched some of our GOP Frienemies debase themselves claiming every Obama move, every Obama thought, every Obama sneeze, was the worst thing a president has ever done. I'm not going that route. So let me ask this, what argument would we be having today if Hillary Clinton said congratulations to a dictator (pick a dictator). CO would be on here blasting it as the worst move ever made by a president, and I'd be here saying she probably shouldn't have done it but in the grand scheme of things it isn't that big of a deal.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and a banal nicety is just that.

 

[zeke4ahs]

First, I think Trump is an idiot. I have trouble ascribing said idiot having developed some code system with Putin. Second, Putin has been a murderous thug for a ling time. As Rs keep pointing out, Obama congratulated him and gave the wiggle room comment.

Banal pleasantries are sometimes just banal pleasantries.

So answer my question, why did everyone on his team think it so important for him NOT to do it. And why did he think it so important TO do it?
And you know the situation with Russia was totally different when President Obama congratulated him. They hadn't just hacked our election and killed people with our closest allies.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

So answer my question, why did everyone on his team think it so important for him NOT to do it. And why did he think it so important TO do it?
And you know the situation with Russia was totally different when President Obama congratulated him. They hadn't just hacked our election and killed people with our closest allies.

Litvinenko was killed in the UK by polonium in 2006. That would be before Obama's congratulations. We knew Putin was old school KGB long before that. It should have been no secret that he is an evil man. I'm pretty sure I've called him Vlad the Impaler here before, and a long time ago.

I am NOT saying Trump was right in congratulating him. I am saying it isn't as big of a deal as it is being made out to be. Presidents have done much worse things than this. Trump himself has done worse things than this. By suggesting everything Trump does is some total horror I fear we desensitize people to total horror. He shouldn't have said it, but saying it is minor compared to not taking action.

 

[Bill4411]

Litvinenko was killed in the UK by polonium in 2006. That would be before Obama's congratulations. We knew Putin was old school KGB long before that. It should have been no secret that he is an evil man. I'm pretty sure I've called him Vlad the Impaler here before, and a long time ago.

I am NOT saying Trump was right in congratulating him. I am saying it isn't as big of a deal as it is being made out to be. Presidents have done much worse things than this. Trump himself has done worse things than this. By suggesting everything Trump does is some total horror I fear we desensitize people to total horror. He shouldn't have said it, but saying it is minor compared to not taking action.

It’s not the fact that he congratulated him, it’s the pattern of behavior that Trump exhibits concerning Putin. Instead of condemning Putin for the killings in England he congratulates him. His advisors were aware that Trump is seen as Putin’s puppet by many people and this didn’t help matters. Trump screwed up from a public preception point of view in America and I doubt that our allies were too impressed either.

 

[zeke4ahs]

Litvinenko was killed in the UK by polonium in 2006. That would be before Obama's congratulations. We knew Putin was old school KGB long before that. It should have been no secret that he is an evil man. I'm pretty sure I've called him Vlad the Impaler here before, and a long time ago.

I am NOT saying Trump was right in congratulating him. I am saying it isn't as big of a deal as it is being made out to be. Presidents have done much worse things than this. Trump himself has done worse things than this. By suggesting everything Trump does is some total horror I fear we desensitize people to total horror. He shouldn't have said it, but saying it is minor compared to not taking action.

Oh I know you're not saying it's right. My main question stands. I'd be questioning Obama if the same story came out. His advisors told him not to do it. Someone thought it so important they leaked that he was told not to do it. And yet he did it. Why??? If this isn't proof positive he ignores the people that are supposed to actually be running the country, I don't know what is.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

It’s not the fact that he congratulated him, it’s the pattern of behavior that Trump exhibits concerning Putin. Instead of condemning Putin for the killings in England he congratulates him. His advisors were aware that Trump is seen as Putin’s puppet by many people and this didn’t help matters. Trump screwed up from a public preception point of view in America and I doubt that our allies were too impressed either.

Again, he made a mistake. I'm not arguing that point. But congratulating him was less of a mistake than not immediately siding with the UK on the poisoning or not following through with sanctions immediately, just to name two bigger mistakes. It is sort of like wishing someone a "good day". It is just the useless politeness we do as part of the social convention. And yes, the optics are bad, which is why he shouldn't have done it. But bad optics are less of a problem than bad policy. That's where our problem is.

 

[iu_a_att]

The catch there is I don't want to become a Republican. For 8 years I watched some of our GOP Frienemies debase themselves claiming every Obama move, every Obama thought, every Obama sneeze, was the worst thing a president has ever done. I'm not going that route. So let me ask this, what argument would we be having today if Hillary Clinton said congratulations to a dictator (pick a dictator). CO would be on here blasting it as the worst move ever made by a president, and I'd be here saying she probably shouldn't have done it but in the grand scheme of things it isn't that big of a deal.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and a banal nicety is just that.

You seem to have lost track of the broad arc of history. Let me review and explain why there is nothing symmetric about the two parties. One party represents a growing and diverse coalition principally of lower and middle income people in cities. The other party represents a shrinking and racially homogeneous coalition of principally middle and high income people in more rural areas. The party of shrinking demographics has made a choice not to try and expand but, rather, to try and shrink the political power of their opposition through increasingly non-democratic methods. Trump is the most extreme play yet and signals the increasing willingness of the Republican coalition to dispense with democracy altogether and follow the lead of autocrats like Putin. We have been watching as democratic norm after democratic norm is shredded.

So, if you are following along, you realize that everyone who is actually concerned with preserving our little small d democratic experiment should be paying close attention precisely to what Trump is saying to Putin...a fellow who would very deeply like to see our little experiment here end in autocracy...a fellow with whom Trump shares both deep interests and affinity...a fellow who has actively employed his government's resources to aid Trumps victory.

Were Trump sending congratulations to some tin-pot dictator in sub-Saharan Africa we might react in the way you suggest...i.e., Trump shouldn't have done it and there is no big deal. But, that is not what we are talking about. So we should pay heightened attention to Trump's dealings with Putin.

 

[iu_a_att]

Again, he made a mistake. I'm not arguing that point. But congratulating him was less of a mistake than not immediately siding with the UK on the poisoning or not following through with sanctions immediately, just to name two bigger mistakes. It is sort of like wishing someone a "good day". It is just the useless politeness we do as part of the social convention. And yes, the optics are bad, which is why he shouldn't have done it. But bad optics are less of a problem than bad policy. That's where our problem is.

The "mistakes" you say are bigger are not independent of the current "mistake" ...rather all of those are not mistakes at all...Trump is sending an absolutely coherent and clear message to Putin through all of those actions. You are mistaken if you think they are mistakes.

 

[iu_a_att]

Again, he made a mistake. I'm not arguing that point. But congratulating him was less of a mistake than not immediately siding with the UK on the poisoning or not following through with sanctions immediately, just to name two bigger mistakes. It is sort of like wishing someone a "good day". It is just the useless politeness we do as part of the social convention. And yes, the optics are bad, which is why he shouldn't have done it. But bad optics are less of a problem than bad policy. That's where our problem is.

Just to reiterate...Trump's action was not a mistake. A mistake is something you did not intend to do with consequences you did not intend. The fact that the "optics are bad" as you say is not a bug it is a feature. The fact that it is a negative with many in the U.S. makes it a meaningful positive for Putin--who is, after all, the actual intended recipient of the message Trump is sending.

 

[IUCrazy2]

If this isn't proof positive he ignores the people that are supposed to actually be running the country, I don't know what is.

Whoa, whoa, whoa....what? This statement is completely wrong. The people who prepare those briefings for the President are advisors. They are not supposed to be actually running the country. The President is the decider, like it or not, he can listen to the advice given and then choose whether he wants to follow it or not. In fact, on any given subject, he is probably being given advice to handle situations in two completely different manners.

This is the one thing that has been laid bare by this administration. I firmly believe there is a group of people who sit just below the highest level who feel that they actually run this country. So people in the government disagree with Trump and they do this pussy "anonymous source" shit where they work for the guy and take his paycheck but undermine him the entire way. No you ass hats. Like it or not, he won the office on a certain platform. If you are not comfortable with his decisions, resign. Leave your post and go get another job. As a government employee, I get sick and f---ing tired of the way that many of these folks above me act.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

The "mistakes" you say are bigger are not independent of the current "mistake" ...rather all of those are not mistakes at all...Trump is sending an absolutely coherent and clear message to Putin through all of those actions. You are mistaken if you think they are mistakes.

I am suggesting actions are important, actions mean something. I had that position every time someone bitched about Obama saying "a" instead of "the" in a sentence. Trump's failure to follow through with actions against Russia is the problem. If Trump were working behind the scenes on a massive boycott of Russian goods, saying "congrats" wouldn't mean a thing. Suppose he didn't say congratulations and said "have a nice day", how irritated would people be?

As to it not being a mistake, I don't think we are arguing the same point. I can purposely and willfully move my queen so that it is easily captured. That doesn't mean it wasn't a mistake to move my queen there.

As to it being a message to Putin to keep interfering, I am somewhat doubtful. Putin can only alter along the edges. The more he interferes and the more obvious it is, the bigger the repercussion when Trump is gone. Even with Putin's help, Trump was far from a sure thing in 2016 and much less in 2020. Putin has limitations.

Not everything Trump does has to be the most evil thing any president has ever done. We start to desensitize people to real evil by crying wolf every day. He should not have congratulated Putin but there are many more bigger mistakes that have been made and will be made (by this and other presidents).

 

[Scott S]

Ok, I am against Putin. I am saying that a Kennedy arming South Vietnam is worse than saying something nice to Putin.

Have you ever ran into someone you do not like and said "good day" or anything else pleasant? Think of it that way. Saying congrats is not always a deep heartfelt well thought out idea that means "I will obay you master". I agree he should not say it but in the list of stupid things presidents have done, this is not over the top #1. That is my key point. The bigger problem are things like not immediately backing the UK.

History is full of world leaders saying nice things to each other while plotting to kill each other. As both sides prepared for WW1, the Kaiser was writing to the Czar as long time friends. Didn't stop him from trying to crush Russia.

I can simplify this down to be kind and cordial to everyone you meet.....and have a plan to kill them.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Let me review and explain why there is nothing symmetric about the two parties. One party represents a growing and diverse coalition principally of lower and middle income people in cities. The other party represents a shrinking and racially homogeneous coalition of principally middle and high income people in more rural areas. The party of shrinking demographics has made a choice not to try and expand but, rather, to try and shrink the political power of their opposition through increasingly non-democratic methods.

And that is a good thing?

The Democrats divide the United States along the lines of race, sex, identity, and status, and they run their politics accordingly. The Dems divide us and then seek to acquire or maintain power by exploiting the divisions. (Your post confirms this). This is horribly destructive of our commonalities and culture.

The Republicans still try ((although it seems to be a futile effort) to focus on policies like taxes, immigration, education, defense, security, and economic growth, which should have broad appeal regardless of demographics. As the Democrats respond to these policy initiatives they invariably bring skin color and other identities into the mix. Case in point; tax reform. That is showing itself to be beneficial to large groups of people across many lines of division, yet the Dems, STILL talk about it in terms of individual groups of people.

There was a time in my lifetime when politics focused on policy issues. The Democrats have deliberately destroyed that. Now politics is about what groups of people do we need as voters.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

The catch there is I don't want to become a Republican. For 8 years I watched some of our GOP Frienemies debase themselves claiming every Obama move, every Obama thought, every Obama sneeze, was the worst thing a president has ever done. I'm not going that route. So let me ask this, what argument would we be having today if Hillary Clinton said congratulations to a dictator (pick a dictator). CO would be on here blasting it as the worst move ever made by a president, and I'd be here saying she probably shouldn't have done it but in the grand scheme of things it isn't that big of a deal.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and a banal nicety is just that.

Lol. Nuance isn’t your strong point. Almost everything I posted about Hillary (except for two points) was critical of her. But that is not the same thing as saying I criticized everything she did. Same for Obama. There is a highly nuanced difference which you seem to have missed.

 

[iu_a_att]

I am suggesting actions are important, actions mean something. I had that position every time someone bitched about Obama saying "a" instead of "the" in a sentence. Trump's failure to follow through with actions against Russia is the problem. If Trump were working behind the scenes on a massive boycott of Russian goods, saying "congrats" wouldn't mean a thing. Suppose he didn't say congratulations and said "have a nice day", how irritated would people be?

I think you are saying that during the Obama administration you witnessed people here unfairly criticizing the President. You want to be better than that and be fair to this President. You saw people making mountains out of molehills before so you want to be sure you don't do that now. Is that right?

As to it not being a mistake, I don't think we are arguing the same point. I can purposely and willfully move my queen so that it is easily captured. That doesn't mean it wasn't a mistake to move my queen there.

We are arguing over whether Trump made a mistake or not. You are saying that he made a rather small mistake. I am saying that he is actually making a very dangerous and risky move. I hope the move does turn out to be a mistake, but if it does turn out to be a mistake it will not be small at all...rather it will be a huge mistake.

As to it being a message to Putin to keep interfering, I am somewhat doubtful. Putin can only alter along the edges. The more he interferes and the more obvious it is, the bigger the repercussion when Trump is gone. Even with Putin's help, Trump was far from a sure thing in 2016 and much less in 2020. Putin has limitations.

Trump is telling us that he has no intention of being gone any time soon. The freer Putin's hand the more he can do to help. Trump is signalling to Putin that he should understand his, Putin's, hands are free. Whether Putin will do anything...and whether it will succeed if he does...those are open questions. If Putin doesn't intervene...or if he does and it fails...Trump will be sunk and all of this will turn out to be not a small mistake but a colossally huge error of the sort Trump is renowned for. Where that leaves the United States is an open question too.

Not everything Trump does has to be the most evil thing any president has ever done. We start to desensitize people to real evil by crying wolf every day. He should not have congratulated Putin but there are many more bigger mistakes that have been made and will be made (by this and other presidents).

Trump does what he does. Almost all of it is stupid, reckless and narcissistic. Some of it will turn out to be among the most evil any president has ever done. Autocrats historically continuously do massive evil precisely to desensitize people. The victims of evil will naturally cry. Asking them to be silent in order to prevent ourselves from becoming desensitized is to compound evil. Our job should be to identify evil where we see it and oppose it wherever we can.

 

[Digressions]

So let me ask this, what argument would we be having today if Hillary Clinton said congratulations to a dictator (pick a dictator).

Let's not forget, this is part of the reason we're where we're at today.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/clinton-putin-226153

You're making excellent points, but in this instance, I think looking at the bigger picture is in order. There are serious concerns that the POTUS is compromised.

Sorry for the drive-by post, but thought about this earlier in the thread and was waiting for it to be posted/discussed. I wish I had more time to spend on it.

One other quick thought/analogy that often comes up in the court of public opinion... I was hoping O.J. was innocent. I maintained his innocence, in my own head, until about halfway through the prosecution's case. After a certain point, I didn't need the rest of the prosecution's case, and it was highly unlikely the defense could reasonably refute the amount, and type, of evidence that was presented against him.

With DJT, that's where I'm at, and have been for several months. I understand the need for, and respect, the process.

p.s. It's taken me about 10 minutes to write this, but 2 hrs to post it. I hope it doesn't bomb the thread when I hit "post reply".

 

[iu_a_att]

Let's not forget, this is part of the reason we're where we're at today.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/clinton-putin-226153

You're making excellent points, but in this instance, I think looking at the bigger picture is in order. There are serious concerns that the POTUS is compromised.

Sorry for the drive-by post, but thought about this earlier in the thread and was waiting for it to be posted/discussed. I wish I had more time to spend on it.

One other quick thought/analogy that often comes up in the court of public opinion... I was hoping O.J. was innocent. I maintained his innocence, in my own head, until about halfway through the prosecution's case. After a certain point, I didn't need the rest of the prosecution's case, and it was highly unlikely the defense could reasonably refute the amount, and type, of evidence that was presented against him.

With DJT, that's where I'm at, and have been for several months. I understand the need for, and respect, the process.

p.s. It's taken me about 10 minutes to write this, but 2 hrs to post it. I hope it doesn't bomb the thread when I hit "post reply".

Nice post. Your article reminds us of how vulnerable Putin feels. Having an ally in Washington is definitely helping him to shore up power in Russia. By congratulating Putin Trump is signalling that he will help Putin stay in power too.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Lol. Nuance isn’t your strong point. Almost everything I posted about Hillary (except for two points) was critical of her. But that is not the same thing as saying I criticized everything she did. Same for Obama. There is a highly nuanced difference which you seem to have missed.

I am sure your 23,842 posts against Obama couldn't have been critical of everything he did. But you sure touched on all the waking hours .

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

And that is a good thing?

The Democrats divide the United States along the lines of race, sex, identity, and status, and they run their politics accordingly. The Dems divide us and then seek to acquire or maintain power by exploiting the divisions. (Your post confirms this). This is horribly destructive of our commonalities and culture.

The Republicans still try ((although it seems to be a futile effort) to focus on policies like taxes, immigration, education, defense, security, and economic growth, which should have broad appeal regardless of demographics. As the Democrats respond to these policy initiatives they invariably bring skin color and other identities into the mix. Case in point; tax reform. That is showing itself to be beneficial to large groups of people across many lines of division, yet the Dems, STILL talk about it in terms of individual groups of people.

There was a time in my lifetime when politics focused on policy issues. The Democrats have deliberately destroyed that. Now politics is about what groups of people do we need as voters.

LOL. This is the most insane thing I've read on here in a long time. Thanks for that.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Let's not forget, this is part of the reason we're where we're at today.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/clinton-putin-226153

You're making excellent points, but in this instance, I think looking at the bigger picture is in order. There are serious concerns that the POTUS is compromised.

Sorry for the drive-by post, but thought about this earlier in the thread and was waiting for it to be posted/discussed. I wish I had more time to spend on it.

One other quick thought/analogy that often comes up in the court of public opinion... I was hoping O.J. was innocent. I maintained his innocence, in my own head, until about halfway through the prosecution's case. After a certain point, I didn't need the rest of the prosecution's case, and it was highly unlikely the defense could reasonably refute the amount, and type, of evidence that was presented against him.

With DJT, that's where I'm at, and have been for several months. I understand the need for, and respect, the process.

p.s. It's taken me about 10 minutes to write this, but 2 hrs to post it. I hope it doesn't bomb the thread when I hit "post reply".

There are serious concerns the president is compromised, I get that. Let's look at it from Putin's view. If I were Putin pulling the strings I would have Trump spitting fire at me every day. He can call me every name in the book, so long as he doesn't DO anything. My way Trump gets to look tough and thus have more power in American politics. The way it is happening, Trump looks weak which adds to the "he's compromised" point. Would Putin really want his top asset on the globe to blow his cover saying "congratulations"? I know that the Chinese are better at the long game, but Putin has to be better than giving up such an asset to cheaply.

 

[iuwclurker1]

So answer my question, why did everyone on his team think it so important for him NOT to do it. And why did he think it so important TO do it?
And you know the situation with Russia was totally different when President Obama congratulated him. They hadn't just hacked our election and killed people with our closest allies.

And...why was Trump infuriated that we found out he'd congratulated Putin?

 

[iu_a_att]

There are serious concerns the president is compromised, I get that. Let's look at it from Putin's view. If I were Putin pulling the strings I would have Trump spitting fire at me every day. He can call me every name in the book, so long as he doesn't DO anything. My way Trump gets to look tough and thus have more power in American politics. The way it is happening, Trump looks weak which adds to the "he's compromised" point. Would Putin really want his top asset on the globe to blow his cover saying "congratulations"? I know that the Chinese are better at the long game, but Putin has to be better than giving up such an asset to cheaply.

That misreads the situation. I don't think Trump regards himself as compromised or as Putin's puppet. I think he aspires to be the American Putin. His idea is to make use of Putin's capabilities to help him consolidate power here and, in return, he is promises to help Putin maintain power there. Your mistake is that you think Trump believes he gets more power here by looking tough on Russia. Trump's base like Russia...they want him to become America's Putin. It is probably true that a majority of Americans don't share that view and don't wish for Trump to become our Putin. But Trump's actions are calibrated both to alarm them and prove that they are toothless and can be ignored.

 

[bigmac76]

OBAMA SAID DO NOT RESIGN

 

[Rockfish1]

LOL. This is the most insane thing I've read on here in a long time. Thanks for that.

People who don't have "identities":

(1) White people;

(2) Christians;

(3) Men; and

(4) Straight people.
​

Everyone else is practicing "identity politics" and is engaged in special pleading. Those without "identities," on the other hand, are speaking from a disinterested perspective derived from pure reason about universal principles that are inherent in being a Real American. By arguing that everyone should enjoy the same rights and benefits we have always extended to white Christian straight men, Democrats are stoking division among us. We should go back to the Fifties when everyone knew their place.

Claims about "identity politics" have always ignored the obvious reality that white people (for example) have their own identities. When they act to protect what they see as their interests, this is regarded as the default setting, and the notion that white people could practice identity politics is laughed off. But now we have Trump, who embodies white identity politics in an overt way that would have been politically inconceivable before he did it.

Predictably, Trump's supporters blame Democrats for all this -- if only Democrats didn't stoke division by trying to include everyone's interests, Trump supporters wouldn't be acting out irrationally. #triggerwarnings #safespaces #snowflakes

 

[toastedbread]

Nice post. Your article reminds us of how vulnerable Putin feels. Having an ally in Washington is definitely helping him to shore up power in Russia. By congratulating Putin Trump is signalling that he will help Putin stay in power too.

I concur with just about everything you have written in this thread, but Putin is not vunerable to the public. The fact is that he is highly popular. He does not even need to rig elections to win.

The only potential manner in which Putin is forcibly removed is if elites turn against him.

 

[iuwclurker1]

Again, he made a mistake. I'm not arguing that point. But congratulating him was less of a mistake than not immediately siding with the UK on the poisoning or not following through with sanctions immediately, just to name two bigger mistakes.

Actually, those are just the same, insofar as they're all part of the same behavior of a coward kowtowing to a menacing dictator who's an avowed enemy of the US. You've just made the argument why this is non-trivial. Knew you could do it, Marvin.

So that's one argument: Trump congratulating Putin is one more instance in a long chain of acts in which our POTUS kisses the ass of a dictator who's threatening us with his nuclear arsenal, sending his air force on fly-by missions past our air force, etc. If we're going to talk about diplomacy as usual, how about reciprocal actions?

 

[iu_a_att]

And...why was Trump infuriated that we found out he'd congratulated Putin?

We don't know that he was infuriated as a matter of fact. We know that people claimed he was infuriated. What infuriates Trump is disloyalty to Trump.

 

[iu_a_att]

Actually, those are just the same, insofar as they're all part of the same behavior of a coward kowtowing to a menacing dictator who's an avowed enemy of the US.

I don't think this is correct. I don't think Trump is a coward kowtowing to a menacing dictator. I think he wants to join the growing club of menacing dictators by making common cause with the one who might be most helpful to him. Hopefully, Trump will have profoundly miscalculated and the gambit will fail. If it does fail then history will record just what perilous times we are living through.

 

[toastedbread]

We don't know that he was infuriated as a matter of fact. We know that people claimed he was infuriated. What infuriates Trump is disloyalty to Trump.

This entire "leak" was orchestrated by trump himself. It's a close the wagons, deep state is conspiring against me play.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I concur with just about everything you have written in this thread, but Putin is not vunerable to the public. The fact is that he is highly popular. He does not even need to rig elections to win.

The only potential manner in which Putin is forcibly removed is if elites turn against him.

There is a certain question about who really runs Russia. Do oligarchs exist because Putin allows them to, or does Putin exist because the oligarchs allow him to. I think Putin has the power, but it isn't overwhelming power, vis a vie the oligarchs.

 

[toastedbread]

There is a certain question about who really runs Russia. Do oligarchs exist because Putin allows them to, or does Putin exist because the oligarchs allow him to. I think Putin has the power, but it isn't overwhelming power, vis a vie the oligarchs.

I think Putin has consolidated power during his time in the Kremlin. There is a reason numerous Oligarchs were arrested, and it's not because they were fighting for democracy, as some of them like to claim. However, there is clearly a group of oligarchs with whhom Putin is aligned. Under the wrong circumstances, he could be pushed out.

 

[toastedbread]

I don't think this is correct. I don't think Trump is a coward kowtowing to a menacing dictator. I think he wants to join the growing club of menacing dictators by making common cause with the one who might be most helpful to him. Hopefully, Trump will have profoundly miscalculated and the gambit will fail. If it does fail then history will record just what perilous times we are living through.

Agreed. Furthermore, Americans have completed overestimated the checks and balances in our system. With a politicized supreme court and a polarized Congress, the checks fall by the wayside. This Republican Congress has show no appetite to act. With each outrageous action by this administration, cowards such as Lindsey Graham claim it will be the next act which puts Trump in jeopardy. Slowly the hardline is eroded into dust.

 

[zeke4ahs]

Whoa, whoa, whoa....what? This statement is completely wrong. The people who prepare those briefings for the President are advisors. They are not supposed to be actually running the country. The President is the decider, like it or not, he can listen to the advice given and then choose whether he wants to follow it or not. In fact, on any given subject, he is probably being given advice to handle situations in two completely different manners.

This is the one thing that has been laid bare by this administration. I firmly believe there is a group of people who sit just below the highest level who feel that they actually run this country. So people in the government disagree with Trump and they do this pussy "anonymous source" shit where they work for the guy and take his paycheck but undermine him the entire way. No you ass hats. Like it or not, he won the office on a certain platform. If you are not comfortable with his decisions, resign. Leave your post and go get another job. As a government employee, I get sick and f---ing tired of the way that many of these folks above me act.

Oh I said that on purpose. I know the so called president is the decider, but since he is totally inept and uninformed, generally it's the other people around him that we'd all better hope are running the country. As other people are mentioning, it's not that big a deal in and of itself. It's that he specifically ignores advice on Russia and does what he wants. It's a clear and distinct pattern throughout his presidency that most people are able to distinguish. Pretty sure Mueller is wondering about that, if he hasn't figured it out by now.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I am sure your 23,842 posts against Obama couldn't have been critical of everything he did. But you sure touched on all the waking hours .

Well it was a target rich environment. But even I reached a point where criticizing him became unchallenging and boring.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Agreed. Furthermore, Americans have completed overestimated the checks and balances in our system. With a politicized supreme court and a polarized Congress, the checks fall by the wayside. This Republican Congress has show no appetite to act. With each outrageous action by this administration, cowards such as Lindsey Graham claim it will be the next act which puts Trump in jeopardy. Slowly the hardline is eroded into dust.

What actions are outrageous? Tax reform? Corporate tax cuts? Pushing congress to fix DACA? North Korea meeting? Energy production and exports? Eliminating regulatory minutiae? Eliminating regulation by litigation? Border enforcement? Gorsuch on SCOTUS?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I am sure your 23,842 posts against Obama couldn't have been critical of everything he did. But you sure touched on all the waking hours .

I don’t recall criticizing him for his jump shot, but I could have

 

[iu_a_att]

Agreed. Furthermore, Americans have completed overestimated the checks and balances in our system. With a politicized supreme court and a polarized Congress, the checks fall by the wayside. This Republican Congress has show no appetite to act. With each outrageous action by this administration, cowards such as Lindsey Graham claim it will be the next act which puts Trump in jeopardy. Slowly the hardline is eroded into dust.

I might temper some of your language but not the general thrust of your point. The overall thrust of this entire thread and debate has to do with the extent to which we should be alarmed by unfolding events. At the most general level I think my point would be that we are really bad Bayesians and really bad at properly calibrating and responding to alarms. There is probably a vast literature on this.

 

[iuwclurker1]

We don't know that he was infuriated as a matter of fact. We know that people claimed he was infuriated. What infuriates Trump is disloyalty to Trump.

By that token, we don't know that he congratulated Putin either, but both were leaked. You sure have put of a lot of cybertime into something you don't know...

What infuriates Trump is everything. Angry people gonna angry.

 

[iuwclurker1]

I don't think this is correct. I don't think Trump is a coward kowtowing to a menacing dictator. I think he wants to join the growing club of menacing dictators by making common cause with the one who might be most helpful to him. Hopefully, Trump will have profoundly miscalculated and the gambit will fail. If it does fail then history will record just what perilous times we are living through.

Ha! Tell me just how Trump would behave toward Putin if he weren't compromised?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

People who don't have "identities":

(1) White people;

(2) Christians;

(3) Men; and

(4) Straight people.
​

Everyone else is practicing "identity politics" and is engaged in special pleading. Those without "identities," on the other hand, are speaking from a disinterested perspective derived from pure reason about universal principles that are inherent in being a Real American. By arguing that everyone should enjoy the same rights and benefits we have always extended to white Christian straight men, Democrats are stoking division among us. We should go back to the Fifties when everyone knew their place.

Claims about "identity politics" have always ignored the obvious reality that white people (for example) have their own identities. When they act to protect what they see as their interests, this is regarded as the default setting, and the notion that white people could practice identity politics is laughed off. But now we have Trump, who embodies white identity politics in an overt way that would have been politically inconceivable before he did it.

Predictably, Trump's supporters blame Democrats for all this -- if only Democrats didn't stoke division by trying to include everyone's interests, Trump supporters wouldn't be acting out irrationally. #triggerwarnings #safespaces #snowflakes

It certainly isn’t a perfect world of politics is it. You know damn well the coalesced groups you mention are a diriect and proximate reaction to the identity games Democrats have been playing throughout the 21st century. Politics by group identity is not constructive politics no matter who does it, but the scales in this are tipped way towards the Democrats.

“Trying to include everyone’s interests” is exactly the problem. The interests in good tax, energy, or even immigration, policy should not cut along skin color. There are other more important philosophical divisions that don’t involve pandering to voting blocks.