Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

agip wrote:

one of the most serious problems with trump is that he believes his shtick. He uses his supply.

He actually believes the garbage he peddles. Which makes him an amazingly good salesman, but the worst president of modern times.

And now, very dangerous. What if you truly believed the other party had stolen an election and you were commander in chief, head of the executive branch, entrusted with enforcing laws? And (1) you felt it was your responsibility to restore democracy? What would you do?

You'd probably try to use martial law to stop the steal, is what you'd do.

(2) The question now is who Trump will get to go along with him.

We think everyone will laugh at him.

We don't know that. Americans are not special...they will become lawless fanatical anti-democracy fighters just like people in every nation have at some point.

30 days.

(1) There is no possibility that Trump "(feels) it (is his) responsibility to restore democracy". Trump cares about exactly one thing = Trump.

(2) No, that is not the question, although it is a reasonable one to think about. The real question, which has an obvious answer, is "Does Trump have the guts to risk taking a bullet (for that is how military coups often end)?"

Trump has already given us the answer to this question - can you say "bone spurs?"

Dr. Racket wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:

the difference is that in this country, people in general have too much to lose, and even more so in the case of the leaders. the status quo is too well off. Nobody or almost nobody wants to jeopardize that. Even the middle class that has lost ground is better off than they were a few generations ago.

What seattle said.

In general yes, but look at deep red districts and people who's livelihood depends on jobs that aren't long for this world. They're getting poorer and further behind the blue districts (on average at least) every year. There's probably a growing sense to some degree of "nothing to lose."

That path usually leads to productivity, booze, and pills rather than organized violence though

Nicely said and i am glad somebody said it. There are cracks in the foundation and we can do better and should. I think the scales are tipping as you say. Good wake up call. I hope something can be done beyond just lies to take advantage of their fears. We'll see.

seattle prattle wrote:

Dr. Racket wrote:

What seattle said.

In general yes, but look at deep red districts and people who's livelihood depends on jobs that aren't long for this world. They're getting poorer and further behind the blue districts (on average at least) every year. There's probably a growing sense to some degree of "nothing to lose."

That path usually leads to productivity, booze, and pills rather than organized violence though

Nicely said and i am glad somebody said it. There are cracks in the foundation and we can do better and should. I think the scales are tipping as you say. Good wake up call. I hope something can be done beyond just lies to take advantage of their fears. We'll see.

I also should have said loss of productivity, booze, and pills rather than organized violence

I'm sorta surprised you guys are just whistling past the political anger of the m/gas. These people are really, really angry and really really armed and really really obedient to Trump. Not a good combination.

And they aren't poor.

agip wrote:

I'm sorta surprised you guys are just whistling past the political anger of the m/gas. These people are really, really angry and really really armed and really really obedient to Trump. Not a good combination.

And they aren't poor.

Nope. BLM, women's marches, etc. - those are the ones who have been out in the streets. Those are the ones in mass and fired up. That is where the critical mass is. Again, right in front of your eyes.

seattle prattle wrote:

agip wrote:

I'm sorta surprised you guys are just whistling past the political anger of the m/gas. These people are really, really angry and really really armed and really really obedient to Trump. Not a good combination.

And they aren't poor.

Nope. BLM, women's marches, etc. - those are the ones who have been out in the streets. Those are the ones in mass and fired up. That is where the critical mass is. Again, right in front of your eyes.

Why can't they both be fired up? The huge turnout of both parties suggests fire on both.

Trump had multiple rallies with tens of thousands of people. No Dem could have done that. Maybe Bernie in 2016 I suppose.

AND Trump raised c. $250 million AFTER the election. That's fervor.

Dr. Racket wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:

Nicely said and i am glad somebody said it. There are cracks in the foundation and we can do better and should. I think the scales are tipping as you say. Good wake up call. I hope something can be done beyond just lies to take advantage of their fears. We'll see.

I also should have said loss of productivity, booze, and pills rather than organized violence

we understood from the context.

But to your larger point, so much of the dem's primary debates were about this issue, how to restore the middle class and the underserved. Odd how those ideas were largely ignored, painted as socialist, and dismissed, but the fake promises from the right about immigration, restoring coal industry, and other platitudes were believed.

That is the biggest job for dems going forward, to regain that trust and show progress, along with the environmental problem, in my opinion.

agip wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:

Nope. BLM, women's marches, etc. - those are the ones who have been out in the streets. Those are the ones in mass and fired up. That is where the critical mass is. Again, right in front of your eyes.

Why can't they both be fired up? The huge turnout of both parties suggests fire on both.

Trump had multiple rallies with tens of thousands of people. No Dem could have done that. Maybe Bernie in 2016 I suppose.

AND Trump raised c. $250 million AFTER the election. That's fervor.

not much has happened with boots on the ground since, maybe a march in WA where lardo drove by and waved,

Come on, Agip. Game over. Sure i could be wrong, but it sure looks like he a) wants the donations to continue, b) position to keep his base and to possibly run again in 2024.

And so what if he believes it. He doesn't have backing. He was lame even in office with precious little to show for it.

* and c) mess it up as much as possible for the next administration.

And really, he is doing harm to his party by dividing his followers from the rest of the party. Rep.'s know they can't let that happen so they humor him and pretend to go along as much as they can.

seattle prattle wrote:

agip wrote:

Why can't they both be fired up? The huge turnout of both parties suggests fire on both.

Trump had multiple rallies with tens of thousands of people. No Dem could have done that. Maybe Bernie in 2016 I suppose.

AND Trump raised c. $250 million AFTER the election. That's fervor.

not much has happened with boots on the ground since, maybe a march in WA where lardo drove by and waved,

Come on, Agip. Game over. Sure i could be wrong, but it sure looks like he a) wants the donations to continue, b) position to keep his base and to possibly run again in 2024.

And so what if he believes it. He doesn't have backing. He was lame even in office with precious little to show for it.

The Trumpists were arrested planning a coup in Michigan.

But yeah agreed the m/gas on the ground have not mobilized. Whether they will or not depends on trump. Hard for me to imagine trump doesn’t activate them. He loves the adoration, he needs the headlines.

agip wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:

not much has happened with boots on the ground since, maybe a march in WA where lardo drove by and waved,

Come on, Agip. Game over. Sure i could be wrong, but it sure looks like he a) wants the donations to continue, b) position to keep his base and to possibly run again in 2024.

And so what if he believes it. He doesn't have backing. He was lame even in office with precious little to show for it.

The Trumpists were arrested planning a coup in Michigan.

But yeah agreed the m/gas on the ground have not mobilized. Whether they will or not depends on trump. Hard for me to imagine trump doesn’t activate them. He loves the adoration, he needs the headlines.

He's an f'g joke. We ought to be worried about why in the last year we have seen more civil unrest on our streets than in any time in our lifetimes and why we have no leadership in this time when we need it most.

Speaking as an attorney: I doubt that this will merit more than a (metaphorical) slap on the wrist. But these MFs did cheapen the Arizona courts for personal and political gain, so I can understand the motivation of the plaintiffs.

“Confidence in the legal system is seriously eroded when attorneys treat lawsuits as a platform for broadcasting gossip and innuendo utterly devoid of factual proof, as a political stunt,” as the letter states.

https://www.12news.com/article/news/politics/bar-complaint-filed-against-trump-attorneys-in-arizona/75-857a2dd9-9e96-47b1-83f5-f9782bd875fb?fbclid=IwAR0-HwUJIchS238CDDY6fwFdVfdUhguSstQBzW9VXQE8U08mgYT--B-qwBE

PS--"Anonymous posters must wait at least 5 minutes before posting"--LOVE IT!

agip wrote:

And they aren't poor.

Yes they are. Well, crudely speaking at least. Red districts have been steadily losing percentage share of real GDP over the past decade. Wealth is becoming more concentrated in blue districts

agip wrote:

I'm sorta surprised you guys are just whistling past the political anger of the m/gas. These people are really, really angry and really really armed and really really obedient to Trump. Not a good combination.

And they aren't poor.

And really really only a small number of people.

Dr. Racket wrote:

agip wrote:

And they aren't poor.

Yes they are. Well, crudely speaking at least. Red districts have been steadily losing percentage share of real GDP over the past decade. Wealth is becoming more concentrated in blue districts

Wealth might be concentrating, but that doesn't mean red counties are poor. It's the old question...if all quintiles are getting richer, how worried should be we about inequality? Can we still say that lower quintiles are losing ground?

But from what I've seen, Rs and Ds are just as rich as each other...there are different wings of the party though.

Rs and Ds match up at the high end...rich people have always been Rs and still are Rs...but Ds have put on a new class of "Panera Bread' Ds who are quite rich.

Then on the bottom you have the rural high school dropout white people who are Rs...vs. the high school dropout blacks who are Ds. Lots more whites than blacks, obviously.

Just noodling around, when I should be working.

agip wrote:

Dr. Racket wrote:

Yes they are. Well, crudely speaking at least. Red districts have been steadily losing percentage share of real GDP over the past decade. Wealth is becoming more concentrated in blue districts

Wealth might be concentrating, but that doesn't mean red counties are poor. It's the old question...if all quintiles are getting richer, how worried should be we about inequality? Can we still say that lower quintiles are losing ground?

Except Republican districts are losing ground.

The causes and effects of this are highly non-trivial, which is what you'd expect from something as complex as the American socioeconomic ecosystem. Things like this don't really boil down into one particular smoking gun.

Although I've got it on the highest amateur authority that's as simple as people being racist or stupid, so there's that too if you prefer!