Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Edge-]

Of course you would suspect that...I would expect no less from you.

And the evidence supports that.

For a guy who "only hires the best", Trump sure has a habit of picking dogshit quality people and then angrily firing them for being dogshit later.

There hasn't been an administration with higher turnover than Trump's, which speaks to the chaos, disorganization, and lack of competency.

Edit: Trump's reason for firing him was he "disagreed"? These people don't exist to be sycophants praising every idea the president has. They exist to advise, which includes vocally disagreeing with the president and advising on wiser policy decisions.

But that's not what Trump wants from "his people", apparently. He just wants people to tell him how genius his ideas are.

[Breccia]

Okay so...we know there was a published report that said Bolton and Pence disagreed with meeting the Taliban. We know Trump tweeted it was false, and then Pence, using odd grammar for him, tweeted an agreement.

Bolton was just fired. I'm just going to assume it was the Taliban.

What's next for Pence? At this point, what can he do but accept that he's now forever linked with the Taliban? He didn't contradict Trump, he didn't resign in protest, and he either tweeted his support or allowed Trump to for him.

Pence supports terrorists too.

- - - Updated - - -

The NOAA chief --

"He doesn't exist."

The acting NOAA chief has decided that the best way to view the situation is, apparently, by perching on a fence.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's acting chief on Tuesday sought to explain a controversial unsigned statement his agency put out last week defending President Donald Trump's claim that Hurricane Dorian could hit Alabama, but also thanked the Alabama weather office that had contradicted the president’s assertion.

In a speech to the National Weather Association, in Huntsville, Ala., NOAA acting Administrator Neil Jacobs said that the “purpose” of the agency's unsigned statement on Friday in defense of Trump was “was to clarify the technical aspects and potential impacts of Dorian.”

“What it did not say, however, is that we understand and fully support the good intent of the Birmingham Weather Forecast Office, which was to calm fears and support public safety,” Jacobs added.

Attendees of the speech said Jacobs' voice cracked multiple times during his remarks and he appeared near tears at some points.

I guess I would cry too, if my only choice was to defend lying about science with "there are good people on both sides" or be fired like Michael Bolton.

"John Bolton."

Hardly matters now, does it?

Trump is still pushing for his objectively false statement, defended only by his incompetence, to magically be right. This guy has a fiscal gun to his head: agree with Trump or leave. Look at the last 1,000 days, and circle where I'm wrong.

[Edge-]

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...mpression=true

"I'm not a vain person. ... But I look better under an incandescent light than these crazy lights that are beaming down," Trump told a crowd in Fayetteville, N.C., on Monday.

Hilariously lacking in self-awareness aside, this has to be quite possibly the dumbest justification for a policy shift that I've ever read.

[DocSavageFan]

And the evidence supports that.

For a guy who "only hires the best", Trump sure has a habit of picking dogshit quality people and then angrily firing them for being dogshit later.

There hasn't been an administration with higher turnover than Trump's, which speaks to the chaos, disorganization, and lack of competency.

Edit: Trump's reason for firing him was he "disagreed"? These people don't exist to be sycophants praising every idea the president has. They exist to advise, which includes vocally disagreeing with the president and advising on wiser policy decisions.

But that's not what Trump wants from "his people", apparently. He just wants people to tell him how genius his ideas are.

It appears to be that he simply wants the war hawks out...like Mattis and Bolton. This is a good thing imo.

[Elegiac]

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...mpression=true

Hilariously lacking in self-awareness aside, this has to be quite possibly the dumbest justification for a policy shift that I've ever read.

The strange thing is, he's not even entirely wrong. I guess the yellow tones from incandescent makes his fake tan and bad dye job look less noticeable. Kinda like how heavy makeup tends to look better in low light.

- - - Updated - - -

It appears to be that he simply wants the war hawks out...like Mattis and Bolton. This is a good thing imo.

Cute, but we already have documented evidence that Trump's main desired quality in subordinates is absolute loyalty since everyone that has been fired or resigned did so for being insufficiently loyal.

Don't try to make a virtue out of conceit.

[DocSavageFan]

Cute, but we already have documented evidence that Trump's main desired quality in subordinates is absolute loyalty since everyone that has been fired or resigned did so for being insufficiently loyal.

Don't try to make a virtue out of conceit.

Nor will I try to make a virtue out of "cute" low resolution thinking.

[Elegiac]

Nor will I try to make a virtue out of "cute" low resolution thinking.

Nice non-argument.

For your next trick you should try to spin firing the national security adviser at a time when the executive branch is already critically understaffed as a good thing.

There is no upside to this shitshow, because some of us treat politics as more than a spectator sport.

[Edge-]

It appears to be that he simply wants the war hawks out...like Mattis and Bolton. This is a good thing imo.

Why did he hire them to begin with? At least with Bolton, we all knew how much of a hawk he was and warned about it, but Trump went ahead and hired him anyways.

Why does he keep hiring war hawks like Flynn, Bolton, and others only to fire them because...he doesn't like warhawks?

[Thekri]

Nice non-argument.

For your next trick you should try to spin firing the national security adviser at a time when the executive branch is already critically understaffed as a good thing.

There is no upside to this shitshow, because some of us treat politics as more than a spectator sport.

Well I don't know. And executive branch that is understaffed with John Bolton is almost certainly worst then an executive branch that is slightly more understaffed, but lacking John Bolton.

Removing a racist Walrus from your house generally improves property values and dramatically lowers your insurance rates.

[DocSavageFan]

Nice non-argument.

For your next trick you should try to spin firing the national security adviser at a time when the executive branch is already critically understaffed as a good thing.

There is no upside to this shitshow, because some of us treat politics as more than a spectator sport.

Your feigned "concern" is duly noted.

[Edge-]

Your feigned "concern" is duly noted.

It's legitimate concern. We may hate Trump, but the damage he's doing to the government with his administrations incompetence will follow long after he's gone. This is an issue many of us seriously care about, believe it or not, because we give a shit about the country more than the man occupying the Oval Office.

[Ripster42]

Removing a racist Walrus from your house generally improves property values and dramatically lowers your insurance rates.

I dunno, you could probably offload walrus meat to eclectic epicureans for a tidy sum.

[Thekri]

It's legitimate concern. We may hate Trump, but the damage he's doing to the government with his administrations incompetence will follow long after he's gone. This is an issue many of us seriously care about, believe it or not, because we give a shit about the country more than the man occupying the Oval Office.

Why are you responding to him? He never even attempts to form a coherent argument. Even Shackler puts more effort into forming an actual argument.

- - - Updated - - -

I dunno, you could probably offload walrus meat to eclectic epicureans for a tidy sum.

Getting it FDA certified kills all the profit margin.

[Felya]

Your feigned "concern" is duly noted.

You are projecting. This thread has been consistent on the concern of Trump’s mental state. Trump hired a war hawk and let him go, because Trump wanted the Taliban to be guests at Camp David, the week of September 11th.

In fact... how is Flynn and McMaster doing?

[DocSavageFan]

Why did he hire them to begin with? At least with Bolton, we all knew how much of a hawk he was and warned about it, but Trump went ahead and hired him anyways.

Why does he keep hiring war hawks like Flynn, Bolton, and others only to fire them because...he doesn't like warhawks?

Who knows...Trump is a mystery. But I do know that he likes to solicit diverse opinions on policies before making decisions. The primary reason Mattis left was because Mattis wanted an active military presence in Syria and Trump did not. Personally, I think Trump made the right call here.

I'm not sure exactly what the Bolton conflict is all about...but I imagine it involves Afghanistan and Bolton wanting to be more aggressive, whereas Trump has been clear for a long, long time that he wants a path out. But I don't know...this is just speculation.

[DarkTZeratul]

But I do know that he likes to solicit diverse opinions on policies before making decisions.

This is a hilariously bad argument given that Trump literally said he fired Bolton because they disagreed.

[DocSavageFan]

It's legitimate concern. We may hate Trump, but the damage he's doing to the government with his administrations incompetence will follow long after he's gone. This is an issue many of us seriously care about, believe it or not, because we give a shit about the country more than the man occupying the Oval Office.

Yeah...and the country is in ruins! OMG!

Bottom line...Trump is not a globalist and your ilk hate it. Conservatives hated Obama for being a globalist...and I was told then that elections have consequences. Tell me...how well does that shoe fit on the other foot?

[Felya]

I'm not sure exactly what the Bolton conflict is all about...but I imagine it involves Afghanistan and Bolton wanting to be more aggressive, whereas Trump has been clear for a long, long time that he wants a path out. But I don't know...this is just speculation.

It involves Trump inviting the Taliban to Camp David... Flynn firing involved him being a foreign agent and the McMaster firing was because he was too serious.

[DocSavageFan]

This is a hilariously bad argument given that Trump literally said he fired Bolton because they disagreed.

No shit Sherlock. Apparently the "nuance" here eludes you. Pathetic.

[Edge-]

Who knows...Trump is a mystery.

He's really, really not. He's dangerously stupid, filled with all the confidence of an ignorant narcissist that doesn't know enough to know how ignorant they are.

But I do know that he likes to solicit diverse opinions on policies before making decisions.

According to what? Because he's fired everyone he disagrees with and is publicly fueding with the NOAA right now because...they disagreed with him and pointed out that he's wrong.

The primary reason Mattis left was because Mattis wanted an active military presence in Syria and Trump did not. Personally, I think Trump made the right call here.

He resigned because Trump wasn't bothering to abide by stated policy and out of nowhere announced the troop withdrawal, capping off a long tenure of Trump not bothering to listen to advise from Mattis as it frequently contradicted his desires. And in an unsurprising turn, ISIS is regaining strength in part because of the reduced pressure from the US working with our local allies.

I'm not sure exactly what the Bolton conflict is all about...but I imagine it involves Afghanistan and Bolton wanting to be more aggressive, whereas Trump has been clear for a long, long time that he wants a path out. But I don't know...this is just speculation.

You mean the things that everyone warned that Bolton would want before he was appointed?

Maybe Trump should listen to others rather than relying on advise from himself because, "He's like, a really smart person" and "has said a lot of things" and he should listen to actual experts?

It's a crazy idea, isn't it?