Thoughts on the Trump presidency

[Tester]

Along with bigly and covfede

covfefe

 

[SuspectUsual]

covfefe

Ah yeah. You knew what I meant though

 

[edwin_m]

Ah yeah. You knew what I meant though

Actually, to this day, nobody knows what you and he meant.

 

[martin butler]

You've already lost me, Now Let's assume Trump so how staggers on till the next presidential election, then announces, that he will stand, will that be a step to far for the constitution? or for those in the GOP, that are not part of the cult?

I think it will galvanise the anti-trump vote, and he will lose, and try another insurrection, or declaring the vote void, whatever he can do to not give up power, until he is made to leave,

 

[Killingworth]

You've already lost me, Now Let's assume Trump so how staggers on till the next presidential election, then announces, that he will stand, will that be a step to far for the constitution? or for those in the GOP, that are not part of the cult?

I think it will galvanise the anti-trump vote, and he will lose, and try another insurrection, or declaring the vote void, whatever he can do to not give up power, until he is made to leave,

At 82?

If he is propped up to complete his term, increasingly uncertain, even his most devoted adherents would realise such a challenge to the constitution would fail. Question is who from either party can then pull together a deeply divided nation.

The Trump legacy is looking a seriously weakened and fragmenting, dangerous America. It's certainly not great.

 

[edwin_m]

Trump is now probably unpopular enough that he'd lose if he stood in a fair election against a credible Democrat. But if he stood in 2028 them at least one rule would already have been broken, so I think we can expect that others would be broken too.

 

[Bald Rick]

He won’t be elected president again. That would require a change to the constitution, and that’s not going to happen. He could, theoretically, stand for Vice President, behind a “puppet” who then stands down immediately from taking office, but I’m reasonably sure the majority of the voting US public would see through that and vote accordingly. As a result there are long odds available on Trump even running in 2028 (10/1).

However I wouldn’t put it past him to try to amend the constitution, fail (bigly), and claim the voting was rigged. Thsi would be the voting of the Senate and House that his party controls.

 

[JamesT]

He won’t be elected president again. That would require a change to the constitution, and that’s not going to happen. He could, theoretically, stand for Vice President, behind a “puppet” who then stands down immediately from taking office, but I’m reasonably sure the majority of the voting US public would see through that and vote accordingly. As a result there are long odds available on Trump even running in 2028 (10/1).

However I wouldn’t put it past him to try to amend the constitution, fail (bigly), and claim the voting was rigged. Thsi would be the voting of the Senate and House that his party controls.

He might have a majority of both houses, but constitutional amendments require a supermajority of two-thirds of both. So he’s not even close to getting that through, never mind getting three-quarters of the states to ratify.

 

[jon0844]

He might have a majority of both houses, but constitutional amendments require a supermajority of two-thirds of both. So he’s not even close to getting that through, never mind getting three-quarters of the states to ratify.

None of the above (perfectly correct) statements mean he won't still go ahead and do it anyway to test the legal system (which he can then ignore).

The forefathers never really planned for someone who might just do whatever they want regardless of the rules.

Only the second amendment seems to be safe, although all those people who have stockpiled guns in case of a tyrannical Government taking over seem to have forgotten how to use them. No issues killing black kids who knock on the wrong door though.

 

[SuspectUsual]

The forefathers never really planned for someone who might just do whatever they want regardless of the rules

That's fairly typical isn't it - a lot of our parliamentary conventions are built around the "good chap" principle, and we've seen in recent years how ill equipped they are to deal with flagrant breaches

 

[jon0844]

That's fairly typical isn't it - a lot of our parliamentary conventions are built around the "good chap" principle, and we've seen in recent years how ill equipped they are to deal with flagrant breaches

They also didn't plan for cases where people break the rules and society tolerates and even supports it if the person breaking the rules is someone they support.

 

[DelW]

The forefathers never really planned for someone who might just do whatever they want regardless of the rules.

Unfortunately they never planned either for a Supreme Court that told an incoming president that he couldn't be prosecuted for any actions he took in the presidential role. When SCOTUS put a sociopathic career con-man above the law, it was never going to produce a good outcome.

But Trump's obsessions with plastering gold leaf over random bits of Washington, and renaming random geographic features, reminds me of a family keeping demented grandpa busy in a corner with anything petty to keep him occupied. In the meantime the behind the scenes authoritarians are pushing forward their own plans while the media and Democrats are distracted by Trump's latest idiocies.

 

[ainsworth74]

The forefathers never really planned for someone who might just do whatever they want regardless of the rules.

They absolutely did that's why the US Government is structured the way that it is (for instance this is why Congress controls the money). What they didn't plan for was for a Congress to be supine in the face of a President trampling all over their terrain and fail to take any action to curtail their activities. They also didn't plan for the hyperpolarisation of the Supreme Court meaning that one party when in power has to tread extremely lightly to avoid having their attempts at governance ruled unconstitutional whilst the other can get away with almost anything it desires.

That's the fault at the heart of the system. We must never forget that this isn't just Trump acting alone. This is Congress and the Supreme Court enabling him. Does anyone think that if Obama had blown a vast proportion of the US militaries precision guided munitions and air defence missiles for a war which had not actually achieved any of it's stated aims that he wouldn't have been impeached by now? If Obama had tried to have masked thugs roaming the streets of cities in Alabama detaining American citizens at random and murdering some of them that the Supreme Court wouldn't have ruled that unconstitutional? Pick half a dozen other things that Trump has done and put Obama (or any other Democrat you care to choose) in their place and Congress and the Supreme Court would have torn them asunder and they'd likely have done so on a bi-partisan basis!

That's the real rot. Congress and the Supreme Court happily going along with the whims of Trump. That's what the founding fathers didn't plan for.

 

[Mr. SW]

Agreed. Trump has dangerously exposed that the US is in fact an elective monarchical imperium, and it's only the other legislative bodies, the law and common decency (!) among its population that have kept it in check.

 

[najaB]

Agreed. Trump has dangerously exposed that the US is in fact an elective monarchical imperium, and it's only the other legislative bodies, the law and common decency (!) among its population that have kept it in check.

I don't think that we've really learned anything new about the US system of governance - the phrases "checks and balances" and "co-equal branches of government" have been well-known and commonly spoken for about as long as the Republic has existed. What has been exposed is that you have to have checks in order for there to be balance, and that if any of the three branches rolls over and play dead (even worse if it's two of them!) then the whole thing breaks down.

Either Congress or the Courts could and should have stopped the worst of the Executive's excesses, but chose not to - no doubt in the case of Congress because of the influence of one thing that the Founding Fathers didn't account for: the billionaire class.

 

[Strathclyder]

That's the real rot. Congress and the Supreme Court happily going along with the whims of Trump. That's what the founding fathers didn't plan for.

They didn't plan for a bought & paid for (billionare class & powerful lobby groups say hello) and therefore utterly surpine Congress & Supreme Court (mostly) going along with every demand that Trump belches forth basically.

 

[brad465]

Clearly he couldn't handle all the 'winning':

Dan Driscoll: US army secretary resigns after months of tension

Dan Driscoll, the youngest-ever army secretary, was about 18 months into his post.

www.bbc.co.uk

US Army Secretary Dan Driscoll has submitted his resignation after about 18 months in the role.

His departure was confirmed by CBS, the BBC's US media partner, which reported it came after months of conflict between him and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth.

The youngest-ever army secretary has often been referred to as President Donald Trump's "drone guy".

Driscoll, 41, has been "highly effective" in advancing Trump's agenda "to Make America Strong Again" and provided "outstanding leadership" during military operations, the White House said in a statement given to CBS.

The BBC has contacted the White House, Pentagon and Army for comment.

Driscoll is the latest in a string of recent high-profile military leaders to depart, including Navy Secretary John Phelan who abruptly quit in April.

Other notable departures include Army Chief of Staff Randy George, Army Gen David Hodne and Maj Gen William Green.

Since entering the Pentagon, Hegseth has fired more than a dozen senior military officers, including the chief of naval operations and the Air Force's vice-chief of staff.

The details of the behind-the-scenes friction between Driscoll and Hegseth are unclear but CBS notes that the army secretary is good friends with George, who was reportedly asked by Hegseth to resign.

The post of army secretary is the top civilian leader of the US Army, directing active duty troops, along with the National Guard and reserve soldiers.

Driscoll previously served in the Army and was an officer in 2007 before leading a cavalry platoon and deploying to Iraq for several months in 2009.

As army secretary, Driscoll became known as Trump's "drone guy" due to his embrace of emerging battlefield technologies.

He took on a leading role last year in talks aimed at ending the Russia-Ukraine war, taking on foreign trips and meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

He's also a close ally and friend of Vice-President JD Vance, whom he met at Yale Law School.

During his tenure as head of the US Army, he was a key figure in Trump's deployment of the National Guard to US cities.

He also took over the role of acting director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

 

[najaB]

Trump says every adult American would get $5,000 if Republicans win midterms

US President Donald Trump says he would offer every adult American a $5,000 (£3,700) payout if Republicans win both chambers of Congress in November's midterm elections – a plan that would cost more than a trillion dollars.

The offer was made in a speech at the party's first-ever convention in the middle of a US presidential term.

He gave no details on how it would work or be funded – saying only that the money would have to be spent in the US. Vice-President JD Vance has linked the plan to the revenue that Trump has raised for the US government using tariffs.

Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62kzr1jg0jo

I guess people can deposit those Republican midterm election cheques right after their $2,000 DOGE cheques, and $2,000 tariff cheques. Oh, and let's not forget that the national debt just passed $40T!

Does anyone with even half a brain believe anything he says these days?

 

[Annetts key]

Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62kzr1jg0jo

I guess people can deposit those Republican midterm election cheques right after their $2,000 DOGE cheques, and $2,000 tariff cheques. Oh, and let's not forget that the national debt just passed $40T!

Does anyone with even half a brain believe anything he says these days?

You know that he's getting desperate when he starts trying to bribe the voters with their own money...

 

[JamesT]

You know that he's getting desperate when he starts trying to bribe the voters with their own money...

Isn’t that what all politicians do? Promise to spend taxpayers money on the things the voters want? Trump is just being a bit more obvious about it.

 

[martin butler]

Clearly, the people trying to contain and control Trump have given up, the madness is clear now for all to see, and it's no longer hidden, I'm half expecting the mid-terms to be a disaster for the GOP, with Trump doing more damage as it gets nearer, and he became even more uncontrollable and his filters drop completely

What's the unknown is how will he react when talk of who succeeds him starts, because I can't see him wanting to step aside, gracefully accepting he will soon have to step down, I can see him refusing, claiming he, and only he can save the US, and the GOP splitting into pro and anti camps, armed Melicia such as proud boys, and white supremist's on the streets, because they know, with him done, their protection ends,

and all the while the Democrats are taking down key members one by one, charging them over mis use of power & corruption, whilst they ran state offices, some will in turn throw others under the bus to try to escape it's going to be quite a scene

 

[jon0844]

Isn't giving everyone $5000 akin to communism? And what would that do for inflation, when we're always told you can't give payrises to people (companies are fine - they need the extra income...) because of inflation.

 

[martin butler]

Isn't giving everyone $5000 akin to communism? And what would that do for inflation, when we're always told you can't give payrises to people (companies are fine - they need the extra income...) because of inflation.

Its bribery, Vote to keep me in power, and I will reward you, except he won't, He doesn't care about the GOP, to him it's just another vehicle towards his own greed, and lust for power, when he does get forced to step down, you can bet he will say America does not deserve him, that they have deserted him.

 

[swt_passenger]

Isn't giving everyone $5000 akin to communism? And what would that do for inflation, when we're always told you can't give payrises to people (companies are fine - they need the extra income...) because of inflation.

A blatant bribe? Or a perfectly legal proposal? I’m sure the media will be able to find hundreds of lawyers to quote who’ll take completely opposite views…

 

[jupiter]

The orange ****-flinging gibbon is too stupid to put any context round it. Try “I know the cost of living is going up and to go some way towards addressing that we want to make your family finances a little easier by giving you all a 5,000 rebate on your taxes”. Too stupid by a very long way.

 

[najaB]

A blatant bribe? Or a perfectly legal proposal? I’m sure the media will be able to find hundreds of lawyers to quote who’ll take completely opposite views…

It's probably not technically illegal, however if it really is a "dividend to share in America's success" as they are trying to describe it, why is it contingent on the results of the election given that the Republicans currently control the House, the Senate, and the White House? Is the USA somehow going to be massively more "successful" on November 4th than it was on September 9th?

 

[brad465]

Trump's stupidity with Iran has now pushed Diesel prices of the forecourts to $6 a gallon:

https://giftarticle.ft.com/giftarticle/actions/redeem/ebeacf37-8e86-4198-85de-8c9d6dae7ed4

US diesel prices have hit a record $6 a gallon as Donald Trump’s war in Iran and Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries choke fuel supplies globally, triggering new fears of inflation. The diesel pump price has surged this year and rose to $6.06 on Friday, motorist group AAA said, above the previous record high of $5.82 in 2022 following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

 

[Strathclyder]

The orange ****-flinging gibbon is too stupid to put any context round it. Try “I know the cost of living is going up and to go some way towards addressing that we want to make your family finances a little easier by giving you all a 5,000 rebate on your taxes”. Too stupid by a very long way.

Too stupid to add detail/context or to actually follow through with it. It's not too much of a stretch nor is it overly cynical for me to say that this is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to buy votes in the mid-terms regardless of the legality of it or the ballooning effect it would have on the national debt.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Too stupid to add detail/context or to actually follow through with it.

Spot on. In fact it's a known characteristic of narcissists that they will often offer financial help but never actually produce it.

 

[Strathclyder]

Spot on. In fact it's a known characteristic of narcissists that they will often offer financial help but never actually produce it.

Indeed, and this isn't even the first time he's offered/promised a rebate/refund that has never materialized. It should be common knowledge to anyone outside the cult by now that a Trump promise, especially one involving money that isn't fattening his and the band of crooks that he calls a family, is utterly worthless.