American Politics Thread: Orange is the new POTUS (Archive)

[FireGilbert]

I had a vendor take me out for lunch the other day and he called Trump "the last hope of the western world". I told him to not bother tendering on any more jobs.

Just kidding, I bit my tongue and changed the subject. He is still a brilliant engineer even with the questionable political views.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

If there was an alternate universe where the USSR managed to maintain a Marxist state that wasn't totalitarian and oppressive, but allowed for and respected dissent and political difference, Stalin would have had much less to answer for than he did. Itse was arguing earlier that such states exist. If it's possible to create a functional Marxist society without compromising the principles of Marxism, then it's hard to argue that those principles were themselves responsible (directly or indirectly) for the atrocities produced by communist states in the 20th century. That's probably a pretty complicated thing to try to analyze, historically.

Two things for the record:

I think history would show that while there have been non-oppressive Marxist governments in the world, those examples are rare and limited and generally "Marxism" has enough of a bad track record to be considered a failed idea. Tripura and Kerala are rather small states within India. They're a proof that something exists, not that it works

That said, Marx himself famously was not a Marxist. Actual Marxism (as in: "can be actually attributed to Marx himself") is a method of analysing a society, not a political ideology, and many scholars consider the the communist system a huge misinterpretation of Marxs ideas.

Which is mostly relevant in the sense that I have no idea what exactly is the ideology of the "Communist Party of India (Marxist)", and yes that's how you write it.

[Kiran403]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

I won't flat out tell them they're being racist, because work would get really awkward, but I do like to challenge them on it. When he says she "didn't carry herself" like a First Lady, I ask why he feels that way?

"Well she just looked like a linebacker!"

Last week he was talking about how elegant Melania is and how much of a contrast it is. I countered that she was a model, but Michelle was a lawyer, that Michelle did everything a First Lady needed to do. He complained that she went on Ellen and was silly and how much a disgrace that was to the position of First Lady. I countered that Trump is tweeting about SNL.

This is a man who at the heart and soul of the matter would never actively hate another person, outside of political ideology he's one of my favorite people to work with, but it's this misguided idea that a woman has to be a dainty little housewife to be the proper first lady that he can't shake. He wants a Laura Bush who stands quietly by and doesn't voice much opinion.

Also again, subtle racism that he would never grasp as racism. These are the people I talk about when I mention how racism is very subtle and unintentional. This isn't a guy who would advocate for the KKK, not even close, but at the same time he sees Melania Trump as an ideal First Lady (while she hides in a penthouse in NYC at taxpayers' expense) and saw Michelle Obama as a disgrace (while she was advocating for childrens' health and initiatives to get women education both here and abroad, etc). He doesn't grasp that his opinion is shaded with racism, but it's absolutely there.

(This man's wife, however, is an avid Fox News viewer and is openly racist, so it's unsurprising that he picks up on her views, even if he's not actively trying to)

I have this same situation at my work. One of the old guys is an avid Trump supporter. I think he's actually less racist than what you describe but some of my boss's friends come in to visit once a week or so and they are super racist and it just amps him up. It sucks because other than that, he's one of my favourite people to work with.
A lot of people say that someone should always condemn racism/racists whenever possible but in a working environment it's not always that easy. I remember when Trump first talked about banning Muslims during the campaign, he and I got in a super heated argument about it and it was so awkward at work for about a week after until we just agreed to limit our political discussions at work.

[Senator Clay Davis]

I didn't see any Sean Spicer making an ass of himself posts yet today. So let me go ahead and rectify that.

https://twitter.com/aravosis/status/829772936764649472

[DuffMan]

It depends, if they are voicing their racist opinions to you and you don't say anything, you are condoning them.

[Itse]

As for the US regime, this turned up in my newsfeed and I think I especially like the quoted part about how to speak about Trump.

http://rationallythinkingoutloud.com...e-circulating/

When you post or talk about him, don’t assign his actions to him, assign them to “The Republican Administration,” or “The Republicans.” This will have several effects: the Republican legislators will either have to take responsibility for their association with him or stand up for what some of them don’t like; he will not get the focus of attention he craves; Republican representatives will become very concerned about their re-elections.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Itse

As for the US regime, this turned up in my newsfeed and I think I especially like the quoted part about how to speak about Trump.

http://rationallythinkingoutloud.com...e-circulating/

I think this is absolutely gold.

Trump, Spicer, Devos, Conway, etc. We should all be saying "Look at what the Republicans are doing now." These are the people they chose, that they backed and believed in. These people represent all republicans, for better or worse, and it should be noted as such.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by octothorp

In the US, mid-50s is kinda the norm for Presidents. Bill Clinton and Obama were two of the youngest presidents ever, while Reagan, Bush senior, and Trump are three of the oldest; the vast majority of US presidents have been in their 50s. In Canada we're a little weird in that we've got a much larger percentage 50 or younger, and 60 and older, with relatively few in their 50s. Not sure why that is. Though we're definitely skewing younger in recent years, as all of both Trudeaus, Mulroney, and Harper were in their 40s when first elected and Clark was 39.

edit: at a cursory glance UK seems to be similar with recent PMs trending younger with Theresa May an exception to a recent history of PMs beginning their position in their 40s or early 50s. Not including weird early english history of guys like Pitt the Younger.

Forty years ago we all smoked and died in our mid sixties, to make it to your 70's was a major achievement, 50 then is what mid sixties is today

[Azure]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

He said Laura Bush was a much better First Lady. My response was that Laura Bush didn't do anything as a First Lady. Michelle actually attempted to achieve good as a First Lady, she was vocal and active and visible.

I can understand disagreeing with policy (I certainly didn't agree with everything, the drone program especially is a massive black mark on the Obama administration) but this guy constantly rails about how happy he is to finally have "class" back in the White House.

The Obamas were nothing if not classy. But there's that subtle, subconscious racism that creeps up again, because for the Obamas to go 8 years scandal free, with two teenage daughters, is quite an achievement. The idea that Melania is the epitome of class while Michelle Obama was not is absolutely preposterous.

Why? I mean outside of the remarkable parenting abilities that they clearly have, anyone who paid attention to the Obama's as people knew that they were doing a pretty good job raising their daughters.

I would have expected nothing less than what they did in that regard.

As for the whole 'class' part, it will be hard for a First Family to come close.

[DuffMan]

Trump loses on the travel ban.

[wwkayaker]

There should be some great Trump and Spicer meltdowns coming. The court just ruled that Trump's travel ban is constitutional and will not be in effect.

[photon]

The ruling was just on the request to stay the court order to stop the ban (so the order is still in effect), the actual case still has to wind its way through the courts.

[Azure]

I guess now the Whitehouse will appeal again and drive it further up in the court system.

Would be super interesting see the ruling that the Supreme Court would make.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Azure

Why? I mean outside of the remarkable parenting abilities that they clearly have, anyone who paid attention to the Obama's as people knew that they were doing a pretty good job raising their daughters.

I would have expected nothing less than what they did in that regard.

As for the whole 'class' part, it will be hard for a First Family to come close.

How awesome would it be if Michelle Obama ran for President next? Now THAT would be an election.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Trump The Republican Administration loses on the travel ban.

Originally Posted by wwkayaker

There should be some great Trump The Republican Administration and Spicer meltdowns coming. The court just ruled that Trump's The Republican Administration's travel ban is constitutional and will not be in effect.

Hmmm... I see the point the previous post was making. Shows the real doofus are the republicans for enabling Trump.

[wwkayaker]

1m
Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump
SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!

[KelVarnsen]

Originally Posted by wwkayaker

1m
Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump
SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!

[direwolf]

Originally Posted by wwkayaker

1m
Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump
SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!

Oooh, all caps. He's not happy, haha.

[photon]

Man I wish he would have spelled it STEAK.

[Izzle]

OMG, I just saw the tweet.

I cant wait for the rest of the tweet... 20 mins from now.

Now, if it does go to the SCOTUS and it becomes a 4-4 tie, what then?