The Never-President Trump

[horsefly 4,300]

Trump continues to show signs of senility

 https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1754917298945605718?s=20

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

On 06/02/2024 at 09:01, sonyc said:

This was your post on the 21st January @Iwans Big Toe.

You have said many times that you are not a Trump supporter. I have read that and understood it. The above was your response and as you'll see I was explicitly named as someone engaging in an "ad hominen" attack and of lying. Etc.

And on the same date (21-01-24) you accused me of being in a cult.

As one response states..."It's a cult. Period"

And that means there is literally no point in thinking that people like that will ever change.  Debate likewise with Trump supporters is futile. It doesn't matter about any facts. Facts themselves are not to believed anyway. Black is literally white and forget any shades in between. Maybe the slightest chance of agreeing a shade of orange.

Maybe I misunderstood, but that is why you where tagged (but not singled out). I was aiming at Horsefly as he is a bully. He has also intimated that you have sided with him by suggesting that he ignore me.

Now I don't know what dms you have had with him, nor do I want too, and to be honest he is not the most trust worthy of people as he lies to try and promote his agenda. However, responding in public to a private conversation someone is attempting to have with you would not inspire that person to trust you either.

 

 

[horsefly 4,300]

For anyone genuinely interested in US politics there is a brilliant series of lengthy interviews from PBS in their "Frontline Transparency Project". This one is with Rusty Bowers, a Republican (he voted for Trump) who served as speaker of the House in Arizona 2019-23. He details the attempts of Trump and his mob to pressure him illegally to overturn the election result. It serves as a good illustration of the difference between the traditional Republican GOP committed to the principles of democracy, and the MAGA mob prepared to lie, cheat, and threaten violence to get what they want.

 

[sonyc 5,519]

9 hours ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

 

 

 

 

Edited February 8 by sonyc
Duplicate reply. Site useless and slow as ever

[sonyc 5,519]

On 08/02/2024 at 00:13, Iwans Big Toe said:

And on the same date (21-01-24) you accused me of being in a cult.

As one response states..."It's a cult. Period"

And that means there is literally no point in thinking that people like that will ever change.  Debate likewise with Trump supporters is futile. It doesn't matter about any facts. Facts themselves are not to believed anyway. Black is literally white and forget any shades in between. Maybe the slightest chance of agreeing a shade of orange.

Maybe I misunderstood, but that is why you where tagged (but not singled out). I was aiming at Horsefly as he is a bully. He has also intimated that you have sided with him by suggesting that he ignore me.

Now I don't know what dms you have had with him, nor do I want too, and to be honest he is not the most trust worthy of people as he lies to try and promote his agenda. However, responding in public to a private conversation someone is attempting to have with you would not inspire that person to trust you either.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 10 by sonyc
Reflected. Best not to defend oneself but just leave original comments by a poster. .

[horsefly 4,300]

15 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Blimey. It's me that's not trustworthy eh? I was responding to horsefly's post of a supporter being interviewed (the X clip). You'd stated many times that you were not a supporter. You referenced me not the other way round.

I do not want to have an argument by direct mail with anyone about it. On any subject. That is what this forum is for - it should not become a personal thing. 

Given you've now decided to post this I will do something I've not done before and copy my DM reply to you. That way there is no obsfuscation or trickery of words. As you've laid out to everyone that I'm not to be trusted then people can decide for themselves.

My reply to you is polite, considerate and even constructive (suggesting a reading source). Plus it even has a apology 

That this is the way you conduct yourself I believe you are someone I ought to be concerned about. So here is my concern on public. I would be grateful if you discontinued your replies to me actually. I don't think it is constructive to follow folk round and keep posting. That's what happens on the football side.

My own take is that a view on something is purely that. I couldn't even care if I happened to be wrong on something or right. It makes no difference. It is just a viewpoint. I don't wish to try and denigrate anyone online. But I don't think your post is so honest. You've made out I've been untrustworthy now on top of your insult previously which I tried to respond to. Like you, I will (occasionally in my case) bother to defend myself. I recall bullies from school. You have to stand up to them.

 

This is my verbatim response:

"I've replied publicly IBT because I don't wish to start a private argument on something that isn't so relevant to me (the US elections) as to make me so angry. I have received DMs before from one of two people which, when I think about them feel quite quietly unsettling. I would rather just be open. I'm a quiet and extremely tolerant sort. I don't believe I've ever stated that a poster is x or y in insulting terms. I would have to think hard but I don't believe so. I often see many sides all at the same time. Unherd has an excellent article on Trump last week (an interview format).

Apologies that I upset you (originally). I was responding to your post which I've reproduced so you could re-assess it"

 

 

After I had made it very clear that I would no longer respond to his very obvious trolling posts in public he sent me a DM too. Unlike you I wasn't "generous" enough in spirit to respond to his DM. Personally, I have no problem with people who want to use robust language when discussing genuinely held beliefs. I do, however, have a problem with insincere people whose only purpose is to wind up others by spouting extremist bigotry. It seems that since I decided I would no longer respond to him he has decided to latch on to you as the person to make a variety of unfounded accusations against. Your very polite and considered response here is typical of the tone in which you contribute on this site (certainly not a style I can replicate), however, I have little doubt it won't be reciprocated. I can only recommend that you follow me in refusing to engage; it leads to a lot more peaceful life.

[horsefly 4,300]

This is probably the best explanation I've heard for why so-called presidential immunity does not protect presidents from criminal prosecution. It makes particularly good use of the example of Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon. In the case of the pardon and  Nixon's response to it, both men acknowledge that a president is NOT immune from prosecution for illegal acts.

 

[sonyc 5,519]

27 minutes ago, horsefly said:

After I had made it very clear that I would no longer respond to his very obvious trolling posts in public he sent me a DM too. Unlike you I wasn't "generous" enough in spirit to respond to his DM. Personally, I have no problem with people who want to use robust language when discussing genuinely held beliefs. I do, however, have a problem with insincere people whose only purpose is to wind up others by spouting extremist bigotry. It seems that since I decided I would no longer respond to him he has decided to latch on to you as the person to make a variety of unfounded accusations against. Your very polite and considered response here is typical of the tone in which you contribute on this site (certainly not a style I can replicate), however, I have little doubt it won't be reciprocated. I can only recommend that you follow me in refusing to engage; it leads to a lot more peaceful life.

Thank you h. Appreciate that.

I never know whether to reply. In 'real' life either. Do you respond in kind to some road rage incident or just let it wash off? The latter is probably the best way. On a forum, then exchanges can be robust, which is fine by me. I  decided to respond and be open about it so that hopefully it might cease. I don't like hiding behind a mobile keyboard - just say what you think and always as fairly and politely as possible. Words can so easily be misinterpreted after all.

I keep my emotional  and deeper feelings private too. It would take the world to move before I truly let anyone know what I really think about them in a negative way. I think we have a very serious responsibility to try and be kind. If we have to be cutting then humour is best. Humour often involvess some kind of a defence after all!

My personal philosophy has always been guided by Jante's Law, which I've followed for more than 25 years (that's the 10% Scandinavian ancestry that perhaps has had an influence!). It is something that has just suited me and is a good fit with my worldview. 

[Barbe bleu 826]

So anyway back to the topic...

Trump's name now on every ballot. Or did anyone have a different take on today's proceedings?

[sonyc 5,519]

32 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

So anyway back to the topic...

Trump's name now on every ballot. Or did anyone have a different take on today's proceedings?

That was partly my fault (as you have intimated). The article I referred to is the following. It would appear Trump has a run in and may well win. I suppose the legal hearings may yet intervene. 

It's a balanced article and provoking in many ways, plus it's almost contradictory in  content in parts.

https://unherd.com/2024/02/andrew-sullivan-what-i-got-wrong-about-trump/

[ricardo 7,395]

40 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

So anyway back to the topic...

Trump's name now on every ballot. Or did anyone have a different take on today's proceedings?

From the excerpt I heard today it seems Colorado's argument got pretty short shrift.

[Barbe bleu 826]

2 hours ago, sonyc said:

That was partly my fault (as you have intimated). The article I referred to is the following. It would appear Trump has a run in and may well win. I suppose the legal hearings may yet intervene. 

It's a balanced article and provoking in many ways, plus it's almost contradictory in  content in parts.

https://unherd.com/2024/02/andrew-sullivan-what-i-got-wrong-about-trump/

Cheers for the link. Intereatkngly dysfunctional  though it is I dont really concern myself with American politics but scanning through it looks like an interesting read that I'll take time to read properly.

One thing in particular I noted was a phrase from a question:

do you think the Left will learn from the mistakes of 2016-2020, when they only exacerbated the polarisation by completely freaking out about Trump’s victory?

That sums up my feelings about politics here as well.   Too many people advocating policies I quite like in hysterical,  abusive and superior tones that do nothing other that push people away.

 

[Barbe bleu 826]

2 hours ago, ricardo said:

From the excerpt I heard today it seems Colorado's argument got pretty short shrift.

Thats pretty much how I read it.   Natural Conservatives already fairly fixed and even the most liberal appointees basically saying 'you've got to give me something better than that if you want to win this' to colorado

[sonyc 5,519]

20 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Cheers for the link. Intereatkngly dysfunctional  though it is I dont really concern myself with American politics but scanning through it looks like an interesting read that I'll take time to read properly.

One thing in particular I noted was a phrase from a question:

do you think the Left will learn from the mistakes of 2016-2020, when they only exacerbated the polarisation by completely freaking out about Trump’s victory?

That sums up my feelings about politics here as well.   Too many people advocating policies I quite like in hysterical,  abusive and superior tones that do nothing other that push people away.

 

I suppose Trump brought a lot of that reaction himself, talking about locking up Hilary Clinton, building a wall, draining the swamp ...and so on. It was dramatic stuff and far more divisive in rhetoric than any US election I've followed (only in the last decade or maybe two really). It has been partly echoed here with the Brexit nonsense and what has followed. The UK is often influenced by the US (unfortunately in my opinion, there are far better models) ...but our histories are linked. Even though I believe it's a strange place to visit and there are huge areas that feel so very different.

The left has failed both in the US and here. Yet....the agendas are so driven by big money and that involves the big press outlets. I know you stated before you don't think they have much influence - but it is very hard for any left of centre messaging to gain traction. Too many vested interests? Starmer is trying to go gently so as not to rock any boats. Meanwhile, in deindustrialised areas here and in the US, large numbers of working people live in straightened circumstances and feel left out. They don't feel represented. This is ideal for someone like Trump. 

I thought the piece was interesting because it was a view more from 'the inside' of US politics and not from sources like The Guardian or The Mail and so on.

Many people are put off by politics. I think that's also to do with one's phase in life. As you age, are more economically redundant and closing in on the end then ideas of what is good for the country certainty seem more important. Younger people often have more fish to fry. 

Biden's term has seen an improving economy and that is one thing and yet for many people they are mainly concerned about immigration - Trump's protectionism plays to their feelings (even if they are only just words. And even if those words are controversial - which they are and hence the interviewee in that article is worried for their constitution and civil unrest). Trump doesn't appear to really be able to provide any moral leadership and countries all over the world  need that kind of leadership. But the many people also see Biden leading the US into more foreign conflict. 

There are other arguments about economic liberalism having failed  but I'm going on so will not expand. 

One final comment would be that an adversarial kind of politics, the system, does not lend to long term solutions, to solve the pauperisation of huge numbers of citizens, or about climate change and virtually everything. It is mainly doomed. The world almost needs a new paradigm (ideas articulated enough for everyone to understand) that can galvanise long term change. I, and I suspect all of us, will never see that in our lifetimes. Many of us are either in the autumn or winter of our lives.

 

[Herman 9,767]

On 26/01/2024 at 12:47, ricardo said:

The polls paint a different picture.

I think we will see Biden back out before November and the Democrats will nominate Newsom.

A step closer to this after hearing the latest news. 

[The Real Buh 3,432]

The bad news for Biden is that, yes, he is too old and mentally compromised to be president.

The good news is that he’s perfect for a position of joint ownership at Norwich City FC alongside our own old and mentally compromised owners.

[ricardo 7,395]

9 hours ago, Herman said:

A step closer to this after hearing the latest news. 

Yes, its looking  very likely that Biden will be persuaded to stand down but lots can happen yet and only a mug would bet on next president when it could be between two people as yet unnamed.

[TheRock 171]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68244352

 

Most who are voting for Biden at this stage are surely doing it as a veto against Trump, not as a vote for Joe being the best candidate.

[A Load of Squit 5,164]

36 minutes ago, TheRock said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68244352

 

Most who are voting for Biden at this stage are surely doing it as a veto against Trump, not as a vote for Joe being the best candidate.

That's how most elections work. People choose the lesser of two evils but in this case Trump is also the evil of two lessers.

Edited February 9 by A Load of Squit

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

On 07/02/2024 at 12:48, horsefly said:

Trump continues to show signs of senility

 https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1754917298945605718?s=20

Joe Biden has suffered “the worst day of his presidency”, an ally said, after a bombshell report found the US President had “significant limitations in his memory”.

Lawyers who interviewed Mr Biden as part of an investigation into his handling of classified documents said he could not remember the years when he was vice president or when his son died of brain cancer.

An ally of the President said it had been “the worst day of his presidency”, telling NBC News: “I think he needs to show us this is a demonstrably false characterisation of him and that he has what it takes to win and govern.”

Another Democratic operative said the report was “beyond devastating” and “confirms every doubt and concern” that voters have about Mr Biden.

“If the only reason they didn’t charge him is because he’s too old to be charged, then how can he be President of the United States?” they added.

Daily Telegraph

[ricardo 7,395]

2 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

Joe Biden has suffered “the worst day of his presidency”, an ally said, after a bombshell report found the US President had “significant limitations in his memory”.

Lawyers who interviewed Mr Biden as part of an investigation into his handling of classified documents said he could not remember the years when he was vice president or when his son died of brain cancer.

An ally of the President said it had been “the worst day of his presidency”, telling NBC News: “I think he needs to show us this is a demonstrably false characterisation of him and that he has what it takes to win and govern.”

Another Democratic operative said the report was “beyond devastating” and “confirms every doubt and concern” that voters have about Mr Biden.

“If the only reason they didn’t charge him is because he’s too old to be charged, then how can he be President of the United States?” they added.

Daily Telegraph

Can't really see the DNC running on "our guy maybe senile  but so is yours."

I'm even more convinced that Biden won't be the candidate in November.

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

On 08/02/2024 at 10:18, horsefly said:

This is probably the best explanation I've heard for why so-called presidential immunity does not protect presidents from criminal prosecution. It makes particularly good use of the example of Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon. In the case of the pardon and  Nixon's response to it, both men acknowledge that a president is NOT immune from prosecution for illegal acts.

 

You remember when you laughed at me for using a clip from Rumble, well you can double my response for you using MSNBC. Next you will be trying to recruit everyone to Scientology as they are more based in fact than MSNBC.

 

 

[A Load of Squit 5,164]

8 hours ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

You remember when you laughed at me for using a clip from Rumble, well you can double my response for you using MSNBC. Next you will be trying to recruit everyone to Scientology as they are more based in fact than MSNBC.

 

 

People in cults ignore the content and focus on something that allows then to justify to themselves why they're in a cult.

You're in a cult.

Edited February 10 by A Load of Squit

[horsefly 4,300]

A dire warning from two of the best legal minds in the US that a Trump presidency could bring an end to democracy in America: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/how-to-steal-a-presidential-election-review-trump-and-the-peril-to-come/ar-BB1i49Ww?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=4032fcabd42c455c9a334b11df2a8ffc&ei=11

Lessig is a chaired professor at Harvard Law School. He views a second Trump term as calamitous. “He is a pathological liar, with clear authoritarian instincts,” Lessig writes. “His re-election would be worse than any political event in the history of America  –  save the decision of South Carolina to launch the civil war.”

Seligman is a fellow at the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford, focused on disputed presidential elections. He too views Trump uncharitably.

“Former president Trump and his allies attempted a legal coup in 2020 – a brazen attempt to manipulate the legal system to reverse the results of a free and fair election,” Seligman has said. “Despite all the attention on 6 January 2021 [the attack on Congress], our legal and political systems remain dangerously unprotected against a smarter and more sophisticated attempt in 2024.”

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

15 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

People in cults ignore the content and focus on something that allows then to justify to themselves why they're in a cult.

You're in a cult.

Exactly the truth and that's what you're doing.

Which is why I read the BBC, watch MSNBC and pay attention to alternative news outlets too. So keep calling me a cult member, your ignorance is just on display for the whole world.

Alternatively you could also consume some media that is going to encourage you to think for yourself rather than just believe what is spoon fed to you. I don't think you have it in you though, you're too worried Big Brother is watching so you have to tow the party line as it might cost you in the long term. (oh and just incase I was being too subtle, I'm not accusing you of being in a cult, I'm accusing you of being a coward)

 

 

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

On 08/02/2024 at 10:10, horsefly said:

After I had made it very clear that I would no longer respond to his very obvious trolling posts in public he sent me a DM too. Unlike you I wasn't "generous" enough in spirit to respond to his DM. Personally, I have no problem with people who want to use robust language when discussing genuinely held beliefs. I do, however, have a problem with insincere people whose only purpose is to wind up others by spouting extremist bigotry. It seems that since I decided I would no longer respond to him he has decided to latch on to you as the person to make a variety of unfounded accusations against. Your very polite and considered response here is typical of the tone in which you contribute on this site (certainly not a style I can replicate), however, I have little doubt it won't be reciprocated. I can only recommend that you follow me in refusing to engage; it leads to a lot more peaceful life.

Oh good for you, you won't respond to me, but will keep mentioning me. I am not trolling because everything I've said is true. So now you run away because you are a bully that has been pushed back on and you don't like it. Weak.

If you agree with me, don't respond 👍

 

 

[horsefly 4,300]

It now couldn't be clearer: ANYONE supporting Trump to become president is a TRAITOR willing to imperil the security of the UK and our European allies: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/trump-encourages-russia-to-attack-non-paying-nato-allies/ar-BB1i6j4D

Donald Trump says he would "encourage" Russia to attack any Nato member that fails to pay its bills as part of the Western military alliance.

He said he had once told a Nato leader he would not protect a nation behind on its payments if it came under Russian attack, and would urge the aggressors to "do whatever they hell they want".

[A Load of Squit 5,164]

10 hours ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

Exactly the truth and that's what you're doing.

Which is why I read the BBC, watch MSNBC and pay attention to alternative news outlets too. So keep calling me a cult member, your ignorance is just on display for the whole world.

Alternatively you could also consume some media that is going to encourage you to think for yourself rather than just believe what is spoon fed to you. I don't think you have it in you though, you're too worried Big Brother is watching so you have to tow the party line as it might cost you in the long term. (oh and just incase I was being too subtle, I'm not accusing you of being in a cult, I'm accusing you of being a coward)

 

 

Alternative news outlets.

display for the whole world.

Encourage you to think for yourself.

Spoon fed.

Big Brother

Tow the party line.

All classic man in a cult responses.

You're in a cult.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

8 hours ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

Oh good for you, you won't respond to me, but will keep mentioning me. I am not trolling because everything I've said is true. So now you run away because you are a bully that has been pushed back on and you don't like it. Weak.

If you agree with me, don't respond 👍

 

 

I think you need a really good think regarding your views on Trump. It's one thing to bemoan what we might think the problems are in our own societies, but our privilege to do so stems from being part of the group of democratic states of which the US is the principal guarantor. What he did on January 6th was treason. Now he's standing in rallies waffling about encouraging Vladimir Putin to attack NATO countries 'who don't pay'. He believes in nothing other than his own self agrandissement. He's a vain fool and the biggest threat to us going.

 

 

[Well b back 3,208]

A bit more on the Trump / Russia / NATO thing here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68266447

That probably explains why he says he could stop the war in Ukraine in a day, don’t think the Ukrainian’s will be happy with his solution though. 
Scary times