Just a reminder WWI started over the Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. Fox News is calling the plot to assassinate Trump an act of war. One of the real reasons George Bush went after Saddam Hussein because Hussein tried to assassinate his dad (See Here)--I should say this has been disputed. But I do think Clinton retaliated by attacking a Iranian base when it happened.
Trump is a very vengeful person. He hates Iran as it is. He just may use it as an excuse to take negative action against the Iranian regime.
Trump is a very vengeful person. He hates Iran as it is. He just may use it as an excuse to take negative action against the Iranian regime.
I think there would be a certain amount of courage involved in a decision to go to war that is beyond Trump. He's not going to be willing to go on TV and tell the American people that he is deploying US forces at multi-division strength to overthrow the Iranian regime.
Trump says he wants to keep the U.S.A. out of foreign wars.
On a tangent, Mrs Eirenist is puzzled by the way Trump keeps clapping his audience and pointing at random individuals in it in a 'There you are, you old son-of-a-gun' manner, presumably pretending to recognise them. Is this an American campaigning ploy? Can anyone provide enlightenment for this Anglo-Manx-Welsh lady (an explosive mixture). She finds the practice very irritating. Off tangent.
ISTM that he's more likely to boast about having had the bigliest number of assassination attempts against him than any other President ever...
Trump dead (or incapacitated) would, I suppose, mean Vance as de facto President?
Trump will not see a prison while in office. Either the New York case will be suspended or dismissed. Likewise, the Georgia case. The Federal cases will be dismissed. Vance, though, will remain a heartbeat away from assuming the office.
Mrs Eirenist is puzzled by the way Trump keeps clapping his audience and pointing at random individuals in it in a 'There you are, you old son-of-a-gun' manner, presumably pretending to recognise them. Is this an American campaigning ploy?
I believe it is a common practice to point to people in the audience whom the speaker recognizes. As for the clapping, it's always upset me too. That's something that the likes of Kim Wrong Trim and Vladimir Sputum do.
Trump says he wants to keep the U.S.A. out of foreign wars.
On a tangent, Mrs Eirenist is puzzled by the way Trump keeps clapping his audience and pointing at random individuals in it in a 'There you are, you old son-of-a-gun' manner, presumably pretending to recognise them. Is this an American campaigning ploy? Can anyone provide enlightenment for this Anglo-Manx-Welsh lady (an explosive mixture). She finds the practice very irritating. Off tangent.
Whatever keeps him from doing that awful double fisted “dance move” he does, alternating arms in and out at the elbow. Pointing at the audience is preferable.
ISTM that he's more likely to boast about having had the bigliest number of assassination attempts against him than any other President ever...
Trump dead (or incapacitated) would, I suppose, mean Vance as de facto President?
Trump will not see a prison while in office. Either the New York case will be suspended or dismissed. Likewise, the Georgia case. The Federal cases will be dismissed. Vance, though, will remain a heartbeat away from assuming the office.
I was thinking more along the lines of Trump being rendered incapable of exercising his office because of a stroke, or other medical emergency. I take the point that he is very unlikely to go to jail, as he now appears to be above the law...
ISTM that he's more likely to boast about having had the bigliest number of assassination attempts against him than any other President ever...
Trump dead (or incapacitated) would, I suppose, mean Vance as de facto President?
Trump will not see a prison while in office. Either the New York case will be suspended or dismissed. Likewise, the Georgia case. The Federal cases will be dismissed. Vance, though, will remain a heartbeat away from assuming the office.
I was thinking more along the lines of Trump being rendered incapable of exercising his office because of a stroke, or other medical emergency. I take the point that he is very unlikely to go to jail, as he now appears to be above the law...
Vance only gets to be acting president if the President acknowledges a temporary incapacity, such as before having a colonoscopy, or if the 25th amendment is invoked (which requires the VP, most of the cabinet, Congress, and potentially a panel of medical experts called in for their opinion all to agree - highly unlikely) to temporarily make the VP acting president against the President’s wishes.
Otherwise, if the President is de facto incapacitated but not officially acknowledged as such, anyone could be calling the shots. There’s no reason why it would be the VP. the VP doesn’t even live or work in the White House or spend the majority of his or her time with the President. The people making decisions for the incapacitated president would probably be the White House Chief of Staff and other top aides and advisors. It could even be members of the President’s family. They would have no legal right to make these decisions and say that the President made them. But neither would the VP.
Not like that stops anyone! Dianne Feinstein barely knew where she was toward the end, but her staff and family propped her up like she was going to be okay.
To the point of not making a joke on a hell thread, ever hear of black humor or gallows humor?
Gallows humor is great. I have a very dark sense of humor. But jokes along the lines of “I don’t like the Iranian regime but at least they tried to kill Trump” are:
1. Not even funny
2. Likely to make any pro-Trump or at least anti-Democrat listener (who Democrats often don’t even know is there) think that the Democrats are full of it when they clutch their pearls at the same kind of rhetoric from Trump and his supporters. And there are anti-Trump listeners (who online may hear the joke after a very long chain of sharing and resharing) who feel encouraged to much more explicitly wish harm on Trump, and then there are the very few unstable people like the second American who plotted to assassinate Trump who hear these things and think “You know, I was thinking of doing the same thing…” (It’s not clear if the first person who shot at Trump would not also have tried to shoot Biden if he had been in town, but the second shooter definitely wanted to shoot Trump specifically for political reasons.)
ISTM that he's more likely to boast about having had the bigliest number of assassination attempts against him than any other President ever...
Trump dead (or incapacitated) would, I suppose, mean Vance as de facto President?
Trump will not see a prison while in office. Either the New York case will be suspended or dismissed. Likewise, the Georgia case. The Federal cases will be dismissed. Vance, though, will remain a heartbeat away from assuming the office.
I was thinking more along the lines of Trump being rendered incapable of exercising his office because of a stroke, or other medical emergency. I take the point that he is very unlikely to go to jail, as he now appears to be above the law...
Vance only gets to be acting president if the President acknowledges a temporary incapacity, such as before having a colonoscopy, or if the 25th amendment is invoked (which requires the VP, most of the cabinet, Congress, and potentially a panel of medical experts called in for their opinion all to agree - highly unlikely) to temporarily make the VP acting president against the President’s wishes.
Otherwise, if the President is de facto incapacitated but not officially acknowledged as such, anyone could be calling the shots. There’s no reason why it would be the VP. the VP doesn’t even live or work in the White House or spend the majority of his or her time with the President. The people making decisions for the incapacitated president would probably be the White House Chief of Staff and other top aides and advisors. It could even be members of the President’s family. They would have no legal right to make these decisions and say that the President made them. But neither would the VP.
To the point of not making a joke on a hell thread, ever hear of black humor or gallows humor?
Gallows humor is great. I have a very dark sense of humor. But jokes along the lines of “I don’t like the Iranian regime but at least they tried to kill Trump” are:
1. Not even funny
2. Likely to make any pro-Trump or at least anti-Democrat listener (who Democrats often don’t even know is there) think that the Democrats are full of it when they clutch their pearls at the same kind of rhetoric from Trump and his supporters. And there are anti-Trump listeners (who online may hear the joke after a very long chain of sharing and resharing) who feel encouraged to much more explicitly wish harm on Trump, and then there are the very few unstable people like the second American who plotted to assassinate Trump who hear these things and think “You know, I was thinking of doing the same thing…” (It’s not clear if the first person who shot at Trump would not also have tried to shoot Biden if he had been in town, but the second shooter definitely wanted to shoot Trump specifically for political reasons.)
And 3. Depending on how the “joke” is worded, it could land shipmates as well as the Ship in hot water. Making a threat against the president is a felony under US federal law. Doing so in an international context can be considered a terrorist act. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the UK has similar laws; in fact, I’d be surprised if it didn’t. And I wouldn’t want to have to rely on “it was just a joke” if the comment attracted attention from law enforcement.
I also love gallows humor, but sometimes, no matter how darkly humorous, it’s a Very Bad Idea.
To the point of not making a joke on a hell thread, ever hear of black humor or gallows humor?
Gallows humor is great. I have a very dark sense of humor. But jokes along the lines of “I don’t like the Iranian regime but at least they tried to kill Trump” are:
1. Not even funny
2. Likely to make any pro-Trump or at least anti-Democrat listener (who Democrats often don’t even know is there) think that the Democrats are full of it when they clutch their pearls at the same kind of rhetoric from Trump and his supporters. And there are anti-Trump listeners (who online may hear the joke after a very long chain of sharing and resharing) who feel encouraged to much more explicitly wish harm on Trump, and then there are the very few unstable people like the second American who plotted to assassinate Trump who hear these things and think “You know, I was thinking of doing the same thing…” (It’s not clear if the first person who shot at Trump would not also have tried to shoot Biden if he had been in town, but the second shooter definitely wanted to shoot Trump specifically for political reasons.)
And 3. Depending on how the “joke” is worded, it could land shipmates as well as the Ship in hot water. Making a threat against the president is a felony under US federal law. Doing so in an international context can be considered a terrorist act. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the UK has similar laws; in fact, I’d be surprised if it didn’t. And I wouldn’t want to have to rely on “it was just a joke” if the comment attracted attention from law enforcement.
I also love gallows humor, but sometimes, no matter how darkly humorous, it’s a Very Bad Idea.
I am not aware of any such laws. I also not aware of anyone being prosecuted for the wording of a joke against the King or the PM. It would make the news. The King has had to cope with a lot of bas things said about him his whole adult life. The PM is not the same as the President. Also our humour can be very disrespectful
Making a threat against the president is a federal crime, yes. In the case of the Iranians, they presented a credible threat against the president elect. That is why the FBI had to act. What concerns me, though, is not any organized plot as much as a lone wolf acting on his (usually a male) own volition. As the shooter in Pennsylvania showed there are few screens that can catch such a person. The Pennsylvania attempt also showed how much Trump has made himself a target with all his violent talk.
They're difficult listens, but the Pod Save America guys are doing a lot of great post-mortem work re: the election. Their most recent episode, "How Tr*mp Built His Coalition" does a lot to explain the environment and issues that gave us another Tr*mp Presidency, and most annoyingly, that these were pretty much known quantities (by the Dem Machine) for most, if not the whole time. This is their 3rd episode post-election. Other episodes:
Again, these are four former Obama Staffers who also worked on other campaigns before Obama. Deep insight, yet really entertaining. Their language can be... colorful.
Again, these are four former Obama Staffers who also worked on other campaigns before Obama. Deep insight, yet really entertaining. Their language can be... colorful.
One of whom was the first person voted out in the current season of “Survivor (US).”
How quickly can progressives move on from Tr*mp's reprehensibility and criminality?
How quickly can they delete all of the tactics that instruct them to run in opposition to issues of reprehensibility and criminality, and the cognitive dissonance required to dismiss those things out of hand?
Whenever I am facing difficulties, my wife will tell me: "This too shall pass."
Now that Trump has nominated Congresswoman Elise Stefanik to be the Ambassador to the UN, her seat will likely be up for a special election. The district has long been a Republican District, but before Stefanik took the seat, it had been won by Democrat Bill Owens in a 2009 special election. Could this be a chink in the Republican plans?
I don't think so. I think MAGA is going to run the table until the 2026 midterms. Democrats have to cut off the index fingers they've used to point at Tr*mp and MAGA and say how terrible-horrible-very bad they were (are). Terribleness and all its synonyms and related terms are effectively off of the table. They're always going to be just under the table, but moving forward, Dems have to remove them from their political place settings if they want to compete.
I am still unable to read American papers or listen to the news, and I am sure it will be a long time before I try it again. This election makes no sense to me at all. The country had the choice between a candidate with intelligence, integrity and compassion and one whose ignorance, corruption and depravity should disqualify him from any public position. It now appears that trump is seen as a leader and role model; Harris isn't.
I don't like it any more than you do, but the electorate has told us in definitive terms that those qualities simply do not move the needle. Americans, it turns out, are not integrity voters. Tr*mp has been a political leader since 2015. That's the undeniable reality, no matter how unpalatable. Dems have to get over the cognitive dissonance of that. Dems have to get over the cognitive dissonance of a lot of things, like the fact that a pseudo-billionaire resonates more with the American working class than an actual middle- or working-class candidate. Things that on their faces should distinguish them from MAGA Elitism, but don't.
I don't like it any more than you do, but the electorate has told us in definitive terms that those qualities simply do not move the needle. Americans, it turns out, are not integrity voters. Tr*mp has been a political leader since 2015. That's the undeniable reality, no matter how unpalatable. Dems have to get over the cognitive dissonance of that. Dems have to get over the cognitive dissonance of a lot of things, like the fact that a pseudo-billionaire resonates more with the American working class than an actual middle- or working-class candidate. Things that on their faces should distinguish them from MAGA Elitism, but don't.
I was going to ask could they do this by offering a viable alternative, but they kind of just did. We have been no better our lot put in his equivalent over here. There is an effort to bring Boris back. Unlike Tr’mp there is no limit to the amount of time he can lead.
It is early in the Presidential cycle. I believe in miracles he might not be as bad as expected
I am still unable to read American papers or listen to the news, and I am sure it will be a long time before I try it again. This election makes no sense to me at all. The country had the choice between a candidate with intelligence, integrity and compassion and one whose ignorance, corruption and depravity should disqualify him from any public position. It now appears that trump is seen as a leader and role model; Harris isn't.
A flawed candidate easily beat a very poor candidate.
One side of me says let's wait and see what he does -- maybe, just maybe, he'll accomplish some good after all. But the other side says don't be silly -- things will get much, much worse. There's already talk of him pulling out of the Paris Agreement. But climate change is just a hoax, don't you know.
Our only hope is that things will get so bad that there can be no denying that electing him was a terrible mistake. But he'll figure out a way to blame it on the Democrats.
Some arguments I've seen say Democrats should just get out of the way and let Trump and the Republicans screw things up and then make them wear it in the midterms. Too many people would be hurt, but I see the point of the argument.
I am still unable to read American papers or listen to the news, and I am sure it will be a long time before I try it again. This election makes no sense to me at all. The country had the choice between a candidate with intelligence, integrity and compassion and one whose ignorance, corruption and depravity should disqualify him from any public position. It now appears that trump is seen as a leader and role model; Harris isn't.
I too, have given up on the news for my mental health at this point.
Some arguments I've seen say Democrats should just get out of the way and let Trump and the Republicans screw things up and then make them wear it in the midterms. Too many people would be hurt, but I see the point of the argument.
I was thinking something similar with regard to the House - it's probably advantageous politically if Republicans have the trifecta, then they have to own either the awful legislation they pass or the clown show of bickering when they fail.
I think Democrats have a responsibility to fight vigorously, and by whatever means they can, against Tr*mp Administration objectives. Tr*mp is already eschewing moderating voices, and early appointments are highly demagogic, so chances are the chaos will be pre- baked-in, and he'll be getting less than astute advice on a range of issues resulting in screw-ups big, small, and numerous.
I am still unable to read American papers or listen to the news, and I am sure it will be a long time before I try it again. This election makes no sense to me at all. The country had the choice between a candidate with intelligence, integrity and compassion and one whose ignorance, corruption and depravity should disqualify him from any public position. It now appears that trump is seen as a leader and role model; Harris isn't.
It appears the greatest issue was the pocketbook. When people complain they cannot afford food stuff, housing, or fuel, they cannot see much further than that. It is about the hierarchy of needs. Trump is the bread king, but I think it will not take long before they will regret that.
Even now, Trump is trying to circumvent the constitution. He wants the newly elected Senate to go into recess as soon as he is inaugurated so he can appoint his cronies without the need for confirmation. Our Constitution allows for recess appointments. (When the Constitution was written it, congress would take up to three months recess. Then too, it could have taken some time for congress to return to be in session due to the state of transportation.
Bur, Trump's people are thinking they can pull their talent from the House. Already, three congresspeople have been nominated for cabinet positions. Those seats will have to be filled again through special appointment or election. In other words, who will be controlling the House will continue to be a question.
The good news is, Trump will not be able to pull out of NATO unilaterally. While it took 2/3 of the Senate to approve the NATO treaty, and in the case of most treaties all the president as to do is formally withdraw from it. But in the case of NATO there is a law on the books that says 2/3 of both the Senate and the House would have to approve of the withdrawal. Curiously, the law was introduced by Marco Rubio way back when.
Don't give up people. The struggle continues. Keep informed. That is the only way this chapter will end.
The longstanding mantra of US elections is "It's the economy, stupid."
It's not that Harris didn't mention inflation. She just didn't speak to it from a standpoint of grievance. Tr*mp only speaks from a standpoint of grievance, and he does it incessantly. It's way more difficult to convince people to be aspirational in an attempt to overwhelm an economic reality than it is to be confrontational about it, and suggest that if certain people are punished things will get better, and for the right people.
Trump says he wants to keep the U.S.A. out of foreign wars.
On a tangent, Mrs Eirenist is puzzled by the way Trump keeps clapping his audience and pointing at random individuals in it in a 'There you are, you old son-of-a-gun' manner, presumably pretending to recognise them. Is this an American campaigning ploy? Can anyone provide enlightenment for this Anglo-Manx-Welsh lady (an explosive mixture). She finds the practice very irritating. Off tangent.
Yes, pointing at people. Is that not a very rude thing to do on the other side of the pond as it is over here?
Trump says he wants to keep the U.S.A. out of foreign wars.
On a tangent, Mrs Eirenist is puzzled by the way Trump keeps clapping his audience and pointing at random individuals in it in a 'There you are, you old son-of-a-gun' manner, presumably pretending to recognise them. Is this an American campaigning ploy? Can anyone provide enlightenment for this Anglo-Manx-Welsh lady (an explosive mixture). She finds the practice very irritating. Off tangent.
Yes, pointing at people. Is that not a very rude thing to do on the other side of the pond as it is over here?
And the random "thumbs up" is equally irritating.
Everything he does irritates the crap out of me, but it is not rude in the US for someone on a stage to point out people in the audience. Other people would make it look generous; they're being applauded by a crowd, and they point to friends, supporters, loved ones -- think maybe of actors at an awards show pointing out other people who were in the movie they're getting an award for.
The thumbs up thing is weird because he's random about it, not being it's weird in itself.
I am still unable to read American papers or listen to the news, and I am sure it will be a long time before I try it again. This election makes no sense to me at all. The country had the choice between a candidate with intelligence, integrity and compassion and one whose ignorance, corruption and depravity should disqualify him from any public position. It now appears that trump is seen as a leader and role model; Harris isn't.
It appears the greatest issue was the pocketbook. When people complain they cannot afford food stuff, housing, or fuel, they cannot see much further than that. It is about the hierarchy of needs. Trump is the bread king, but I think it will not take long before they will regret that.
Even now, Trump is trying to circumvent the constitution. He wants the newly elected Senate to go into recess as soon as he is inaugurated so he can appoint his cronies without the need for confirmation. Our Constitution allows for recess appointments. (When the Constitution was written it, congress would take up to three months recess. Then too, it could have taken some time for congress to return to be in session due to the state of transportation.
Bur, Trump's people are thinking they can pull their talent from the House. Already, three congresspeople have been nominated for cabinet positions. Those seats will have to be filled again through special appointment or election. In other words, who will be controlling the House will continue to be a question.
The good news is, Trump will not be able to pull out of NATO unilaterally. While it took 2/3 of the Senate to approve the NATO treaty, and in the case of most treaties all the president as to do is formally withdraw from it. But in the case of NATO there is a law on the books that says 2/3 of both the Senate and the House would have to approve of the withdrawal. Curiously, the law was introduced by Marco Rubio way back when.
Don't give up people. The struggle continues. Keep informed. That is the only way this chapter will end.
But surely you don't need to pull out of NATO to ignore NATO. My opinion is that there will not be any problems with NATO
No doubt about it, misogyny is alive and well in the United States, especially when Steven Miller tells his minions to go out and find males who had not voted yet. But, little, by little, the glass ceiling will crack and give way. When Walter Mondale first nominated Geraldine Ferraro to be his running mate in 1984, that was an earth-shaking event. When John McCain tapped Sarah Palin to be his mate, not so much. Biden nominated Harris and they won. It just could be the next go around will find a woman on the top of the ticket from either party.
Wouldn't be interesting if both major parties nominated a woman? Heu, even though I am old, I can still dream.
The second most powerful person in the Trump administration will be Susie Walz. She was able to show her cred with the way she handled the Trump campaign. She knew when and where to place him in the swing states. She was able to get him to appeal to minority groups. She had rather limited dollars to spend, compared to the Harris campaign. She is the first woman to hold the position of Chief of Staff.
Some arguments I've seen say Democrats should just get out of the way and let Trump and the Republicans screw things up and then make them wear it in the midterms. Too many people would be hurt, but I see the point of the argument.
I worry that as long as the economy does well and the US doesn't wind up in a war, Trump and Republicans won't be blamed by a majority of voters in four years for whatever else goes wrong (even things they are directly responsible for). And as for the economy, although tariffs like the kind Trump is proposing could send inflation spiraling up again and hurt any business that relies on imports in any part of its supply chain (which is most businesses), I also worry that the US economy is too big to fail and that after the Global Financial Crisis and Covid the Fed (along with the ECB and other major central banks) has learned to act fast and big to put out any fires of recession or inflation before they can get too bad. So if Trump messes things up, they will probably clean up his mess, along with a bipartisan majority in Congress that will pass whatever stimulus checks are needed (which will have Trump's signature on them again).
I think Democrats need to lean into the issues of the cost of housing, healthcare, childcare, and eldercare. They need to
Trump says he wants to keep the U.S.A. out of foreign wars.
On a tangent, Mrs Eirenist is puzzled by the way Trump keeps clapping his audience and pointing at random individuals in it in a 'There you are, you old son-of-a-gun' manner, presumably pretending to recognise them. Is this an American campaigning ploy? Can anyone provide enlightenment for this Anglo-Manx-Welsh lady (an explosive mixture). She finds the practice very irritating. Off tangent.
Yes, pointing at people. Is that not a very rude thing to do on the other side of the pond as it is over here?
And the random "thumbs up" is equally irritating.
Everything he does irritates the crap out of me, but it is not rude in the US for someone on a stage to point out people in the audience. Other people would make it look generous; they're being applauded by a crowd, and they point to friends, supporters, loved ones -- think maybe of actors at an awards show pointing out other people who were in the movie they're getting an award for.
The thumbs up thing is weird because he's random about it, not being it's weird in itself.
When politicians come on or go off stage to applause here, it is considered awkward to just stand and receive the applause, and for politicians who are popular in their parties the applause is often lengthy. If they try to thank the audience and move into their speech too early, they risk being drowned out by the crowd (as happened to Harris a couple of times early in her campaign). That is why politicians wave, point at random audience members, and applaud back at the audience. The people who go to political rallies unfortunately tend to be super partisans who treat it like a rock concert and want to be able to “go wild” for their candidate. So politicians have to find something to do while there is just too much noise to be heard, even with a microphone.
I can’t possibly get in Trump’s head and explain his body language, though.
Here is a review of the nominee for Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth.
I note Hegseth has no real command experience. He has written a number of very conservative pieces about out military, and he is a Fox talking head. He has also promised to help Trump eliminate the woke generals.
I am wondering if this will carry on to reverting back to the former Confederate name of southern military bases?
Then there is Kristi Noem who has been nominated as Secretary of Homeland Security. Problems are: she is banned from entry onto several tribal lands in her home state; she admits to shooting a 14-month-old dog because it was "untrainable," and she interfered with the professional licensing process of her daughter getting a real estate license.
Cronyism anybody"
Fascism too.
No wonder Trump wants to bypass the normal confirmation process. I am sure there would be a couple of Black senators who would not vote to confirm, Hegseth. And who would dare want to go against the Humane Society? Okay MAGA people.
Comments
Trump is a very vengeful person. He hates Iran as it is. He just may use it as an excuse to take negative action against the Iranian regime.
To the point of not making a joke on a hell thread, ever hear of black humor or gallows humor?
I think there would be a certain amount of courage involved in a decision to go to war that is beyond Trump. He's not going to be willing to go on TV and tell the American people that he is deploying US forces at multi-division strength to overthrow the Iranian regime.
Trump dead (or incapacitated) would, I suppose, mean Vance as de facto President?
On a tangent, Mrs Eirenist is puzzled by the way Trump keeps clapping his audience and pointing at random individuals in it in a 'There you are, you old son-of-a-gun' manner, presumably pretending to recognise them. Is this an American campaigning ploy? Can anyone provide enlightenment for this Anglo-Manx-Welsh lady (an explosive mixture). She finds the practice very irritating. Off tangent.
Trump will not see a prison while in office. Either the New York case will be suspended or dismissed. Likewise, the Georgia case. The Federal cases will be dismissed. Vance, though, will remain a heartbeat away from assuming the office.
I believe it is a common practice to point to people in the audience whom the speaker recognizes. As for the clapping, it's always upset me too. That's something that the likes of Kim Wrong Trim and Vladimir Sputum do.
I was thinking more along the lines of Trump being rendered incapable of exercising his office because of a stroke, or other medical emergency. I take the point that he is very unlikely to go to jail, as he now appears to be above the law...
Vance only gets to be acting president if the President acknowledges a temporary incapacity, such as before having a colonoscopy, or if the 25th amendment is invoked (which requires the VP, most of the cabinet, Congress, and potentially a panel of medical experts called in for their opinion all to agree - highly unlikely) to temporarily make the VP acting president against the President’s wishes.
Otherwise, if the President is de facto incapacitated but not officially acknowledged as such, anyone could be calling the shots. There’s no reason why it would be the VP. the VP doesn’t even live or work in the White House or spend the majority of his or her time with the President. The people making decisions for the incapacitated president would probably be the White House Chief of Staff and other top aides and advisors. It could even be members of the President’s family. They would have no legal right to make these decisions and say that the President made them. But neither would the VP.
Gallows humor is great. I have a very dark sense of humor. But jokes along the lines of “I don’t like the Iranian regime but at least they tried to kill Trump” are:
1. Not even funny
2. Likely to make any pro-Trump or at least anti-Democrat listener (who Democrats often don’t even know is there) think that the Democrats are full of it when they clutch their pearls at the same kind of rhetoric from Trump and his supporters. And there are anti-Trump listeners (who online may hear the joke after a very long chain of sharing and resharing) who feel encouraged to much more explicitly wish harm on Trump, and then there are the very few unstable people like the second American who plotted to assassinate Trump who hear these things and think “You know, I was thinking of doing the same thing…” (It’s not clear if the first person who shot at Trump would not also have tried to shoot Biden if he had been in town, but the second shooter definitely wanted to shoot Trump specifically for political reasons.)
Thanks for the clarification @stonespring.
I also love gallows humor, but sometimes, no matter how darkly humorous, it’s a Very Bad Idea.
I am not aware of any such laws. I also not aware of anyone being prosecuted for the wording of a joke against the King or the PM. It would make the news. The King has had to cope with a lot of bas things said about him his whole adult life. The PM is not the same as the President. Also our humour can be very disrespectful
Dafyd Hell Host
He will be doing cheesy winks next.
"Let The Blame Game Commence" (2nd episode after the election)
"Making Sense of Tr*mp's Win" (1st episode after the election)
Again, these are four former Obama Staffers who also worked on other campaigns before Obama. Deep insight, yet really entertaining. Their language can be... colorful.
To sum up.
The future's bright. The future's orange
/tangent
A nuclear explosion's pretty bright too.
How quickly can they delete all of the tactics that instruct them to run in opposition to issues of reprehensibility and criminality, and the cognitive dissonance required to dismiss those things out of hand?
Can they at all?
Now that Trump has nominated Congresswoman Elise Stefanik to be the Ambassador to the UN, her seat will likely be up for a special election. The district has long been a Republican District, but before Stefanik took the seat, it had been won by Democrat Bill Owens in a 2009 special election. Could this be a chink in the Republican plans?
It is early in the Presidential cycle. I believe in miracles he might not be as bad as expected
I sincerely hope you are right.
But I'm not holding my breath.
A flawed candidate easily beat a very poor candidate.
Our only hope is that things will get so bad that there can be no denying that electing him was a terrible mistake. But he'll figure out a way to blame it on the Democrats.
I too, have given up on the news for my mental health at this point.
I was thinking something similar with regard to the House - it's probably advantageous politically if Republicans have the trifecta, then they have to own either the awful legislation they pass or the clown show of bickering when they fail.
It appears the greatest issue was the pocketbook. When people complain they cannot afford food stuff, housing, or fuel, they cannot see much further than that. It is about the hierarchy of needs. Trump is the bread king, but I think it will not take long before they will regret that.
Even now, Trump is trying to circumvent the constitution. He wants the newly elected Senate to go into recess as soon as he is inaugurated so he can appoint his cronies without the need for confirmation. Our Constitution allows for recess appointments. (When the Constitution was written it, congress would take up to three months recess. Then too, it could have taken some time for congress to return to be in session due to the state of transportation.
Bur, Trump's people are thinking they can pull their talent from the House. Already, three congresspeople have been nominated for cabinet positions. Those seats will have to be filled again through special appointment or election. In other words, who will be controlling the House will continue to be a question.
The good news is, Trump will not be able to pull out of NATO unilaterally. While it took 2/3 of the Senate to approve the NATO treaty, and in the case of most treaties all the president as to do is formally withdraw from it. But in the case of NATO there is a law on the books that says 2/3 of both the Senate and the House would have to approve of the withdrawal. Curiously, the law was introduced by Marco Rubio way back when.
Don't give up people. The struggle continues. Keep informed. That is the only way this chapter will end.
It's not that Harris didn't mention inflation. She just didn't speak to it from a standpoint of grievance. Tr*mp only speaks from a standpoint of grievance, and he does it incessantly. It's way more difficult to convince people to be aspirational in an attempt to overwhelm an economic reality than it is to be confrontational about it, and suggest that if certain people are punished things will get better, and for the right people.
Yes, pointing at people. Is that not a very rude thing to do on the other side of the pond as it is over here?
And the random "thumbs up" is equally irritating.
Or, just Women.
Everything he does irritates the crap out of me, but it is not rude in the US for someone on a stage to point out people in the audience. Other people would make it look generous; they're being applauded by a crowd, and they point to friends, supporters, loved ones -- think maybe of actors at an awards show pointing out other people who were in the movie they're getting an award for.
The thumbs up thing is weird because he's random about it, not being it's weird in itself.
Wouldn't be interesting if both major parties nominated a woman? Heu, even though I am old, I can still dream.
The second most powerful person in the Trump administration will be Susie Walz. She was able to show her cred with the way she handled the Trump campaign. She knew when and where to place him in the swing states. She was able to get him to appeal to minority groups. She had rather limited dollars to spend, compared to the Harris campaign. She is the first woman to hold the position of Chief of Staff.
Chips, even cracks are appearing.
It will happen. Hopefully, in the next decade.
,
I worry that as long as the economy does well and the US doesn't wind up in a war, Trump and Republicans won't be blamed by a majority of voters in four years for whatever else goes wrong (even things they are directly responsible for). And as for the economy, although tariffs like the kind Trump is proposing could send inflation spiraling up again and hurt any business that relies on imports in any part of its supply chain (which is most businesses), I also worry that the US economy is too big to fail and that after the Global Financial Crisis and Covid the Fed (along with the ECB and other major central banks) has learned to act fast and big to put out any fires of recession or inflation before they can get too bad. So if Trump messes things up, they will probably clean up his mess, along with a bipartisan majority in Congress that will pass whatever stimulus checks are needed (which will have Trump's signature on them again).
I think Democrats need to lean into the issues of the cost of housing, healthcare, childcare, and eldercare. They need to
When politicians come on or go off stage to applause here, it is considered awkward to just stand and receive the applause, and for politicians who are popular in their parties the applause is often lengthy. If they try to thank the audience and move into their speech too early, they risk being drowned out by the crowd (as happened to Harris a couple of times early in her campaign). That is why politicians wave, point at random audience members, and applaud back at the audience. The people who go to political rallies unfortunately tend to be super partisans who treat it like a rock concert and want to be able to “go wild” for their candidate. So politicians have to find something to do while there is just too much noise to be heard, even with a microphone.
I can’t possibly get in Trump’s head and explain his body language, though.
I note Hegseth has no real command experience. He has written a number of very conservative pieces about out military, and he is a Fox talking head. He has also promised to help Trump eliminate the woke generals.
I am wondering if this will carry on to reverting back to the former Confederate name of southern military bases?
Then there is Kristi Noem who has been nominated as Secretary of Homeland Security. Problems are: she is banned from entry onto several tribal lands in her home state; she admits to shooting a 14-month-old dog because it was "untrainable," and she interfered with the professional licensing process of her daughter getting a real estate license.
Cronyism anybody"
Fascism too.
No wonder Trump wants to bypass the normal confirmation process. I am sure there would be a couple of Black senators who would not vote to confirm, Hegseth. And who would dare want to go against the Humane Society? Okay MAGA people.