Trump Dump: Internal Policy (Thread I)

[The Romulan Republic]

Not delusional so much as pathological liar, I think.

Which he always was, but he's getting more and more brazen. The term "Orwellian" is grossly overused, but it seems apt in this case.

[SpottedKitty]

The term "Orwellian" is grossly overused, but it seems apt in this case.

<nod> Looks like Newspeak v2 turns out to be Twit(ter)speak.

[Simon_Jester]

They're still a potential source of heavies if Trump decides the uniformed services aren't politically reliable enough for him, though. Plus they have one thing going for them that the Brownshirts didn't; not being officially affiliated with the GOP, Trump can preserve a thin veneer of plausible deniability if they shoot up a BLM rally or something.

Trump isn't going to be able to use them to shut down democratic processes if he can't control them.

Klansmen randomly deciding to go shoot up a Black Lives Matter rally, with tacit encouragement from another group, isn't the kind of thing Trump actually wants to happen, you see. Even if he wants to be a dictator it's not what he'd want.

If Trump wanted to be a fascist dictator, in the sense of actually sitting down and planning out "how do we make this happen," he would need:

1) The ability to issue specific orders to specific groups, telling them to push harder or back off, to shift away from a losing strategy in favor of a winning one. In other words, a well-defined chain of command linking him to the radical groups he's trying to use as weapons.
2) The ability to use targeted violence against public officials that oppose him. Without having random nontargeted violence lead to outrage against his cause faster than it intimidates his opponents.
3) The ability to stage actually violent rallies (not just vaguely menacing ones) to intimidate his opponents. Even if that results in negative confrontations with the law.
4) Pursuant to (2) and (3), he would need to have people who are actually willing to get arrested and go to jail for him because The Leader Commands It. But, conversely, to NOT do anything that would send them to jail when The Leader does not thus command.
_____________________________

These are not things you can do without an organized and above all disciplined movement. Having a million thugs who like you is not enough. You need to take those thugs and forge them into an army.

Do you or do you not understand what I'm saying? Do you or do you not agree with what I am saying? I get that it's very common to say 'yes-but,' but right now I'd really appreciate a yes-or-no answer, because I'm starting to get fatigued. Tired of even trying to participate in conversations that involve my needing to go into this subject at all.

So I would be greatly obliged if you could tell me, yes/no, up/down, do you agree with the statement:

"Trump does not have a paramilitary thug army, which greatly weakens his ability to impose fascism compared to historical fascists like Hitler and Mussolini, even if he wants to do so."

[mr friendly guy]

So Trump has gone from mildly delusional to completely round the twist. I can't wait to see how his apologists handwave this one away...

They done what cosmicstorm did. Claim he wasn't referring to a specific terrorist attack, but just what has been happening in general with regards to Sweden.

[Flagg]

I say what you're saying.

Now let's get them FEMA Camps open, them black trains rolling, and scare the shit out of Glenn Beck, Alex Jones, and Sean Hannity!

That's your job, I'm natural born citizen of the Republic of Finland with no dual citizenship. That does give a certain degree of perspective on the actions of Donald Trump because it's not my cow that's in the ditch, I am an outsider when it comes to US internal politics and in fact only reason I take intrest on the current situation is how it affects me. The problem with Trump's goverment is that no-one seems to know how to react to them it creates uncertency here. That said there's a world of difference between "things are uncertain so we should prepare for the realistic worst case scenario" and "the sky is about to fall, we must slaughter slavs or brown people to stop it!"

First Poland Canada, then the world!

[Flagg]

How many people die because of guns every year in the USA again? Thirty-thousand? That are 83 people every day. I don't know about you, but in other countries this would be called civil war. And the americans piss themselves about arabs and mexicans? Somebody needs to get his priorities right.

That's a bit of a non-sequitur. Also, 2/3rds of deaths from firearms are due to suicide. Helping people with their mental health will do much more to assist in that than almost anything else. And we shouldn't get side tracked into a gun control discussion.

Helping people with their mental health would do far too much damage to President Pussygrabber's base.

[Flagg]

Emphasis on 'half baked.' Compared to the Sturmabteilung and the MVSN, none of those groups are much of a threat, and that includes the modern incarnation of the KKK.

If the Klan could snap their fingers and turn back into the monster they were back in the Roaring Twenties, then they'd be something close to that level of organized, violent political ugliness. But that was ninety years ago; they haven't been the same since Superman got done trashing them.

Yes, I know, Superman is a fictional character. He kicked their asses anyway.

They're still a potential source of heavies if Trump decides the uniformed services aren't politically reliable enough for him, though. Plus they have one thing going for them that the Brownshirts didn't; not being officially affiliated with the GOP, Trump can preserve a thin veneer of plausible deniability if they shoot up a BLM rally or something.

No, Trump would much rather have a BLM (or loosely affiliated, and I'm talking 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon footloosely (sorry, I'm a bad man) affiliated) member/hanger-on/slightly brownish person shoot up a Klan Rally, to give the illusion of their type being the "persecuted ones".

[FaxModem1]

Now there actually are riots in Sweden: CNN

Sweden: Riots erupt in Stockholm neighborhood
By Ivan Watson and Lauren Said-Moorhouse, CNN

Updated 10:59 AM ET, Wed February 22, 2017
sweden stockholm riots immigration watson pkg_00014506

Riots spark immigration debate in Sweden 03:26
Story highlights
Trouble flared in Stockholm's Rinkeby neighborhood as police arrested a suspect
Calm was restored to the area by midnight, Swedish authorities say
US President Donald Trump earlier suggested immigrants in Sweden were to blame for an increase in crime
Stockholm, Sweden (CNN)Riots broke out in a predominantly immigrant neighborhood of Stockholm Monday night, as residents clashed with police officers and set vehicles on fire, Swedish police say.

Officers were forced to call in reinforcements when a crowd began to gather in the suburb of Rinkeby during the arrest of a suspect, according to a statement from Stockholm police.
Stockholm regional police chief Ulf Johansson said the clashes may have been a result of their "increased pressure on criminals in the area."

The clashes come days after US President Donald Trump suggested that immigrants in Sweden were to blame for an increase in crime across the country.
A policeman investigates a burned-out car in Rinkeby, Stockholm, after riots broke out.
A policeman investigates a burned-out car in Rinkeby, Stockholm, after riots broke out.
In recent years, Sweden has taken in more refugees per capita than any other European country, which has fueled tensions and caused a rise in anti-immigrant sentiment.
Warning shots fired by police
On Monday night in Rinkeby, several people threw stones at police, striking one officer in the arm. As the situation escalated, police fired warning shots to disperse the crowd and one shot at a rioter, a police spokesperson told CNN's Ivan Watson.
More riots erupted later in the evening, causing damage to shopfronts as well as instances of looting. A police spokesperson said 10 cars had been torched, but that order and security had been restored by midnight.
Police say 10 cars were set alight during riots in the Stockholm suburb of Rinkeby.
Police say 10 cars were set alight during riots in the Stockholm suburb of Rinkeby.
A CNN team in the area on Tuesday saw evidence of the damage: The doors of Rinkeby's subway station had been smashed, and other broken windows were covered in temporary plastic sheeting, but the burned-out cars had already been cleared away.

The area is known for its large immigrant population, but also for high levels of unemployment, Watson said.
Authorities have launched an investigation into the unrest.
"Of course it is very serious that the police officers are attacked when doing their job," Johansson said.
He added: "But I can assure that we are resilient and will not leave, rather intensify our work."
Large-scale riots in 2013
In an emailed statement to CNN, Swedish police said that while riots like those on Monday night are unusual, it is not the first time unrest has broken out in Rinkeby.
Sweden slams Trump for migrant comment

Sweden slams Trump for migrant comment 03:29
In 2013, large scale riots flared for a week in the Swedish capital, with gangs setting fire to schools and a police station.
In 2015, more than 160,000 people -- many from Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan -- arrived in Sweden seeking asylum.
The country granted asylum to 101,025 refugees -- about 1% of the total population -- from 2012 to 2015.
In January 2016, a 22-year-old woman was murdered at the asylum center where she worked, leading to pressure on the government to curb the number of migrants coming into the country.
Trump links migrants and crime
At a rally in Florida on Saturday, the US President remarked: "You look at what's happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers. They're having problems like they never thought possible."
Sweden reacts to Donald Trump: 'Has someone stolen our meatballs?'
Sweden on Trump: 'Has someone stolen our meatballs?'
However, a former US ambassador told CNN that the country is perfectly safe regardless of the influx of refugees in recent years.
"The crime rate has not skyrocketed," Azita Raji told CNN's Chris Cuomo, citing data showing a weak correlation between terrorism and the migrations.

Trump's statements left many Swedish residents puzzled.
Djamel Zeghachov, a driver in Stockholm, told CNN: "We were like, what's happened right now? Has somebody stolen our meatballs? People were laughing about it."

Does Trump get points for retroactively being right?

[Simon_Jester]

Riots aren't terrorist attacks, and occasional riots don't translate into "our society is falling apart and urgent change is needed."

Or if they do, the US has needed to solve its poverty problem a lot longer, and a lot more seriously, than its immigration 'problem.'

[mr friendly guy]

I have seen people use the shifting the goalposts tactic with Trump. For example they will berate the media for focussing on this one date which Trump got wrong because Sweden has lots of other problems with immigrants. The fact we focus on that date is that its another example of lies made by the administration, like the Bowling Green Massacre and the Atlanta terrorist attacks caused by migrants (as opposed a white American guy). Moreover, if Sweden's migrant problems are so bad, why do we need to defend a false claim exaggerating it?

[Rogue 9]

I think people aren't giving Trump enough credit for thinking about what he's saying. Examine what he said.

You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible.

Notice: He never finishes the thought; in fact he never finished any of the three thoughts he brought up, specifically what supposedly happened, what large numbers they took in, and what problems they're having. This is deliberate. His manner of speaking is designed to let the listener fill in the gaps with what he's already thinking, so that his disparate supporters can all get something different out of the speech that fits with what they want and perceive, and they can all believe they're right even if they perceived wildly different things. People who actually know that nothing happened of course see through it and are confused and presume him ignorant and/or stupid, but those people aren't who he's talking to.

Underestimating your opponent is a dangerous thing. People thought George W. Bush was stupid, yet until the wheels completely fell off after 2006, he repeatedly beat the Democrats politically. Trump is certainly impatient, petulant, authoritarian, and inexperienced in government, but he knows very well how to work a crowd. Presuming him stupid undersells the danger he represents.

[FaxModem1]

Note to self, post Smileys went being sarcastic.

On-topic, expect to see a lot 'I told you so's from people defending Trump using it.

[Simon_Jester]

I think people aren't giving Trump enough credit for thinking about what he's saying. Examine what he said.

You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible.

Notice: He never finishes the thought; in fact he never finished any of the three thoughts he brought up, specifically what supposedly happened, what large numbers they took in, and what problems they're having. This is deliberate. His manner of speaking is designed to let the listener fill in the gaps with what he's already thinking, so that his disparate supporters can all get something different out of the speech that fits with what they want and perceive, and they can all believe they're right even if they perceived wildly different things. People who actually know that nothing happened of course see through it and are confused and presume him ignorant and/or stupid, but those people aren't who he's talking to.

He's very savvy, and has an amazing talent for compensating for his own weaknesses.

Coherence, literacy, being in possession of the facts- these are not areas The Donald is good at. He has compensated by developing a rhetorical 'sell' strategy which is sort of the equivalent to mumbling in order to conceal the fact that you don't know the lyrics to a song. And it works, because he really is very good at it.

The man's spent seventy years not crashing out into total poverty despite evidence that he's borderline illiterate and lacks the attention span to make complex decisions. He clearly has to have something going for him.

And his ability to successfully bullshit people into approving of him, without actually saying anything except "I am great" is a big part of that.

[Flagg]

I think people aren't giving Trump enough credit for thinking about what he's saying. Examine what he said.

You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible.

Notice: He never finishes the thought; in fact he never finished any of the three thoughts he brought up, specifically what supposedly happened, what large numbers they took in, and what problems they're having. This is deliberate. His manner of speaking is designed to let the listener fill in the gaps with what he's already thinking, so that his disparate supporters can all get something different out of the speech that fits with what they want and perceive, and they can all believe they're right even if they perceived wildly different things. People who actually know that nothing happened of course see through it and are confused and presume him ignorant and/or stupid, but those people aren't who he's talking to.

Underestimating your opponent is a dangerous thing. People thought George W. Bush was stupid, yet until the wheels completely fell off after 2006, he repeatedly beat the Democrats politically. Trump is certainly impatient, petulant, authoritarian, and inexperienced in government, but he knows very well how to work a crowd. Presuming him stupid undersells the danger he represents.

Bush only won anything politically because SCOTUS installed him, and then 9/11 happened giving him pretty much carte blanche to do whatever he wanted "or you're un-American, a traitor, etc". The wheels came off the bus in 2005 when it both became so apparent Bush was a lying, empty suit who would rather play his guitar at John McCain's birthday than deal with all the drowning people in New Orleans as it was reclaimed by Poseidon and the only thing higher than the death counts from 9/11, both wars, and in the lower 9th ward are the number of lies told by that criminal administration to sell the stupid twats amongst us to go to war in Iraq.

Lies that were so see-through to anyone whose skull was occupied by a brain not made of a slushy, that Time Magazine (trying to save face for the entire media who share give or take 50% of the blame for the Mess-O-Potamia) literally released an issue saying "How We Were All Wrong About Iraq" (bolding and underlining mine) when I recall a very sizable chunk of Americans, myself included, demanding we not invade Iraq, and huge anti-war protests in every major American city and cities across the globe (some of them reaching over 100,000-200,000 marchers strong) that were willfully ignored by the Media before the war started because as Katie "I can't keep a job because I'm not a real journalist and making Sarah Palin look stupid compared to me gave Obama the win" Couric put it= "NAVY SEALS ROCK!".

[Flagg]

I think people aren't giving Trump enough credit for thinking about what he's saying. Examine what he said.

You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible.

Notice: He never finishes the thought; in fact he never finished any of the three thoughts he brought up, specifically what supposedly happened, what large numbers they took in, and what problems they're having. This is deliberate. His manner of speaking is designed to let the listener fill in the gaps with what he's already thinking, so that his disparate supporters can all get something different out of the speech that fits with what they want and perceive, and they can all believe they're right even if they perceived wildly different things. People who actually know that nothing happened of course see through it and are confused and presume him ignorant and/or stupid, but those people aren't who he's talking to.

Underestimating your opponent is a dangerous thing. People thought George W. Bush was stupid, yet until the wheels completely fell off after 2006, he repeatedly beat the Democrats politically. Trump is certainly impatient, petulant, authoritarian, and inexperienced in government, but he knows very well how to work a crowd. Presuming him stupid undersells the danger he represents.

Aaand... DING DING DING!

So Trump has gone from mildly delusional to completely round the twist. I can't wait to see how his apologists handwave this one away...

They done what cosmicstorm did. Claim he wasn't referring to a specific terrorist attack, but just what has been happening in general with regards to Sweden.

And mr friendly guy gets the cigar, no guarantees that it hasn't been inserted into any and all orifices living nor dead!

[K. A. Pital]

And it's not called "Trump Dump" for nothing, this thread.

Dumped here, courtesy of me.

[Rogue 9]

I think people aren't giving Trump enough credit for thinking about what he's saying. Examine what he said.

You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible.

Notice: He never finishes the thought; in fact he never finished any of the three thoughts he brought up, specifically what supposedly happened, what large numbers they took in, and what problems they're having. This is deliberate. His manner of speaking is designed to let the listener fill in the gaps with what he's already thinking, so that his disparate supporters can all get something different out of the speech that fits with what they want and perceive, and they can all believe they're right even if they perceived wildly different things. People who actually know that nothing happened of course see through it and are confused and presume him ignorant and/or stupid, but those people aren't who he's talking to.

Underestimating your opponent is a dangerous thing. People thought George W. Bush was stupid, yet until the wheels completely fell off after 2006, he repeatedly beat the Democrats politically. Trump is certainly impatient, petulant, authoritarian, and inexperienced in government, but he knows very well how to work a crowd. Presuming him stupid undersells the danger he represents.

Aaand... DING DING DING!

So Trump has gone from mildly delusional to completely round the twist. I can't wait to see how his apologists handwave this one away...

They done what cosmicstorm did. Claim he wasn't referring to a specific terrorist attack, but just what has been happening in general with regards to Sweden.

And mr friendly guy gets the cigar, no guarantees that it hasn't been inserted into any and all orifices living nor dead!

Once confronted with the facts, sure, but he's still playing a deliberate psychological game with his followers. His manner of speaking is essentially choose-your-own-statement.

[Flagg]

I think people aren't giving Trump enough credit for thinking about what he's saying. Examine what he said.


Notice: He never finishes the thought; in fact he never finished any of the three thoughts he brought up, specifically what supposedly happened, what large numbers they took in, and what problems they're having. This is deliberate. His manner of speaking is designed to let the listener fill in the gaps with what he's already thinking, so that his disparate supporters can all get something different out of the speech that fits with what they want and perceive, and they can all believe they're right even if they perceived wildly different things. People who actually know that nothing happened of course see through it and are confused and presume him ignorant and/or stupid, but those people aren't who he's talking to.

Underestimating your opponent is a dangerous thing. People thought George W. Bush was stupid, yet until the wheels completely fell off after 2006, he repeatedly beat the Democrats politically. Trump is certainly impatient, petulant, authoritarian, and inexperienced in government, but he knows very well how to work a crowd. Presuming him stupid undersells the danger he represents.

Aaand... DING DING DING!

They done what cosmicstorm did. Claim he wasn't referring to a specific terrorist attack, but just what has been happening in general with regards to Sweden.

And mr friendly guy gets the cigar, no guarantees that it hasn't been inserted into any and all orifices living nor dead!

Once confronted with the facts, sure, but he's still playing a deliberate psychological game with his followers. His manner of speaking is essentially choose-your-own-statement.

You give the guy way too much credit. It's all very basic "us vs them" bullshit. And they are very, very, bad at it. I mean they don't seem to realize that they are on the Global stage. It's not Trumpville, Shitsconsin where you can get everyone riled up yelling a boldfaced lie, like; "Them's Swedes Blew up Bowling Green, yous guys hear about dat!? Let's go kick their asses!

[Simon_Jester]

The thing is, Trump doesn't even bother calculating the effects of his actions on the global stage.

He's spent his entire half-century of adult life perfecting his technique for selling to those he cares about selling to. No matter where he is or what he's doing, in his mind he's selling to whoever he wants to buy what he has to offer.

That's not the Swedes, that's his voters back home.

Which is where his made-up rambling rhetorical style that never comes to the point and rarely expresses a coherent thought comes in. It gives his intended audience (gullible people who are impressed by him and want to buy what he's offering) the maximum number of opportunities to nod and go "mm-hm" at him without actually analyzing what he's saying on its merits.

[Flagg]

The thing is, Trump doesn't even bother calculating the effects of his actions on the global stage.

He's spent his entire half-century of adult life perfecting his technique for selling to those he cares about selling to. No matter where he is or what he's doing, in his mind he's selling to whoever he wants to buy what he has to offer.

That's not the Swedes, that's his voters back home.

Which is where his made-up rambling rhetorical style that never comes to the point and rarely expresses a coherent thought comes in. It gives his intended audience (gullible people who are impressed by him and want to buy what he's offering) the maximum number of opportunities to nod and go "mm-hm" at him without actually analyzing what he's saying on its merits.

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying. The fact is that I don't know that he's aware of there even being a global statge where upon the shit he says and does even matters. It's more like "France said what about NATO? Who gives a fuck about a bunch of f*gg*t whine drinking pussies? I bet they don't even have nukes!".

I hope that's hyperbole.

[Gandalf]

Underestimating your opponent is a dangerous thing. People thought George W. Bush was stupid, yet until the wheels completely fell off after 2006, he repeatedly beat the Democrats politically. Trump is certainly impatient, petulant, authoritarian, and inexperienced in government, but he knows very well how to work a crowd. Presuming him stupid undersells the danger he represents.

Bush is/was stupid. It was a combination of Karl Rove's skills and the American affinity for stupid that kept him winning until too much was weighed against him and the regime. Trump is Bush without the polish and with more direct malice.

Here we're seeing a repeat of conversations from 2002-2003: The leader says clearly ridiculous things. But surely the leader cannot be stupid. Then the leader must truly be playing nine dimensional chess, only recognisable to his truest followers!

[The Romulan Republic]

Not at all.

The point is that Trump has one thing he's actually talented at: he's a con man.

He's utterly unfit for government, far more than Bush was, morally, intellectually, and in terms of experience. But he is good at conning people, and he is able to transfer that to political campaigning.

He also has a party with control of two (likely soon three) branches of the Federal government, and control of many state governments, which is largely willing to aid and abet him, or at least turn a blind eye, on things like voter suppression.

We undersell that threat at our peril.

[Rogue 9]

Underestimating your opponent is a dangerous thing. People thought George W. Bush was stupid, yet until the wheels completely fell off after 2006, he repeatedly beat the Democrats politically. Trump is certainly impatient, petulant, authoritarian, and inexperienced in government, but he knows very well how to work a crowd. Presuming him stupid undersells the danger he represents.

Bush is/was stupid. It was a combination of Karl Rove's skills and the American affinity for stupid that kept him winning until too much was weighed against him and the regime. Trump is Bush without the polish and with more direct malice.

Here we're seeing a repeat of conversations from 2002-2003: The leader says clearly ridiculous things. But surely the leader cannot be stupid. Then the leader must truly be playing nine dimensional chess, only recognisable to his truest followers!

It's not nine-dimensional chess. I'm saying his rhetorical style is designed to be chameleonic on purpose; it's how he's operated for decades. It's easy to point at his false statements and laugh about how dumb he is, but doing that is missing the fact that he is running a con, and one successful enough to put him in the White House. That doesn't make him a policy genius (obviously), but it does mean he can effectively work his electorate into believing that he is by getting them to believe that he agrees with them personally.

[Flagg]

Underestimating your opponent is a dangerous thing. People thought George W. Bush was stupid, yet until the wheels completely fell off after 2006, he repeatedly beat the Democrats politically. Trump is certainly impatient, petulant, authoritarian, and inexperienced in government, but he knows very well how to work a crowd. Presuming him stupid undersells the danger he represents.

Bush is/was stupid. It was a combination of Karl Rove's skills and the American affinity for stupid that kept him winning until too much was weighed against him and the regime. Trump is Bush without the polish and with more direct malice.

Here we're seeing a repeat of conversations from 2002-2003: The leader says clearly ridiculous things. But surely the leader cannot be stupid. Then the leader must truly be playing nine dimensional chess, only recognisable to his truest followers!

It's not nine-dimensional chess. I'm saying his rhetorical style is designed to be chameleonic on purpose; it's how he's operated for decades. It's easy to point at his false statements and laugh about how dumb he is, but doing that is missing the fact that he is running a con, and one successful enough to put him in the White House. That doesn't make him a policy genius (obviously), but it does mean he can effectively work his electorate into believing that he is by getting them to believe that he agrees with them personally.

Which is a problem when you can't use the word "Jew" because your base spent all last night knocking over Jewish headstones and painting swastikas on everything without a swastika on it already.

[Thanas]

Oh this is rich. Remember Comey, the guy who "just happened" to leak the new inquiry into clinton emails to congress? And who "just happened" to remain FBI director for saving Trump's election being a patriot. And who "just happened" to refuse to deny or confirm whether there was investigations into Trump and his Russian contacts?

Well, turns out he is totally fine with discussing such investigation with the White House Chief of Staff.

Link

The White House on Friday acknowledged that Priebus, FBI director James Comey and deputy director Andrew McCabe had discussed what the FBI knew about Russian ties to the Trump presidential campaign.