I went down to the demonstration
To get my fair share of abuse

-- The Rolling Stones

So, what do y'all think of Robert De Niro saying FUCK TRUMP at the Tony awards? Do people here think this will (a) increase; or (b) decrease the Dems' chances in November? Do you think this is a sign of strength, or a sign of weakness as an argumentation tactic? If you and I are having a conversation about the multiverse, or the nature of mathematical inconsistency, or US politics, and I say, "Well, FUCK YOU!", do you regard that as a strong debating point or a weak one?

@tim wood What do you think?

Who cares? Especially given that Jeff Sessions today has barred a majority of abuse victims from asylum in the United States, which will have very serious if not outright deadly repercussions for these victims.

Although, despite having taken place the day prior, "Fuck You" is a pretty apt response.

Who cares? — Maw

That's my question. Do you think this will have a positive or negative effect on the votes of middle America in November?

It will have no effect.

Weak debating. However, it's an honest expression of feeling - or at least I think it is. Such things can be persuasive because they're honest - honesty has its place.

As to helping the Democrats, I do not believe DeNiro's opinions or expressions will change anyone's vote.

The midterms will be interesting. Everyone has a very good reason to vote. It ought to be a Democrat landslide, with the possible exception of excellent Republican candidates, of which I'm aware of none. If not, then every American, every single American, is on notice that the America that existed from 1790 until 20 Jan. 2017 is no more, and restoring it will be a serious fight.

I do not understand how anyone, anymore, can stomach Trump. I just watched a campaign clip where Trump swore he would never lie, and no one - not anyone - would be "above" the law.

I do not understand how anyone, anymore, can stomach Trump. — tim wood

He just made peace with freaking North Korea. That war's been going on as long as my lifetime. Now I wish he'd made human rights a condition of the deal. I'm disappointed about that. But don't you give this guy ANYTHING?

As far as ordinary people stomaching Trump, how about all the working class people with jobs, the people whose 401k is booming (hey it may all crash tomorrow but at the moment it hasn't crashed yet), the people who actually LIKE his cultural rhetoric (those are the deplorables, whom I deplore for the record. I've always been a social liberal with a libertarian streak).

But can't you see that

a) Trump has done SOME good stuff, like NK; and

b) Some people are very happy with him.

You don't have to like the guy, but can you see either or both of these points? Can't you see that SOME people, a LOT of people in fact, CAN stomach Trump just fine?

November will be interesting. I don't know if there will be big turnout. There's never big turnout in midterms and millennials may skew liberal but do millennials show up for midterms?

As someone who is not American (I'm Japanese), I say Trump is somewhat unpredictable but is not necessarily the worst president as people make him to be.

I hate these radical leftists saying "Nazi" or "white supremacy" or "Ultranationalism" or some exaggerated propaganda whenever things happen against their desire.

But can't you see that — fishfry

Let's get basic. I say Trump's a bad man, a very bad man. Agree?

The idea is that the bad man cannot do good things. He may luck into a good thing - it's beyond me to understand what's up with North Korea (unless Un's "radar" tells him rapprochement would be good for his personal health). To do anything you have to have some idea about what you're doing; in so far as the good is concerned, Trump doesn't have it.

For example: do you think Trump is an honest man? I think he is sufficiently disturbed so that he is incapable of being honest. What comes out of his mouth cannot be truth. There may be occasions when it's more-or-less accurate, but that's not the truth.

As of this moment, piece in NK is not yet. Maybe it will happen. Maybe big brother Xi explained the facts of life to Un. I'd like to see real irreversible on-the-ground progress before US troops leave South Korea.

Perhaps you see Trump as some kind of tool. Point him at a china shop and watch him break things. Think about his history as it's been reported over years. That's the record that matters. And his performance at the G7 won't benefit you or me any time soon.

And look at the people around him. Can you say Betsy Devos? She's just one of many horrors.

After some thought, I wouldn't want Trump as clam warden on a beach. He's simply too rotten.

If indeed a peace treaty or disarmament is agreed to in the Korean Penisular - big 'if' - then indeed it would be a great thing, no ifs or buts. But it is still nauseating to observe how much Trump is pursuing this because it's going to be good for his image.

Secondly nobody should forget that Kim Jong Un, instead of cruising around Singapore night-spots, ought to be hauled in front of the world court for crimes against humanity, then either executed or jailed for life. Not going to happen, of course, but important to remember.

Can't you see that SOME people, a LOT of people in fact, CAN stomach Trump just fine? — fishfry

That continually baffles me. I mean, a lot of the kinds of things that the electorate was outraged about, when it came to Clinton or Obama, Trump does all the time, in spades, and 'the Trump supporters' seem to think it's all just fine and dandy.

For instance, the 'crimes' that Hillary Clinton was accused of in respect of the insecure mail-server, amount to nothing - zip - while people involved in Trump's campaign team have been indicted on federal crimes verging on treason.

To say nothing of the continual barrage of lies, half-truths, misinformation and exaggerations, the pathological narcissism and vanity....the list is endless.

So - what is the matter with these people? Trump himself said it - he could stand on Fifth Avenue in New York City and shoot someone dead, and they'd still vote for him. It doesn't matter if he trashes the Western Alliance, destroys the environment, and subverts the constitution - they'll vote for him anyway. That's why it's scary.

Let's get basic. I say Trump's a bad man, a very bad man. Agree? — tim wood

Not really, but for this discussion I take no position at all. Else I fall into the trap of defending Donald Trump. Why bother? I regarded him on election day as the second most awful candidate in the race. I still prefer him to the thought of Hillary being president. But past that I won't go. If I said a word in defense of Trump I could be legitimately characterized as a Trump defender and that is not the position I'm taking in this thread. Or in general for that matter. I'm a Trump explainer, but liberals these days simply can't hear that distinction. It's not just you.

You made the statement, How can any American not hate his guts. I hope that's a fair paraphrase, I didn't bother to scroll back for the exact wording.

And I said, well first, the deplorables (whom I agree are deplorable) still love him.

Second, anti-war independents such as myself do appreciate what he's doing in NK. Is that an accident? I see it as the direct result of his real estate hustler negotiating style. He deliberately keeps everyone off balance.

And the stock market's up, the labor market is tight as hell, and consumer confidence is at record highs. There are Americans enjoying those effects. When Bill Maher says he hopes the economy will crash to make Trump look bad, a lot of Americans think Maher is a teeny bit lacking in empathy for human beings. Which is somewhat of a liberal specialty these days.

So my question was not, "Do you think Trump sucks." I know how you feel. I am only asking you if your worldview allows you to acknowledge that MANY Americans are in favor of his presidency at the moment. His approval ratings are pretty decent, higher than what Obama had at this point in his presidency as I believe I read recently.

Can you see that many Americans approve of Trump at the moment at the very same time that the see his many faults? Can't you understand that?

Looks like the meeting between the two dictators went well. But they haven't released the text yet, so one wonders...

he sure was a lot nicer about Kim than he was about Trudeau. But then, he seems to warm towards dictators.

Trudeau hasn't tortured and killed enough of his own citizens for Donald to consider him a Goodfella.

[This and related comments below moved from the Shoutbox]



Use 'hide" in square brackets. Anyway, yes, left Hanover in Singapore where he was advising the Don on some new real estate opportunities.



Good job, H!

Mmmm surely we can muster a little more recognition of what has been accomplished by Trump and Pompeo? We got three hostages returned.
What is possible? Our getting access to 5,000 of our military family that we will never leave behind, if there is any chance of bringing them home, no matter how much time may pass.
A dialogue between multiple countries including the United States on how to gracefully handle the changes of the future without further damage to any country.
The very contemplation of ending our war games, downsizing our children's presence in the DMZ and the waters of Japan is music to so many families ears here in the USA, mine included.
My God in Heaven, to hear that the Korean War is over?
Damned be the haters and the naysayers.
Peace is the goal and it is only in the absence of hate that it can grow.

You've got nothing but same ol', same ol' yet. North Korea has broken every commitment to denuclearisation it ever made. And its delaying tactics are legendary. So surprise, surprise, there's not even a timetable in this agreement. Actually there is nothing new at all on their side. It's just fluff. About the only thing that's new is Trump committing America to ending military maneuvres and Kim, a vicious dictator, being given the type of respectability on the world stage normally only accorded to democratic heads of major powers. Of course, it's not just Trump's fault. It goes back at least as far as Clinton if not beyond. I don't actually blame him as much as his predecessors and China who it suited to have a bulwark against western influence on their border. So, he's trying in his own naive and stupid way to do something (even if it is most likely mostly for his own glory that he's doing it, or maybe the possibility of a condo on a previously militarized beach). Anyway, nothing here yet except pomp and ceremony.

Damned be the haters and the naysayers. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Blessed be the critical of thought for they shall inherit reality rather than have it brutally imposed on them.

Put it another way, you've got a bunch of amateurs led by your fool president playing with someone (Kim) who actually knows what he's doing. So, predictably, Kim wins round one.

Example:



Send a boy to do a man's work... :fire:

So, predictably, Kim wins round one. — Baden

And here's the blow by blow analysis.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/12/trump-nuclear-north-korea-kim-jong-un?CMP=fb_gu

Here's a conservative view which comes to about the same conclusion. Massive disappointment:



"If Obama had done this, I would be crushing him today."

"But for now, this is only a historic breakthrough for the Kim dynasty, whose rule over an enslaved nation has been given a huge boost. They will be celebrating. For the rest of us, it is further cause to grieve that the world’s most powerful nation is in such incapable hands."

Yes. But I'm sure Sean Hannity will put a positive spin on this and that's all that matters really.

My understanding of Trump is that for him the world is made up of fuckers and fuckees and he's in the former group. If his worldview is correct then he's right and I and a lot of people are all wrong. What do you say? Is he right?

Now, this is a separate question, therefore optional. What did Hillary do to reap such hatred? I hesitate to use "hatred" but that's how it seems to me.

I wouldn't call you a Trump explainer for the simple reason you've offered no explanation for him. Apologist and rationalizer, maybe.

As to approval, there is no accounting for what some people approve of. People, lots of people, have approved of awful things.

The lesson is not, does it taste good now, but whether you will have a stomach-ache or worse, maybe much worse, later.

The underlying faith in Trump, it seems to me, is an adolescent hoping he will beat up the bad guys but won't hurt us. Unfortunately the record is clear; there is only one "us" he won't hurt and that's him. His life is a record of hurting "us" who isn't him. History is clear on another point: bad people usually come to a bad end and take everyone around them with them.

You've both told and sold yourself a story. Try looking at the whole picture.

I prefer a Republican who is not at war with their fellow conturymen. We are all Americans, we should all be fighting on the same side in the same "territory." Further division is not a solution to our deepening polarization.

What is the likelihood of Trump being out after the first term? The last week or so's events have been fucking awful to witness

He just made peace with freaking North Korea. — fishfry

No he didn't.

"But for now, this is only a historic breakthrough for the Kim dynasty, whose rule over an enslaved nation has been given a huge boost. They will be celebrating. For the rest of us, it is further cause to grieve that the world’s most powerful nation is in such incapable hands."

Yes. But I'm sure Sean Hannity will put a positive spin on this and that's all that matters really. — Baden

I'm with @ArguingWAristotleTiff on this. I don't know if this will work out in the end, but it's something. North Korea is not trustworthy, but we have to keep trying. They're too dangerous and a war would be disastrous. I don't like Trump, but let's see what happens.

We all hope it will work out, and we all agree we need to keep trying, and we all agree the DPRK is dangerous, and war would be a disaster. The point of disagreement is over whether the summit achieved anything substantial and whether it was therefore a success. It didn't and wasn't because Trump went unprepared, got all squishy when the supreme sociopath smiled at him, and gave away a huge concession on military exercises as well as legitimizing and strengthening Kim's position in a way no orther foreign leader could have managed. For nothing. I repeat, for absolutely nothing except some warm fuzzy words that the North Koreans have said before. Make no mistake, they are laughing in Pyongyang now at the US administration and their wacky president who wants to put his condos on their beaches.



Oh, and this:



Anyway, it may work out. Who knows. But this is not a good start. The US is in a strategically far weaker position (with China, for example, now calling for a lifting of sanctions) than it was before the summit. That's undeniable.

Anyway, it may work out. Who knows. But this is not a good start. The US is in a strategically far weaker position now (with China, for example, now calling for a lifting of sanctions) than it was before the summit. That's undeniable. — Baden

We are just a few hours into this agreement, whatever it ultimately entails, and the greatest danger to the Democrats is that it effectively eliminates the nuclear threat currently posed by North Korea. That a brash blow hard was able to eliminate arguably the world's greatest threat through a few hours of conversation will make the liberal's world view crumble, which is one that posits that Trump, and all like him, are incapable of real success and positive change. It will also cost the Democrats the election next term. That is undeniable.

I don't know (and don't much care) what effect it will have on the Democrats though I doubt that alone would cost them an election. Anyway, you agree with my analysis or not?

He just made peace with freaking North Korea.
— fishfry

No he didn't. — Maw

So you were similarly critical of Obama's Iran deal?

LOL. Of course not.