Just What is Trump

[JerryBaumchen 1,362]

Hi folks,

I found this article to be rather long but quite interesting:

‘He Was the Ringmaster in the Demise of His Own Circus’ - POLITICO

‘On many levels Fred hated Donald. And I think that Donald knew that his father hated him.’

‘He’s a bottomless pit of need.’ 

‘I don’t think he cares about his kids.’

‘The Trump library? That’s going to be a very small building.’

Jerry Baumchen

[Phil1111 1,149]

I think you, I and Joe discussed most of this before he was elected. After he's done what surprises me the most is that he lasted six months. Also by the support he still enjoys. His biographers give trump too much credit, Miller, the GOP and his other enablers too little.

NYT has a nice little article on the issues he faces now financially and civil court actions

Don't forget the trump Death Clock

Edited January 20, 2021 by Phil1111

[mistercwood 287]

5 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

After he's done what surprises me the most is that he lasted six months.

Difficult jobs are refreshingly easy if you just don't ever do the difficult parts.

[Westerly 61]

he's a jobless unemployed american, same as the 5000 million he helped make.

[Phil1111 1,149]

President Putin has declared a national day of mourning.

[kallend 2,026]

The serial liar's final score:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/

In 1,460 days, President Trump has
made 30,558 false or misleading claims

[Faicon9493 141]

What is Trump?

Answer: America's greatest self-inflicted wound since the Civil War.

[gowlerk 2,190]

12 minutes ago, Faicon9493 said:

What is Trump?

Answer: America's greatest self-inflicted wound since the Civil War.

I'm not sure I agree. Both the Vietnam war and Bush's war on terror Iraq invasion were more costly. I guess it depends on how you define "self inflicted" though. Maybe you are right, there was every reason to know Trump would be bad, but he was elected anyway.

Edited January 20, 2021 by gowlerk

[Faicon9493 141]

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I'm not sure I agree. Both the Vietnam war and Bush's war on terror Iraq invasion were more costly. 

By some estimates, Trump's lies and incompetence early in the pandemic cost the lives of 130,000 Americans. I believe that surpasses the American lives lost in Vietnam and Iraq.

[Phil1111 1,149]

1 hour ago, Faicon9493 said:

By some estimates, Trump's lies and incompetence early in the pandemic cost the lives of 130,000 Americans. I believe that surpasses the American lives lost in Vietnam and Iraq.

Here is a lengthy discussion on How Much Is a Human Life Actually Worth?.

from Wired. Its from early in the pandemic. There is no question trump is the winner.

[gowlerk 2,190]

24 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Here is a lengthy discussion on How Much Is a Human Life Actually Worth?.

from Wired. Its from early in the pandemic. There is no question trump is the winner.

What is less certain is how it would have played out if HRC or someone else was POTUS. It is not realistic to blame Trump for all those deaths. 

[wmw999 2,444]

24 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

What is less certain is how it would have played out if HRC or someone else was POTUS. It is not realistic to blame Trump for all those deaths. 

Because of the right talkosphere’s demonization of Hillary Clinton, pretty much anything she said would have likely been rejected as a left-wing plot, unfortunately. Unless there was a sea change in that arena — brought about by some financial market change. That arena thrives on having an antagonist, just as a sports team or pro wrestling arena has an “other,” the bad guy, that everyone can boo and hate. 
Wendy P. 

[SkyDekker 1,465]

56 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

What is less certain is how it would have played out if HRC or someone else was POTUS. It is not realistic to blame Trump for all those deaths. 

Does it have to be a specific number? There is zero doubt that Trump mishandled the COVID pandemic. There is zero doubt that if properly responded to, in stead of ignored and minimized, less people would have died.

[gowlerk 2,190]

4 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Does it have to be a specific number? There is zero doubt that Trump mishandled the COVID pandemic. There is zero doubt that if properly responded to, in stead of ignored and minimized, less people would have died.

Not if you look at it by itself. I am speaking in the context of comparing the folly of Trump with the folly of the Iraq and middle east war, and the folly of Vietnam. Those particular mistakes can all be laid at the feet of leaders. However, no specific number can ever be known. What is known is that people are dying everywhere from the pandemic. In the US Republican leaders in general have responded poorly and Trump was the leader of their party. Yet NY and CA with D leadership have not done better. 

[Phil1111 1,149]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

What is less certain is how it would have played out if HRC or someone else was POTUS. It is not realistic to blame Trump for all those deaths. 

Agree and I don't. US states with head up their ass governors have a liability.

34 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Because of the right talkosphere’s demonization of Hillary Clinton, pretty much anything she said would have likely been rejected as a left-wing plot, unfortunately. Unless there was a sea change in that arena — brought about by some financial market change. That arena thrives on having an antagonist, just as a sports team or pro wrestling arena has an “other,” the bad guy, that everyone can boo and hate. 
Wendy P. 

Agree and today after trump HRC looks like a virtuous Mother Teresa.

3 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Does it have to be a specific number? There is zero doubt that Trump mishandled the COVID pandemic. There is zero doubt that if properly responded to, in stead of ignored and minimized, less people would have died.

Absolutely yet it seems as if in the 2020 election that has less impact than other factors. In Canada and Germany there have been anti-mask protests. But nothing like the US.  A coherent national message about covid dangers was necessary and trump muzzled Fauci

[SkyDekker 1,465]

1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

In the US Republican leaders in general have responded poorly and Trump was the leader of their party. Yet NY and CA with D leadership have not done better. 

Correct, some of the most densely populated areas have not outperformed rural areas. Not sure that is a giant shocker. It is also a way to deflect from the fact that national leadership was completely lacking. National leadership does have an impact.

[gowlerk 2,190]

11 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

National leadership does have an impact.

I've said so all along. It is hard to score Presidential errors. All I'm really trying to say is that as damaging and maddening as four years of Trump has been I don't think he has managed to do as much harm to the US as others have. Other than covid the US got kind of lucky. No really big challenges came up during his term. In a way, covid itself may have been a lucky thing for them as it is easy to imagine a second Trump term without it. 

I do believe he is one of the worst if not the very worst ever. But he was also rather incompetent which prevented him from doing more disruption. In the end the "deep state" and the establishment in general dragged their heels and hung on long enough to get through the shit storm. Four more years would have been far worse than the first four.

Edited January 20, 2021 by gowlerk

[johnhking1 96]

3 hours ago, gowlerk said:

I'm not sure I agree. Both the Vietnam war and Bush's war on terror Iraq invasion were more costly. I guess it depends on how you define "self inflicted" though. Maybe you are right, there was every reason to know Trump would be bad, but he was elected anyway.

Maybe Kennedy, Johnson and Bush jr should be impeached for mess they got us involved in.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

7 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Other than covid the US got kind of lucky. No really big challenges came up during his term.

COVID is currently the 3rd deadliest epidemic in US history. There is a good chance this will end up being the deadliest epidemic. I would call that a pretty big challenge.

[wmw999 2,444]

4 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

COVID is currently the 3rd deadliest epidemic in US history. There is a good chance this will end up being the deadliest epidemic. I would call that a pretty big challenge.

Proportionately, nearly 2 million people would have to die to equal the 1918 pandemic. 675,000 died, but the US population was only about a third of what it is now. 
Wendy P. 

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Just now, wmw999 said:

Proportionately, nearly 2 million people would have to die to equal the 1918 pandemic. 675,000 died, but the US population was only about a third of what it is now. 
Wendy P. 

And when you adjust for improvements in medical science in 100 years?

[jakee 1,489]

2 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Here is a lengthy discussion on How Much Is a Human Life Actually Worth?.

from Wired. Its from early in the pandemic. There is no question trump is the winner.

When the question is 'America's greatest wound.' There is no doubt in my mind that Bush did far more damage to the world as a whole. I fully expect the repercussions from his crusade to be a dominant factor in the geopolitics of Iraq, Syria and the wider middle east for the rest of my life.

[gowlerk 2,190]

45 minutes ago, jakee said:

When the question is 'America's greatest wound.' There is no doubt in my mind that Bush did far more damage to the world as a whole. I fully expect the repercussions from his crusade to be a dominant factor in the geopolitics of Iraq, Syria and the wider middle east for the rest of my life.

Exactly. The neo-cons will be felt for a long time. And part of the blame for Trump belongs to the American people rejecting their war mongering.

[JerryBaumchen 1,362]

Hi folks,

Once a con man, always a can man.

'Trump has been floating the idea of raising $2 billion for a presidential library'

'the Obama Presidential Center in Chicago is estimated to cost $500 million'

National Archives launches website for Trump Presidential Library - POLITICO

Why spend any money on a library for someone who cannot read?

Jerry Baumchen

[wmw999 2,444]

Because he can get the contract to build it, and then charge rent, duh. Those gold fixtures and marble are expensive!

Wendy P.