The US Presidency 2018
- Thread starter FJAG
- Start date
- Status
FSTO
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 5,868
- Points
- 1,210
Now I know this was a partisan rally for the Republican candidate but wow, absolute zero pretence that this guy is the leader for all Americans.
It did seem that the crowd was losing steam about 1/2 way through the rally. Maybe it was that northern plains reserve that was kicking in, you betcha!
It did seem that the crowd was losing steam about 1/2 way through the rally. Maybe it was that northern plains reserve that was kicking in, you betcha!
Retired AF Guy
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 932
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 5,971
- Points
- 1,260
Putting this here even though it is related to e.g. US vs NATO and US vs G7 ...
It seems to me that President Trump is very nervous about multilateral deals. He might think that multilateral deals allow a bunch of pipsqueaks to 'gang up' on the USA. He appeared open to a renewed, renegotiated Canada-US FTA to replace NAFTA because, I suppose, he thinks that American is in the catbird seat in any one-on-one relationship with Canada.
His new target seems to be the WTO, and I expect that the rest of the legacy of Breton Woods will not be far behind if he ever figures out what they are for.
President Trump seems to believe ~ I suspect that the right word ~ that America does, indeed, have a 'special providence' and that the rules that govern everyone else cannot, must not apply to America.
History suggest, to me anyway, that special providence is a myth; the Babylonians didn't have one; nor the Greeks; the Roman Empire faded away as did the Mogul and Spanish empires; even the mighty, mercantilist British Empire died ... why does anyone think that America is different?
I tearing down institutions that were designed to actually make America more secure, Donald J Trump is just acting as an agent for Putin and Xi Jinping ... he seems to be serving the best interest of America's enemies. :dunno:
It seems to me that President Trump is very nervous about multilateral deals. He might think that multilateral deals allow a bunch of pipsqueaks to 'gang up' on the USA. He appeared open to a renewed, renegotiated Canada-US FTA to replace NAFTA because, I suppose, he thinks that American is in the catbird seat in any one-on-one relationship with Canada.
His new target seems to be the WTO, and I expect that the rest of the legacy of Breton Woods will not be far behind if he ever figures out what they are for.
President Trump seems to believe ~ I suspect that the right word ~ that America does, indeed, have a 'special providence' and that the rules that govern everyone else cannot, must not apply to America.
History suggest, to me anyway, that special providence is a myth; the Babylonians didn't have one; nor the Greeks; the Roman Empire faded away as did the Mogul and Spanish empires; even the mighty, mercantilist British Empire died ... why does anyone think that America is different?
I tearing down institutions that were designed to actually make America more secure, Donald J Trump is just acting as an agent for Putin and Xi Jinping ... he seems to be serving the best interest of America's enemies. :dunno:
- Reaction score
- 2,847
- Points
- 940
If only he was aware of the full expression, generally attributed to Otto von Bismarck -- "God has a special providence for fools, drunks and the United States of America."E.R. Campbell said:
From Walter Russell Mead:
The problem is that Trump isn't remotely "intellectually brilliant," nor does he hold these Jacksonian values in any way, not merely the moderating qualities-- he is simply using them as talking points to appeal to "his base."
[In addition to the article by Mead, The National Interest, No. 58, Winter 1999/2000, is a special edition on "The Age of Nationalism," which has turned out to be sadly prescient, given that it was published almost 20 years ago]
- Reaction score
- 2,103
- Points
- 1,160
- Jacksonian America is a folk community with a strong sense of common values and common destiny
Interesting, is this also the silent majority that supposedly propelled Nixon* into power when the Democrats did not have leadership that could attract those same Jacksonian values. I still sometimes think there were far more people interested in getting rid of Hillary than looking to Trump for leadership. Perhaps that may have been their only common value.
* Conrad Black: Richard M. Nixon: A Life in Full
"Nixon was the people. He was the representative inhabitant of what Jack Kerouac called 'the great unwashed body of America.' He was laborious but effective, eloquent but not hypnotizing, cynical but compassionate and patriotic. He got where he did by climbing, falling, climbing again, and never ceasing to struggle." It is my understanding that the description does not fit either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, but people certainly had enough of Clinton.
Now, a lot of people do not like Conrad Black for some strong and probably well justified reasons. But as an author with an interest in American political history, his observations are astute, qualified with the benefit of history and perspective.
Interesting, is this also the silent majority that supposedly propelled Nixon* into power when the Democrats did not have leadership that could attract those same Jacksonian values. I still sometimes think there were far more people interested in getting rid of Hillary than looking to Trump for leadership. Perhaps that may have been their only common value.
* Conrad Black: Richard M. Nixon: A Life in Full
"Nixon was the people. He was the representative inhabitant of what Jack Kerouac called 'the great unwashed body of America.' He was laborious but effective, eloquent but not hypnotizing, cynical but compassionate and patriotic. He got where he did by climbing, falling, climbing again, and never ceasing to struggle." It is my understanding that the description does not fit either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, but people certainly had enough of Clinton.
Now, a lot of people do not like Conrad Black for some strong and probably well justified reasons. But as an author with an interest in American political history, his observations are astute, qualified with the benefit of history and perspective.
- Reaction score
- 2,847
- Points
- 940
Long read. Sorry, I didn't have time for a short response, but that's the price for not making 10-12 posts/day in the politics diatribes.
Stealing unabashedly from John Lewis Gaddis’ On Grand Strategy (2018), it should be self-evident that “if you seek ends beyond your means, then sooner or later you’ll have to scale back your ends to fit your means.” No sh*t, right? Many leaders, some otherwise geniuses, may forget it. From Julius Caesar at the Rubicon, Napoleon and Hitler at Russia’s border, and LBJ in Vietnam, all figured that past tactical success assured future strategic dominance. How did that play out for them?
Trump’s constantly repeated mantra that he’s some form of business genius and great negotiator1 is based on a skewed sense of ‘tactical success,’ in having his businesses successfully granted Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection SIX times! With that track record of ‘success,’ having Trump as Commander-in-Chief, would make me very worried if I was in the US military; fortunately, his depth of military thought is limited to visions of a Space Command and wanting to stand on a YUGE podium during a Bastille Day-type parade.
American pre-eminence came from winning two World Wars (mind you, starting by sitting back and making massive profits selling to ‘allies’), and the Cold War. Contrast this with the subsequent neglect of grand strategic thinking, which led to postwar quagmires and misadventures with either impossible or irrelevant aims. Show me the strategic thought in kowtowing to dictators, but more importantly, launching a global trade war against everyone else.
Now, I cannot believe that Trump has ANY strategic vision; “Make America Great Again” is a campaign slogan, not a plan.2 Anyone who believes that his thinking is more than 140-charracters deep is denying the evidence – changing policy and contradicting his own staff and personal pronouncements; most massive staff turnover of any US President (even dwarfing Bill Clinton’s presidency); tantrum-like focus on the completely inconsequential; the compulsive, obvious lies usually resulting from whatever random thought passed through his mind at the time….
BOTOM LINE: Trump is in the process of breaking America, simply because he hasn’t a clue about the effects of his actions. His legacy will long outlive him. America is decreasingly trusted as either a dependable business, military, or diplomatic partner. The knock-on effect of his constant undermining the media harms democracy globally. He is single-handedly going to be responsible for a recession, if not depression, and he doesn’t care – he’ll just claim bankruptcy protection again.
Someone should tell him that the Chinese may not grant it.
1. Yes, I’ve read Art of the Deal too. :boring:
The "co-author," Tony Schwartz expressed regrets about having written the book, and both he and the book's publisher have said that Trump had played no role in the book's actual writing, while Trump has given conflicting accounts on the question of authorship. Pesky facts. Fortunately, facts have proven irrelevant for Trump and his supporters.
2. With this presidency's track record, “Make America Great Again” may have simply been a typo for “Make America Grate Again” and someone just said "to hell with it, we've already ordered the t-shirts -- it's our policy now."
Stealing unabashedly from John Lewis Gaddis’ On Grand Strategy (2018), it should be self-evident that “if you seek ends beyond your means, then sooner or later you’ll have to scale back your ends to fit your means.” No sh*t, right? Many leaders, some otherwise geniuses, may forget it. From Julius Caesar at the Rubicon, Napoleon and Hitler at Russia’s border, and LBJ in Vietnam, all figured that past tactical success assured future strategic dominance. How did that play out for them?
Trump’s constantly repeated mantra that he’s some form of business genius and great negotiator1 is based on a skewed sense of ‘tactical success,’ in having his businesses successfully granted Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection SIX times! With that track record of ‘success,’ having Trump as Commander-in-Chief, would make me very worried if I was in the US military; fortunately, his depth of military thought is limited to visions of a Space Command and wanting to stand on a YUGE podium during a Bastille Day-type parade.
American pre-eminence came from winning two World Wars (mind you, starting by sitting back and making massive profits selling to ‘allies’), and the Cold War. Contrast this with the subsequent neglect of grand strategic thinking, which led to postwar quagmires and misadventures with either impossible or irrelevant aims. Show me the strategic thought in kowtowing to dictators, but more importantly, launching a global trade war against everyone else.
Now, I cannot believe that Trump has ANY strategic vision; “Make America Great Again” is a campaign slogan, not a plan.2 Anyone who believes that his thinking is more than 140-charracters deep is denying the evidence – changing policy and contradicting his own staff and personal pronouncements; most massive staff turnover of any US President (even dwarfing Bill Clinton’s presidency); tantrum-like focus on the completely inconsequential; the compulsive, obvious lies usually resulting from whatever random thought passed through his mind at the time….
BOTOM LINE: Trump is in the process of breaking America, simply because he hasn’t a clue about the effects of his actions. His legacy will long outlive him. America is decreasingly trusted as either a dependable business, military, or diplomatic partner. The knock-on effect of his constant undermining the media harms democracy globally. He is single-handedly going to be responsible for a recession, if not depression, and he doesn’t care – he’ll just claim bankruptcy protection again.
Someone should tell him that the Chinese may not grant it.
1. Yes, I’ve read Art of the Deal too. :boring:
The "co-author," Tony Schwartz expressed regrets about having written the book, and both he and the book's publisher have said that Trump had played no role in the book's actual writing, while Trump has given conflicting accounts on the question of authorship. Pesky facts. Fortunately, facts have proven irrelevant for Trump and his supporters.
2. With this presidency's track record, “Make America Great Again” may have simply been a typo for “Make America Grate Again” and someone just said "to hell with it, we've already ordered the t-shirts -- it's our policy now."
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 13,828
- Points
- 1,160
Journeyman said:
Agree with you 100% with one little addendum. America was already broken when he was elected. As proof all I can offer is that 63 million Americans voted for this man.
The logical conclusion to that is that even if Trump crashes and burns (which I expect he will in time) there will still be tens of millions of Americans who aren't ready to go back to the status quo ante.
op:
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,748
- Points
- 1,040
Given some of the policy proposals being floated by Democrats, I predict that Trump will be re-elected if:
1) He does nothing significantly worse than anything he has already done; and
2) He sticks to his list of potential USSC nominees.
1) He does nothing significantly worse than anything he has already done; and
2) He sticks to his list of potential USSC nominees.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,948
- Points
- 1,160
I agree with Brad, it's unlikely Trump will be defeated in the next election, considering the DNC is still whining about the last one and Hillary's death grip is still on it's throat. Trump is a flawed solution to the broken political situation in the US. Personally I don't think the 2 main parties can appeal to enough voters in the future to hold onto their power, both are facing growing factions that feel unrepresented. I also seeing more potentiel non main party Presidential candidates in the future, which may be a good thing.
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 13,828
- Points
- 1,160
I'm not sure where third party individuals would go these days. You might remember the 1992 election when Ross Perot was on the ballot. At some points he polled 39% of the vote but through poor management of his campaign ended up getting 15% of the popular vote (nearly 20 million votes) but zero Electoral College votes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot_presidential_campaign,_1992#Results
Just spitballing here but I think any third party candidate won't be a winner but could become a real spoiler for one or the other of the mainstream parties.
Before we rule out the Dems, why don't we wait and see what the mid terms look like? I have a feeling that there's going to be some GOP ship-jumping going on.
:cheers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot_presidential_campaign,_1992#Results
Just spitballing here but I think any third party candidate won't be a winner but could become a real spoiler for one or the other of the mainstream parties.
Before we rule out the Dems, why don't we wait and see what the mid terms look like? I have a feeling that there's going to be some GOP ship-jumping going on.
:cheers:
- Reaction score
- 2,103
- Points
- 1,160
Speaking of third party candidates, I wonder how Ralp Nader feels now about suggesting and then endorsing Trump to run as a third party candidate ( which he essentially is, even with the GOP ticket). :facepalm:
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 13,828
- Points
- 1,160
whiskey601 said:
This is the most recent I found. Not sure if the April 5, 2018 date is of the actual interview or just the post. In short he doesn't like Trump. ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh6gRenh7pg
:cheers:
- Reaction score
- 64
- Points
- 530
Actually its closer to 45% but 87% among Republicans.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-lefts-contempt-is-going-to-reelect-trump/2018/07/03/8e91b240-7ede-11e8-b0ef-fffcabeff946_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.419dcf13ffcd
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/07/results-matter-president-trump-tops-obama-in-approval-numbers-at-same-point-in-his-presidency/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-lefts-contempt-is-going-to-reelect-trump/2018/07/03/8e91b240-7ede-11e8-b0ef-fffcabeff946_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.419dcf13ffcd
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/07/results-matter-president-trump-tops-obama-in-approval-numbers-at-same-point-in-his-presidency/
- Reaction score
- 1,419
- Points
- 1,160
There is a third party already: the socialist left wing of the Democrat Party. One ran for POTUS last election. One just became a Congresswoman elect.
Altair
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 717
- Points
- 1,110
From the first article you yourself postedtomahawk6 said:
And while it is high among republicans, that is to be expected.
Democracy is a team sport in america, and those who decide the elections are the swing/independent voters, although, I admit, with the highly polarizing political atmosphere that has been in place, those voters probably are not as prominent or influencial.
That said, I wouldn't be looking further than the midterms. That is going to be the setup for 2020, and how much of the presidents agenda is going to be effected by that.
- Status
Similar threads
