45th President of the United States, Donald Trump. Vol 3
Discussion
jjlynn27 said:
JagLover said:
He is hailed as the second coming purely because of his race.
No, he's not. Only people obsessed with race, like del mar, dj and yourself, think that. As a genuine question what did Obama do that would justify him as great ?
I am not saying Clinton was great or that trump is likely to be. As far as I am aware he got his very devisive healthcare act through and for various reasons that was about it.
Yipper said:
DeejRC said:
Well del mar has more than a point. Obama wasnt a great President. He wasnt even a good President. He was mediocre at best, no worse than most of the rest and gains his brownie points entirely and utterly from being the first black President. And for acting Presidential.
A previous poster mentioned Clinton as the last "great" one and Im inclined to agree with him.
I will happily accept that Obama was a necessary President though and that his tenure be seen as a successful also extremely necessary. Given the next chap in the office though I dont think he has any need to worry about comparisons!
The US is in sore need of a genuinely v good President soon!
It is absolutely vital to distinguish between what presidents *say* and what they actually *do*.A previous poster mentioned Clinton as the last "great" one and Im inclined to agree with him.
I will happily accept that Obama was a necessary President though and that his tenure be seen as a successful also extremely necessary. Given the next chap in the office though I dont think he has any need to worry about comparisons!
The US is in sore need of a genuinely v good President soon!
Obama and Clinton spoke well, and the virtue-signaling crowd love them. But their records were bad.
For example, Clinton cheated on his wife and sexed a young intern in public office and set in place the subprime mortgage rules that caused global depression a few years later and oversaw the biggest stock bubble of the 20th century and ignored the growth of Al Qaeda that allowed Bin Laden to knock down the Twin Towers which history will show marks the start of the end of the American century.
Morally, economically, politically and militarily, Clinton was an utter disaster.
History doesn't show anything ending the end of the American century for:
A) the rather simplistic assertion of Century. Pax Americana has been noted as "a thing" for 60 yrs.
B) Francis Fuk already tried all that lark back in the early 90s with The End of History. He was talking crap back then also.
C) He opened up/liberalised some economic areas that subsequent lawmakers had 20yrs to reign in the excesses of. Forgive me if I treat line of argument with the same contempt as New Labour harking back to the Major govt and the current Tories harking back to Gordon Brown.You get 5 yrs use the legacy blame angle, thereafter you are standing on your own legs sunshine.
D) America is still the primary currency in the world and currently looks set to remain that way - despite what pretensions to hokum that story in the Guardian tried to waffle on about.
E) American is about to embark on its second cheap power boom. Yes, Im aware this possibly has disastrous environmental consequences, however I suspect that will get short shirt in the US. History invariably shows any organised and structured nation/society that manages to harness cheap energy encounters a boom.
As for Al Q, well you have to go back a decade and more before Bill for the foundations of that. The growth of it from the Muj to Al Q however comes from having a base force + money + forceful persuasion. Im not entirely sure what you expected Bill to do about the rise of Wahabism and the dosh they had whilst they almost entirely sheltered within Saudi. I will accept though that the US intel community did not take the 2 warnings they received in the 2 earlier attacks seriously enough.
Unfortunately for those who dont like Clinton (either/any of them), he really was a very adept President.
In comparison Obama was mediocre, but most Presidents are invariably mediocre. Tis the nature of job and position because Congress, Senate and the President - far from it being a problem that affected Obama - are rarely all aligned. Again, its *almost* a design of the US system for that to be so. And its no accident. The Founding Fathers of America's political system really really knew what they were doing chaps and being the usual typically cynical and arrogant Europeans, we dont give them enough credit.
I just typed out a serious reply to Yipper didnt I?
rscott said:
He certainly gave hope to a large segment of the US population though. Perhaps his inability to deliver and lack of decent candidates meant that segment didn't vote in as large numbers this time and so eased Trump's path to victory.
Same could be said about Trump voters, funny how they are seen as deluded idiot fools by many but Obama voters where not. One thing is for sure the Obama voters have now been proven to have had false hope and in away proven to be deluded. I wont call them idiots or fools because I don't think they are.Its likely that Trump voters will learn the same lessons. I just don't like how one group is criticized and called one thing and another group is praised for doing almost exactly the same thing.
Why was Obama bad?
I mean, if you were a victim of his drone strikes I could understand it but it wasn't that HE was bad, it was the fact the Republicans won the house and Senate and destroyed every single one of his attempts at doing anything.
He actually seemed like he gave a s
t about issues, the Republicans just held him to ransom if he actually tried to implement changes to sort them out.
I appreciated after Bush that he seemed like a US President that didn't want to project their power over the world, relatively non-interventionist (although of course when talking about Libya, Syria, etc it can be completely argued against).
That said I am swayed by the mention that he was a good speaker cause I could listen to him for hours on end, a bit like Morgan Freeman (and no, not cause he's black).
I mean, if you were a victim of his drone strikes I could understand it but it wasn't that HE was bad, it was the fact the Republicans won the house and Senate and destroyed every single one of his attempts at doing anything.
He actually seemed like he gave a s
t about issues, the Republicans just held him to ransom if he actually tried to implement changes to sort them out.I appreciated after Bush that he seemed like a US President that didn't want to project their power over the world, relatively non-interventionist (although of course when talking about Libya, Syria, etc it can be completely argued against).
That said I am swayed by the mention that he was a good speaker cause I could listen to him for hours on end, a bit like Morgan Freeman (and no, not cause he's black).
Edited by F1GTRUeno on Monday 15th January 19:42
Not-The-Messiah said:
jjlynn27 said:
JagLover said:
He is hailed as the second coming purely because of his race.
No, he's not. Only people obsessed with race, like del mar, dj and yourself, think that. tholes who are the ones who instantly bring race into the equation? Countdown said:
Not-The-Messiah said:
jjlynn27 said:
JagLover said:
He is hailed as the second coming purely because of his race.
No, he's not. Only people obsessed with race, like del mar, dj and yourself, think that. tholes who are the ones who instantly bring race into the equation? If a Japaneses tourist was to travel past lets say a run down council estate of this country and says "That's a bit of a s
thole" are they racist? Obama inherited a mess in 2008 - an economy that had plunged into a recession and a st-storm in Iraq and Afghanistan. I think he did rather well when you look at the whole picture. That said his final couple of years were disappointing, especially his handling of ISIS and other Middle Eastern issues.
t-storm in Iraq and Afghanistan. I think he did rather well when you look at the whole picture. That said his final couple of years were disappointing, especially his handling of ISIS and other Middle Eastern issues. Not-The-Messiah said:
rscott said:
He certainly gave hope to a large segment of the US population though. Perhaps his inability to deliver and lack of decent candidates meant that segment didn't vote in as large numbers this time and so eased Trump's path to victory.
Same could be said about Trump voters, funny how they are seen as deluded idiot fools by many but Obama voters where not. One thing is for sure the Obama voters have now been proven to have had false hope and in away proven to be deluded. I wont call them idiots or fools because I don't think they are.Its likely that Trump voters will learn the same lessons. I just don't like how one group is criticized and called one thing and another group is praised for doing almost exactly the same thing.
rscott said:
Not-The-Messiah said:
rscott said:
He certainly gave hope to a large segment of the US population though. Perhaps his inability to deliver and lack of decent candidates meant that segment didn't vote in as large numbers this time and so eased Trump's path to victory.
Same could be said about Trump voters, funny how they are seen as deluded idiot fools by many but Obama voters where not. One thing is for sure the Obama voters have now been proven to have had false hope and in away proven to be deluded. I wont call them idiots or fools because I don't think they are.Its likely that Trump voters will learn the same lessons. I just don't like how one group is criticized and called one thing and another group is praised for doing almost exactly the same thing.
Trump sells (very well to some) division and being against others. His MAGA should be Make America White Again.
Someone already commented that those hats will be seen like swastikas one day. I’m inclined to agree.
Edited by p1stonhead on Monday 15th January 20:24
@BlackLabel agree, considering the circumstances he did fairly well and vetoed couple of potentially very dangerous military actions, IMO he did better than both Bushes and Clinton
Not-The-Messiah said:
No some people are just desperate to believe he has a issue, So desperate that they will jump on anything and twist it to fit their own view.
true that, and MSM/celebrities are struggling hard to find any connection
del mar said:
jjlynn27 said:
JagLover said:
He is hailed as the second coming purely because of his race.
No, he's not. Only people obsessed with race, like del mar, dj and yourself, think that. As a genuine question what did Obama do that would justify him as great ?
I am not saying Clinton was great or that trump is likely to be. As far as I am aware he got his very devisive healthcare act through and for various reasons that was about it.
Pointing out the work he did for auto industry, lowering drugs cost, getting rid of dadt to start with, looks like a waste of time.
Not-The-Messiah said:
No some people are just desperate to believe he has a issue, So desperate that they will jump on anything and twist it to fit their own view.
If a Japaneses tourist was to travel past lets say a run down council estate of this country and says "That's a bit of a sthole" are they racist?
It's ok, if you want to support a neo nazi, go for it. But why not be honest about it, rather than dress it up as a justifiable choice?If a Japaneses tourist was to travel past lets say a run down council estate of this country and says "That's a bit of a s
thole" are they racist? JagLover said:
Clinton had a Republican congress most of his time in office.
Obama was a very divisive figure, who regarded much of middle America with barely concealed contempt. He is hailed as the second coming purely because of his race.
Utter rubbish and symptomatic of the massive chip on your shoulder about his race.Obama was a very divisive figure, who regarded much of middle America with barely concealed contempt. He is hailed as the second coming purely because of his race.
Not-The-Messiah said:
No some people are just desperate to believe he has a issue, So desperate that they will jump on anything and twist it to fit their own view.
If a Japaneses tourist was to travel past lets say a run down council estate of this country and says "That's a bit of a sthole" are they racist?
You don't need such a poorly contrived comparison; Japanese society does have a huge problem with racism. (It's also far worse than America on welcoming refugees, for example.)If a Japaneses tourist was to travel past lets say a run down council estate of this country and says "That's a bit of a s
thole" are they racist? But your example does not match Trump's claim or context. If a Japanese politician, looking at immigration plans, said "s
thole" when referring to African countries, while asking why not instead have more immigration from (say) Korea, then the answer is yes, racist.Not-The-Messiah said:
So when Trump calls certain places stholes who are the ones who instantly bring race into the equation?
Trump and his supporters, by trying to equate comment by 'Japaneses'(sic) tourist about an estate with the president of the USA comment about the whole continent. tholes who are the ones who instantly bring race into the equation? Not-The-Messiah said:
No some people are just desperate to believe he has a issue, So desperate that they will jump on anything and twist it to fit their own view.
Did you read the link posted by Byker28i on the previous page? Trump’s issues with race could not be set out more clearly and more comprehensively, but you and others keep pretending they don’t exist. So either you lack relatively basic comprehension skills or you’re an apologist for Trump. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff