Welcome to Trump town

 
  Carnot Minister for Railways

Trump's not backing down on his Nationalism, American exceptionalism, and 'worship' of the US constitution.  I'm not comfortable with this to be honest. Glad I'm not a Yank:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-24/trump-declares-inauguration-national-day-of-patriotic-devotion/8206960

Sponsored advertisement

  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
Madonna should stick to making dreadful films to torment everyone with instead of offering an opinion about a President barely sworn in.
"don_dunstan"

Because she's female?
Because she's not a politician?
Because she's not speaking on behalf of a group?
Because she's famous in her own right?
or
Because don_dunstan's a misogynist?
  gordon_s1942 Chief Commissioner

Location: Central Tablelands of NSW
My suggestion is instead of 'what iffing' and bemoaning any plans Trump has that may affect us in any way, we take a step back and watch and note the situation and see what we can do to offset any losses Trumps proposals may cause.
I would be in consultation with those others we trade with as they too most likely be affected and see how we can turn this around to our mutual advantage.
This maybe just the 'Wake Up' call we have been needing for years as from what I read the USA hasnt been backward in coming forwards to  sell their products so now let us return the favour.
Excluding Europe, Africa and South America just taking in the Asian area only, there are close to some 5 Billion we can trade with as opposed to the 400 Million in the USA.
With Trade its a 'Quid Pro Quo' arrangement, we buy and sell to each other but if the USA wants to close its borders to outside trade, we can do the same when they try to sell to us what they make which wont help their economy overly well.
There is NOTHING the USA makes that we cant make ourselves or do without as far as I am concerned.
  Showtime Chief Train Controller

Madonna should stick to making dreadful films to torment everyone with instead of offering an opinion about a President barely sworn in.

Because she's female?
Because she's not a politician?
Because she's not speaking on behalf of a group?
Because she's famous in her own right?
or
Because don_dunstan's a misogynist?
Valvegear
Like all celebrities, because she does not live in the real world (like Australian politicians too)
  Showtime Chief Train Controller

My suggestion is instead of 'what iffing' and bemoaning any plans Trump has that may affect us in any way, we take a step back and watch and note the situation and see what we can do to offset any losses Trumps proposals may cause.
I would be in consultation with those others we trade with as they too most likely be affected and see how we can turn this around to our mutual advantage.
This maybe just the 'Wake Up' call we have been needing for years as from what I read the USA hasnt been backward in coming forwards to  sell their products so now let us return the favour.
Excluding Europe, Africa and South America just taking in the Asian area only, there are close to some 5 Billion we can trade with as opposed to the 400 Million in the USA.
With Trade its a 'Quid Pro Quo' arrangement, we buy and sell to each other but if the USA wants to close its borders to outside trade, we can do the same when they try to sell to us what they make which wont help their economy overly well.
There is NOTHING the USA makes that we cant make ourselves or do without as far as I am concerned.
gordon_s1942
I think you need to break this news to Turnbull and co as they still think the Pacific agreement is happening
  Groundrelay Chief Commissioner

Location: Surrounded by Trolls!
...Whatever it takes?

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/23/politics/drone-strikes-president-trump/
Trump ain't pretending to be something he's not. He's not a peace-maker, he's not the "change you can believe in" guy and he's certainly not a Nobel Peace Prize recipient. He openly said he'd be doing more targeted strikes during the campaign.
don_dunstan
So it’s not military strikes in Syria and Yemen that’s the problem then! Obama inherited the war on terror but he certainly wasn’t one to relish it, unlike this guy.

...The people who have been feeling ignored and taken for granted feel as though they actually have a voice for a change and that in itself is a wonderful thing. Whether or not they actually have someone in Trump who will make things better for them remains to be seen - early days yet. ...
don_dunstan
Trump didn’t get to where he is looking after the little people. We’ve seen this man of the people thing before but obviously some haven’t learned anything since 1933.

- Jingoistic nationalism
- Viciously condemning opposition
- Belittling critics
- Attacking minorities

I’m not sure how you balance your moral ledger but such things don’t sit well with some of us, celebrities or not. At least they stood up against this latest manifestation of fascism.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Because she's female?
Because she's not a politician?
Because she's not speaking on behalf of a group?
Because she's famous in her own right?
or
Because don_dunstan's a misogynist?
Valvegear
I think you know me well enough to know that's not true.
Obama inherited the war on terror but he certainly wasn’t one to relish it, unlike this guy.
Groundrelay
So he didn't relish it, he was a discrete killer of civilians, not a boastful skyte. Do you hear what you're saying? Then again if I was Obama I would probably keep my history of being involved in wars discreet too - who do you think armed ISIS at the start of the Syrian conflict? Oops... better keep that one quiet.
I’m not sure how you balance your moral ledger but such things don’t sit well with some of us, celebrities or not. At least they stood up against this latest manifestation of fascism.
Groundrelay
Comparing Trump to Hitler is clearly silly - sorry but I just can't take you seriously when you use that analogy.

And honestly, do you think in another couple of years that any of these celebrities will still be banging on about Trump once things settle down? No... they'll go back to making money from their audience until they find their next cause they think they can increase their profiles though.
  Newcastle Express Chief Commissioner

Let's try that again.

Are you sitting down?

Why? Because the Trump team said that they will not lie. Nope, it's not 1st April yet.

They already have lied. Lied about how many turned up to Trump's inauguration compared to Obama inauguration.
  Big J Deputy Commissioner

Location: In Paradise
It is fine to be like that as self proclaimed entrepreneur, but as a leader of a nation, reacting emotionally is a worry.

I had hoped that once he took office that he will implement his election promises, but will act like a president and control his emotional response. But unfortunately my glass half empty is appearing to become true.
Personally I was disappointed that he even bothered to comment on the media coverage of his inauguration ceremony - and I agree with you here that he needs to learn very quickly to act more "presidential".

Hopefully there won't another conflict to the many that are already occurring. It will be an interesting ride and I hope that he does achieve a more prosperous US as that will help the current global economic malaise, but I am very concern about his attacks to basic foundations of democracy and free speech (which I find ironic as it is a foundation of his election platform).
As I have already said on this board several times, the Trump Presidency is a direct result of alienation of the majority of people from the successes of globalisation and so-called "free trade". Leaving aside Trump's actual capacity to deliver on his promises, here was someone who came along and said to the people who were losing out that he could fix their woes and bring good quality jobs back on-shore and that was all they needed to hear. Feminism, racism, "Islamophobia", the glass ceiling - that did NOT win votes... the Democrats need to ask themselves why the core of their electorate have stopped voting for them and try and fix the damn problem in the next four years by somehow making themselves more electorally appealing and stop moaning that "we wuz robbed" by that silver-tongued Trump.

I was talking to an old leftie friend of mine on the weekend who surprised me by saying that he thought the Labor Party should learn a lesson from the election of Trump and stop promoting free-trade and globalisation because it's been hurting working people in this country - and I have to agree. Globalisation is fabulous and wonderful if you are a mobile highly-skilled professional who can move to London or New York and make your fortune; it's a sure-fire money spinner if you are a huge multi-national who can move your manufacturing operations to a country where you can pay a fraction of the wages that you would have to pay in the West. But its been an absolute disaster - an economic apocalypse - if you live in Penrith, Broadmeadows or Elizabeth and have nothing to sell but your labour.
don_dunstan
Wow I actually agree with you Don. My understanding with his actions on the TPP and his intended actions with NAFTA he has already commenced dialogue with business leaders and Union leaders. This is alone signals the current problem for the Democrats. Unions normally align with the Democrats. If Trump acts and does rejuvenate the economy with manufacturing jobs I think Democrats will take a further hit. Trump lost the popular vote, but if he is successful you will see more disenfranchised blue collar workers voting and it will be for them.

Trump concerns me on social matters though. His gag order was symbolic on women's health. I know that it was not started by him ( I think Reagan started this and successive presidents include it or not, depending their personal view). But it is symbolic that it maintains the perception that men know better than women, which is a major concern. It also continues the symbolism of his position on religion and race. I am hoping that their congress and senate keeps this sober, but this gag order doesn't give me hope.

In Australia I would have thought the LNP would follow suit, but no way will they have dialogue with Unions like Trump is. The closest the LNP got to this was Howard's battlers comprising of self employed like tradies. But they have made a good job isolating the unions with the ABCC (even though it impacts mainly the CFEMU, it is symbolic) and their rhetoric about unions and not acknowledging their role to improve their members lot.

In fact I find it laughable that the Canberra media pack continues to say that Cory Bernadi will split from the LNP to do a Trump. Whilst he is aligned with social conservatism, Trump is no way aligned to him in that he is reaching out to blue collar workers. Trump saw that opportunity, Bernadi could never talk to the manufacturing unions. Also their members would be up in arms.

In fact, I think you are right this is an opportunity for the ALP. ALP need to talk to industrial leaders along with the unions, ala Hawke's summits which were the basis of our current industrial relations system (albeit with modification over the years). I think this is why Shorten is positioning himself differently over the TPP. He isn't saying protectionism, but bilateral agreements. However I do tend to agree with the LNP with their view use the TPP as the framework with a TPP lite without the US.

Personally I believe in free trade, but Australia has a history of winding back it's tariffs before thre other countries offering the same to provide something real. Sugar always comes to mind. The TPP concerned me over IP, copy write and patents, which was all all US centric. With them out hopefully these will be removed, but I don't have faith in either lot (LNP or ALP) getting this right either. Their attitude is about dollars and are willing to trade our culture away.
  nswtrains Chief Commissioner

Let's try that again.

Are you sitting down?

Why? Because the Trump team said that they will not lie. Nope, it's not 1st April yet.

They already have lied. Lied about how many turned up to Trump's inauguration compared to Obama inauguration.
Newcastle Express
This distorting the truth along with Trump's histrionics scares me as it reminds me of that little Austrian who made similar statements and premises whilst promoting absolute nationalism and the promise of plenty to a down and out country. And look where that ended up. What concentration camps for Muslims or anybody else he doesn't like. Trump is cunning but not intelligent and that worries me too.
  Groundrelay Chief Commissioner

Location: Surrounded by Trolls!
...So he didn't relish it, he was a discrete killer of civilians, not a boastful skyte. Do you hear what you're saying? Then again if I was Obama I would probably keep my history of being involved in wars discreet too - who do you think armed ISIS at the start of the Syrian conflict? Oops... better keep that one quiet...
don_dunstan
Don, as I pointed out it’s pretty clear that for you hold all things Trump to a far lower standard than Obama or Hillary. Convenient but hardly credible.

...
I’m not sure how you balance your moral ledger but such things don’t sit well with some of us, celebrities or not. At least they stood up against this latest manifestation of fascism.
Comparing Trump to Hitler is clearly silly - sorry but I just can't take you seriously when you use that analogy....
don_dunstan
Who mentioned Hitler, Basil?
Fascism didn’t start and end with the Austrian corporal. Trump Inc’s tactics have been pretty much out of that playbook and nothing looks like changing.


...And honestly, do you think in another couple of years that any of these celebrities will still be banging on about Trump once things settle down? No... they'll go back to making money from their audience until they find their next cause they think they can increase their profiles though.
don_dunstan
You won't get it. His regime’s first target is women, forcing its patriarchal version of morality on them. The women that marched don’t want his sort anywhere near their reproductive organs.

Under Trump people who don’t fit within their narrow minded view of US society have been and will be hurt or worse.
  Carnot Minister for Railways

Talking of the Women's Marches, a good opinion piece here by David Brooks: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/opinion/after-the-womens-march.html

"Without the discipline of party politics, social movements devolve into mere feeling, especially in our age of expressive individualism. People march and feel good and think they have accomplished something. They have a social experience with a lot of people and fool themselves into thinking they are members of a coherent and demanding community. Such movements descend to the language of mass therapy."

Is it any wonder Trump thrives in an environment of unhinged and frankly neurotic identity politicking?
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Don, as I pointed out it’s pretty clear that for you hold all things Trump to a far lower standard than Obama or Hillary. Convenient but hardly credible.
Groundrelay
I'm saying is that Obama is not exceptional. There's been a lot in the media about the fact that Obama's eight years were different, all I'm pointing out is that he continued doing pretty much the exact same things as Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, Reagan... etc. I'd actually argue that Obama was not held to the same standards as other US Presidents as he seemed to be able to get away with pretty much the same interventionist policies in the Middle East without being identified as a war-monger. Because he's the coolest President ever? Seems very sad that being cool makes you immune from being held to account.

The arming of ISIS at the start of the Syrian conflict was a huge mistake yet Hillary and Obama didn't really get called to account for starting off that war and then refusing to negotiate in good faith to try and end it. The relentless bombing of civilians in Yemen is very recent and particularly disgusting and yet there's hardly been a word of this in the mainstream media in the lead up to his leaving office... why? Because Obama is considered to be a nice guy who wasn't the same as Bush II?

As I've also said repeatedly, Trump actually has no record yet so we can't judge him. I really don't understand the commentary on this board that positively affirms what Trump is when he's only been sworn in for four days; we have to wait and see what he does first. And as I've said earlier, I expect him to be the same as every other president... not exceptional. But we'll see.
  bingley hall Minister for Railways

Location: Last train to Skaville
Don, as I pointed out it’s pretty clear that for you hold all things Trump to a far lower standard than Obama or Hillary. Convenient but hardly credible.
I'm saying is that Obama is not exceptional. There's been a lot in the media about the fact that Obama's eight years were different, all I'm pointing out is that he continued doing pretty much the exact same things as Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, Reagan... etc. I'd actually argue that Obama was not held to the same standards as other US Presidents as he seemed to be able to get away with pretty much the same interventionist policies in the Middle East without being identified as a war-monger. Because he's the coolest President ever? Seems very sad that being cool makes you immune from being held to account.

The arming of ISIS at the start of the Syrian conflict was a huge mistake yet Hillary and Obama didn't really get called to account for starting off that war and then refusing to negotiate in good faith to try and end it. The relentless bombing of civilians in Yemen is very recent and particularly disgusting and yet there's hardly been a word of this in the mainstream media in the lead up to his leaving office... why? Because Obama is considered to be a nice guy who wasn't the same as Bush II?

As I've also said repeatedly, Trump actually has no record yet so we can't judge him. I really don't understand the commentary on this board that positively affirms what Trump is when he's only been sworn in for four days; we have to wait and see what he does first. And as I've said earlier, I expect him to be the same as every other president... not exceptional. But we'll see.
don_dunstan

Can we have a citation on this please on the supply of arms to ISIS? My take is that they originally provided support to the anti-Assad rebels who certainly had genuine grievances against the oppressive Assad regime and were not Islamist in their make up. Whether civil war was the answer is another matter.

Over time ISIS and other Islamist groups exploited the situation, with the rebels quickly pushed to one side and ISIS and others becoming the predominant opposition force. Consequently copious amounts of US  hardware fell into their hands.

This would be a failing of the US military and intelligence services to grasp the consequences of their actions, which over many decades has become par for the course. The various presidents over these decade have been largely impotent when it comes to these failings..........which brings us around to the ability of the POTUS to influence much at all these days. One reason I feel Trump will only manage to implement a very small fraction of his proposed policies.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Can we have a citation on this please on the supply of arms to ISIS? My take is that they originally provided support to the anti-Assad rebels who certainly had genuine grievances against the oppressive Assad regime and were not Islamist in their make up. Whether civil war was the answer is another matter.

Over time ISIS and other Islamist groups exploited the situation, with the rebels quickly pushed to one side and ISIS and others becoming the predominant opposition force. Consequently copious amounts of US  hardware fell into their hands.
bingley hall
As you imply it certainly wasn't deliberate but there's a lot of evidence that Hillary was running arms to both Libyan and Syrian rebels in the hope of displacing the various "unfriendly" governments under advice and supervision from the CIA. In the case of Qaddafi it worked but Assad is still there.

As was the case in Afghanistan it seems that the CIA-led insurgency started out with good intentions but that things soon went awry when it turned out that the arms were actually going to the sworn enemies of the United States - Al Qaeda. Julian Assange's Wikileaks released some significant correspondence on the issue (Political Insider):

In Obama’s second term, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton authorized the shipment of American-made arms to Qatar, a country beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood, and friendly to the Libyan rebels, in an effort to topple the Libyan/Gaddafi government, and then ship those arms to Syria in order to fund Al Qaeda, and topple Assad in Syria.

Clinton took the lead role in organizing the so-called “Friends of Syria” (aka Al Qaeda/ISIS) to back the CIA-led insurgency for regime change in Syria.

Every single time they embark on these regime change exercises it always - always - ends up in some kind of terrible blow-back but they never seem to learn. Obama and Hillary weren't the first to make this mistake and they probably won't be the last.
  Carnot Minister for Railways

Can we have a citation on this please on the supply of arms to ISIS? My take is that they originally provided support to the anti-Assad rebels who certainly had genuine grievances against the oppressive Assad regime and were not Islamist in their make up. Whether civil war was the answer is another matter.

Over time ISIS and other Islamist groups exploited the situation, with the rebels quickly pushed to one side and ISIS and others becoming the predominant opposition force. Consequently copious amounts of US  hardware fell into their hands.
As you imply it certainly wasn't deliberate but there's a lot of evidence that Hillary was running arms to both Libyan and Syrian rebels in the hope of displacing the various "unfriendly" governments under advice and supervision from the CIA. In the case of Qaddafi it worked but Assad is still there.

As was the case in Afghanistan it seems that the CIA-led insurgency started out with good intentions but that things soon went awry when it turned out that the arms were actually going to the sworn enemies of the United States - Al Qaeda. Julian Assange's Wikileaks released some significant correspondence on the issue (Political Insider):

In Obama’s second term, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton authorized the shipment of American-made arms to Qatar, a country beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood, and friendly to the Libyan rebels, in an effort to topple the Libyan/Gaddafi government, and then ship those arms to Syria in order to fund Al Qaeda, and topple Assad in Syria.

Clinton took the lead role in organizing the so-called “Friends of Syria” (aka Al Qaeda/ISIS) to back the CIA-led insurgency for regime change in Syria.

Every single time they embark on these regime change exercises it always - always - ends up in some kind of terrible blow-back but they never seem to learn. Obama and Hillary weren't the first to make this mistake and they probably won't be the last.
don_dunstan
If there's one word that describes Obama and Hillary's understanding of radical Islam and their minions, it's "Naivety".  As has been said for Millenia: "An enemy of mine enemy is my friend".
  freightgate Minister for Railways

Location: Albury, New South Wales
Trump now say an executive order will be signed to halt visas from a series of Islamic counties. Trump is now underway.
  Groundrelay Chief Commissioner

Location: Surrounded by Trolls!
Trump’s breaking all records signing Executive orders as fast as they can be written. They can’t drag the US back to pre-Copernican times soon enough.

Executive overreach isn’t an issue now! It's plain to see just how vindictive this administration is. Seems '1984' is their instruction manual.

On a lighter note this cartoon sums him up pretty well Smile

http://theweek.com/cartoons/675399/political-cartoon-trump-hollywood-star-cia-service-members
  gordon_s1942 Chief Commissioner

Location: Central Tablelands of NSW
With the recent reintroduction of a US federal Law preventing people in Federally funded orginisations being prevented from speaking on any matter relating to their occupation seems to me to make a laughing stock of their much vaunted Constitution that 'Guarantee's Freedom of Speech' except on matters the Government doesnt want you too apparently.
  northbritish Chief Train Controller

Let's try that again.

Are you sitting down?

Why? Because the Trump team said that they will not lie. Nope, it's not 1st April yet.

They already have lied. Lied about how many turned up to Trump's inauguration compared to Obama inauguration.
Newcastle Express
Newcastle Express. No it was the media who lied and they have been caught out. Take a look at these two items and follow the links, and note they are from CNN who are not a Trump supporter.

1.
CNN has an really cool interactive photo thing of the inauguration at the time President Trump was making his speech after being sworn in.
You can pan, tilt, and zoom the picture to get a detailed panoramic view of the entire scene or close-ups of the officials and dignitaries
as they are there watching him speak .

Sean Spicer is clearly right about the attendance figures and the press using misleading photos from before the full crowds arrived to give
the impression that the crowd size was less than it actually was.

In this interactive CNN photo you can see the densely packed crowds stretching all the way back to the Washington Monument with no unfilled
spaces except for side streets which were blocked off from the public. The place was packed to full capacity and then some!

http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/


-----
2.
CNN Quietly Releases Updated Pic Showing Trump’s Inaugural Crowd Size Greater than Obama’s 2009 Inaugural Crowd

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/01/crowd-size-matters-trump-is-right-it-was-huge/

-----

The numbers are of course a non issue, but the corrections are needed so that the real liars are called on it.

Cheers
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
With the recent reintroduction of a US federal Law preventing people in Federally funded orginisations being prevented from speaking on any matter relating to their occupation seems to me to make a laughing stock of their much vaunted Constitution that 'Guarantee's Freedom of Speech' except on matters the Government doesnt want you too apparently.
"gordon_s1942"
If Trump has any principles, he should have the US National Anthem rewritten to remove the nonsense about, " . . . the land of the free."
  justapassenger Minister for Railways

And the next line too, which he clearly doesn't fit.
  lsrailfan Chief Commissioner

Location: Somewhere you're not
He is certainly dividing a real lot of people with his tough immigration policy, that's for sure!
  Carnot Minister for Railways

Perhaps we should rename this thread "Not Welcome to Trump Town"?

Anyway, love him or loathe him, the "Disruptor in Chief" or "Man of Action" seems to be sticking to his campaign promises.

And I might put this article here: http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/28/us/syrian-family-trump-travel-ban/index.html
  M636C Minister for Railways

On a USA Forum referring to locomotive emission standards, the President was called

"Annoying Orange in Chief"......

While there has been a lot of signing of Presidential Decrees indicating that election promises will be carried out, not much has actually happened apart from restrictions on entry to the USA.

While we can expect both houses with a Republican majority to pass such requests, he does seem to be spending money rather than balancing the Budget.

I keep thinking about that other great populist Peron in Argentina.
That didn't work out well....

Peter

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: