Life in the Trump Era, Part 2

[LA Ute]

Who cares? He doesn't belong in office. If this helps remove him from office, it's a good thing. For that alone, it's not a cynical sideshow - people working to get him out are doing the nation a favor.

He got elected. Just for purposes of discussion, assume he was elected legitimately. (We can all be dismayed at that fact; I certainly am.) Also assume that despite his irritating admiration of Putin, Trump did nothing wrong. Assume the Steele dossier really is, as all the evidence shows, just opposition research paid for by the Clinton campaign, and is full of false information. Assume that a FEW fools in the FBI thought there was no real chance Trump would win, so they violated FBI rules to tip the scales in Clinton’s favor to make sure. Assume the left-leaning and Trump-hating news media took that narrative and ran with it relentlessly for many months. Finally, assume that Mueller comes up with nothing implicating Trump or his team in any collusion in Russian meddling in the election. (That’s what Mueller is investigating. The indictments and guilty pleas so far have nothing to do with that.)

That’s what I mean by cynical. Painting a guy who won the election, whom you hate, as a Russian tool, when you know the evidence is flimsy. And you’re doing this to invalidate a legitimate presidential election. It’s right out of an Alan Drury novel from the 1950s. Maybe that’s not what happened, we’ll see. If it is, I can’t think of anything more cynical.

[sancho]

He got elected. Just for purposes of discussion, assume he was elected legitimately.

Fine. It's true - he was elected. It was a joke taken too far, but he was elected. I suppose using whatever means necessary to get rid of him changes the rules for the future. But it would be so nice not to have him anymore.

Anyway, I imagine the people involved in the investigations believe they have something legitimate. If they don't, it is cynical, as you say. I guess it wouldn't be too surprising - politics runs on cynicism and dishonesty.

[concerned]

Assume the Steele dossier really is, as all the evidence shows, just opposition research paid for by the Clinton campaign, and is full of false information. Assume that a FEW fools in the FBI thought there was no real chance Trump would win, so they violated FBI rules to tip the scales in Clinton’s favor to make sure. Assume the left-leaning and Trump-hating news media took that narrative and ran with it relentlessly for many months. Finally, assume that Mueller comes up with nothing implicating Trump or his team in any collusion in Russian meddling in the election. (That’s what Mueller is investigating. The indictments and guilty pleas so far have nothing to do with that.)

That’s what I mean by cynical. Painting a guy who won the election, whom you hate, as a Russian tool, when you know the evidence is flimsy. And you’re doing this to invalidate a legitimate presidential election. It’s right out of an Alan Drury novel from the 1950s. Maybe that’s not what happened, we’ll see. If it is, I can’t think of anything more cynical.

How many of these assumptions do you actually believe are true?

[LA Ute]

How many of these assumptions do you actually believe are true?

Just making a point. The possibility that even some of them are true should be disturbing to everyone. And none of the assumptions is outlandish. I am no Trump fan. as you know, but I am a fan of trying to be level-headed about big scandals. I thought the Monica Lewinsky/Whitewater thing was ridiculous, excessive, and hurt the country. That episode, along with the Lawrence Walsh episode, convinced me that the old independent counsel law was a bad idea and was extra-constitutional. Even the new approach (Mueller, e.g.) rubs me the wrong way. My client work has made me pretty wary of federal prosecutors.

[Brian]

I live in the South, in an unincorporated part of the South, 15 minutes from a medium sized city. There are a lot of Trump supporters that are my neighbors, ward members, and many many in the branches and remote wards in our stake. At work, there are maybe 5-ish Trump voters that I work with with any regularity.

I sometimes worry about what would happen if 'their guy' was thrown out of office. They really do tend to see themselves as un-represented. Blue collar, an increasingly automated economy that doesn't bode well for their future, etc, etc. They're are struggling, and all the focus is on the social-justice warrior type things. They LOVE to see CNN/MSNBC, the democrats/etc get flustered when Trump says something. It's like their guy is punching the establishment in the nuts, and they love it. The hoity-toity atheists in Europe freak out, and they love it.

I'm with everyone that he is by far the least qualified person to ever be president. And I wish he'd be removed.
However, I wonder about the backlash if he was removed. It could get ugly.
Part of me wonders if the best solution is to just hold our noses until 2020, and hope turnout is high.

[LA Ute]

I live in the South, in an unincorporated part of the South, 15 minutes from a medium sized city. There are a lot of Trump supporters that are my neighbors, ward members, and many many in the branches and remote wards in our stake. At work, there are maybe 5-ish Trump voters that I work with with any regularity.

I sometimes worry about what would happen if 'their guy' was thrown out of office. They really do tend to see themselves as un-represented. Blue collar, an increasingly automated economy that doesn't bode well for their future, etc, etc. They're are struggling, and all the focus is on the social-justice warrior type things. They LOVE to see CNN/MSNBC, the democrats/etc get flustered when Trump says something. It's like their guy is punching the establishment in the nuts, and they love it. The hoity-toity atheists in Europe freak out, and they love it.

I'm with everyone that he is by far the least qualified person to ever be president. And I wish he'd be removed.
However, I wonder about the backlash if he was removed. It could get ugly.
Part of me wonders if the best solution is to just hold our noses until 2020, and hope turnout is high.

For the reasons you state, I'm afraid millions of people would see Trump's removal as a coup d'etat. I am not at all sure it would be a bloodless coup.

[Ma'ake]

I live in the South, in an unincorporated part of the South, 15 minutes from a medium sized city. There are a lot of Trump supporters that are my neighbors, ward members, and many many in the branches and remote wards in our stake. At work, there are maybe 5-ish Trump voters that I work with with any regularity.

I sometimes worry about what would happen if 'their guy' was thrown out of office. They really do tend to see themselves as un-represented. Blue collar, an increasingly automated economy that doesn't bode well for their future, etc, etc. They're are struggling, and all the focus is on the social-justice warrior type things. They LOVE to see CNN/MSNBC, the democrats/etc get flustered when Trump says something. It's like their guy is punching the establishment in the nuts, and they love it. The hoity-toity atheists in Europe freak out, and they love it.

I'm with everyone that he is by far the least qualified person to ever be president. And I wish he'd be removed.
However, I wonder about the backlash if he was removed. It could get ugly.
Part of me wonders if the best solution is to just hold our noses until 2020, and hope turnout is high.

This is the real issue - how did we get to the early 2016 GOP primaries with so many who were out for blood? It's a very long, complex story, but regardless of what happens with Trump - whether he somehow takes rationality pills or is impeached or keels over due to a tantrum - we will have this issue to deal with, how to cobble together some shred of common interest to try and keep the nation from erupting.

[LA Ute]

This is the real issue - how did we get to the early 2016 GOP primaries with so many who were out for blood? It's a very long, complex story, but regardless of what happens with Trump - whether he somehow takes rationality pills or is impeached or keels over due to a tantrum - we will have this issue to deal with, how to cobble together some shred of common interest to try and keep the nation from erupting.

A big part of it was that there were 15 other candidates who drew support from mainstream Republicans. Trump drew from some mainstream Repubs but also from people who hadn’t been involved, including but not exclusively the alt-right. The other 15 divided up the normal vote and Trump’s base was remarkably loyal. He kept winning and eventually the opposition wasted away. That’s not the whole story but as a Rubio supporter (and fundraiser) I did watch that part unfold.

[Ma'ake]

A big part of it was that there were 15 other candidates who drew support from mainstream Republicans. Trump drew from some mainstream Repubs but also from people who hadn’t been involved, including but not exclusively the alt-right. The other 15 divided up the normal vote and Trump’s base was remarkably loyal. He kept winning and eventually the opposition wasted away. That’s not the whole story but as a Rubio supporter (and fundraiser) I did watch that part unfold.

Good take on what happened. A lot of angry voters comprised (and still comprise) Trump's base. "Drain the swamp", "lock her up!", etc.

Similarly, many young folks - eg, 10,000 showing up to see Bernie at This is the Place State Park - manifesting a similar uprising on the left.

I could list 20 factors I think were ingredients to these separate but similar uprisings, but I think those are what we need to understand and address, or at least try to ameliorate.

[jrj84105]

He got elected. Just for purposes of discussion, assume he was elected legitimately. (We can all be dismayed at that fact; I certainly am.)

1) Also assume that despite his irritating admiration of Putin, Trump did nothing wrong. 2) Assume the Steele dossier really is, as all the evidence shows, just opposition research paid for by the Clinton campaign, and is full of false information.
3) Assume that a FEW fools in the FBI thought there was no real chance Trump would win, so they violated FBI rules to tip the scales in Clinton’s favor to make sure. 4) Assume the left-leaning and Trump-hating news media took that narrative and ran with it relentlessly for many months.
5) Finally, assume that Mueller comes up with nothing implicating Trump or his team in any collusion in Russian meddling in the election. (That’s what Mueller is investigating. The indictments and guilty pleas so far have nothing to do with that.)

That’s what I mean by cynical. Painting a guy who won the election, whom you hate, as a Russian tool, when you know the evidence is flimsy. And you’re doing this to invalidate a legitimate presidential election. It’s right out of an Alan Drury novel from the 1950s. Maybe that’s not what happened, we’ll see. If it is, I can’t think of anything more cynical.

I think it’s more likely that actual voter rolls and votes were changed than that even 3 of your 5 assumptions of Trump’s innocence are true.

[LA Ute]

I think it’s more likely that actual voter rolls and votes were changed than that even 3 of your 5 assumptions of Trump’s innocence are true.

2, 3 and 4 are all plausible to me. It is entirely rational to believe so, on the one hand; and, at the same time, to believe that Trump is a man of little character, a fool in many respects, and that we would be better off if someone else had been elected president.
I am sure you disagree. That’s what makes America a great country.

[UTEopia]

2, 3 and 4 are all plausible to me. It is entirely rational to believe so, on the one hand; and, at the same time, to believe that Trump is a man of little character, a fool in many respects, and that we would be better off if someone else had been elected president.
I am sure you disagree. That’s what makes America a great country.

The Mueller investigation will have one of three outcomes: 1) He categorically states there is no evidence of collusion and that will pacify all but a few of the Trump haters. I can't stand Trump, but would respect that conclusion. 2) Evidence of collusion is identified and the players circle the wagons and spin the evidence the way they want to spin it causing the saga to continue for the the next 6 years. 3) Unimpeachable evidence consisting of a video with audio taken both by Trump Jr. and Ivanka showing Trump on bended knee pleading with Putin to make him King of America is presented and Trump and all of his base will claim "fake news."

[jrj84105]

2, 3 and 4 are all plausible to me. It is entirely rational to believe so, on the one hand; and, at the same time, to believe that Trump is a man of little character, a fool in many respects, and that we would be better off if someone else had been elected president.
I am sure you disagree. That’s what makes America a great country.

I think those 3 are plausible but improbable- just cumulatively slightly more improbable than changing votes.

I actually don’t think any real vote tampering was done, but the probability went up when Georgia destroyed its records after the special election.

I think that Russia’s goal was to show they could alter elections thereby casting doubt on the electoral process. The left is too apathetic and pacifist to get up in arms about anything so there was no point in changing votes to the GOP. If/when Russia wants to cause real unrest, they’ll change votes to the Dems and let the extreme right respond. The far right has been primed to believe in voter fraud for years, and now the left will accept the possibility as well- especially if Russian hackers decide to leave some bigger bread crumbs next time.

If they can hack a couple of the podunk heavy red districts that are refusing to enact appropriate security measures and turn them into democratic wins, that paired with a blue wave of any magnitude is going to send some people with more guns than sense into hysteria.

[tooblue]

I think those 3 are plausible but improbable- just cumulatively slightly more improbable than changing votes.

I actually don’t think any real vote tampering was done, but the probability went up when Georgia destroyed its records after the special election.

I think that Russia’s goal was to show they could alter elections thereby casting doubt on the electoral process. The left is too apathetic and pacifist to get up in arms about anything so there was no point in changing votes to the GOP. If/when Russia wants to cause real unrest, they’ll change votes to the Dems and let the extreme right respond. The far right has been primed to believe in voter fraud for years, and now the left will accept the possibility as well- especially if Russian hackers decide to leave some bigger bread crumbs next time.

If they can hack a couple of the podunk heavy red districts that are refusing to enact appropriate security measures and turn them into democratic wins, that paired with a blue wave of any magnitude is going to send some people with more guns than sense into hysteria.

How President Trump's Defense Went From 'No Collusion' With Russia to 'Collusion Is Not a Crime'

http://time.com/5352628/donald-trump...llusion-crime/