THE ERA OF TRUMP

[Smitty-48]

1. Trump has business ties to Putin and to Russia.

Clinton has business ties to Putin and Russia, she lobbied agressively, using her position as SECSTATE, to lure Americans firms to Mr. Ivan's KGB run version of Silicon Valley, called Skolkovo, which is actually a front for the Russian military's covert acquisition of western military technology, in return, the Clinton Foundation recieved donations from Skolkovo as quid pro quo.

In 2014, the FBI actually sent Clinton an urgent warning that Skolkovo was in fact a front for the Russian military, none the less, her campaign chair sits on the board of directors of a Skolkovo based company which received $35 million in seed money from a Russian state fund under the control of the Kremlin.

[StCapps]

Trump hasn't been inaugurated yet. It's too early to tell if he knows what he's doing as POTUS or not. All we have to judge whether he knows what he's doing politically or not, at this point is by his campaign and his transition. So far so good. Why should Trump be judged by a hypothetical future instead of by what he has actually done so far?

[BjornP]

C'mon Bjorn - He knows more then the generals, believe me. That makes him very smart. He's so smart he doesn't need to attend the daily security briefings. That's SUPER smart. [/sarcasm]

(Great post, BTW.)

I believe you. In fact, according to: http://www.breitbart.com/exclusive-inte ... eadHamster

I've got a plan so cunning, you could put a tail on me and call me a weasel.

Trump's Weave is a really fiber-optic augmentation AI, capable of supplying Trump with extra brain power. He's the first US cyborg president. You gots to hurry to catch the article, though. The post-election's rigged, and Obama's pulling down pro-Trump sites left and right. Especially right.

[BjornP]

Trump hasn't been inaugurated yet. It's too early to tell if he knows what he's doing as POTUS or not. All we have to judge whether he knows what he's doing politically or not, at this point is by his campaign and his transition. So far so good. Why should Trump be judged by a hypothetical future instead of by what he has actually done so far?

99% agreed with that.

[Smitty-48]

Why should Trump be judged by a hypothetical future instead of by what he has actually done so far?

That's easy, the liberal concern trolls were pretty damn sure that they were going to win this thing, perhaps by the hair of their chins, but win it none the less, when they didn't, they've pretty much been reeling ever since, still in shock that "Nuclear Hitler!" didn't get the job done, so until they can come up with something new, all they have as a placeholder is "but, but... wait! Didn't we mention that he's a RUSSIAN NUCLEAR HITLERRRRRRRR!!!"

[StCapps]

One thing I know, Donald Trump is a damn skilled campaigner and he's killing it so far in the transition phase. I don't know whether he'll be a good president but his political track record so far is pretty impressive. All evidence so far points not to someone who is an idiot and doesn't know what they are doing, but to someone who is pretty damn clever and seems to have a plan, just saying.

[StCapps]

Why should Trump be judged by a hypothetical future instead of by what he has actually done so far?

That's easy, the liberal concern trolls were pretty damn sure that they were going to win this thing, perhaps by the hair of their chins, but win it none the less, when they didn't, they've pretty much been reeling ever since, still in shock that "Nuclear Hitler!" didn't get the job done, so until they can come up with something new, all they have as a placeholder is "but, but... wait! Didn't we mention that he's a RUSSIAN NUCLEAR HITLERRRRRRRR!!!"

They tried the Russia angle before the election too. It's already wasn't effective, yet they continue to double down on it. It may take them a while yet to pull their heads out of their asses and come up with some new material at this rate.

[Smitty-48]

Why should Trump be judged by a hypothetical future instead of by what he has actually done so far?

That's easy, the liberal concern trolls were pretty damn sure that they were going to win this thing, perhaps by the hair of their chins, but win it none the less, when they didn't, they've pretty much been reeling ever since, still in shock that "Nuclear Hitler!" didn't get the job done, so until they can come up with something new, all they have as a placeholder is "but, but... wait! Didn't we mention that he's a RUSSIAN NUCLEAR HITLERRRRRRRR!!!"

They tried the Russia angle before the election too. It's already wasn't effective yet they continue to double down on it. It may take them a while yet to pull their heads out of their asses and come up with some new material.

True, but now they're doubling down on the Red Scare angle with a whole new level of breathless desperation.

I don't think they will come up with anything new, never did when they ran this routine against Ronald Reagan, Trump will come back FTW with Morning in America 2020.

That's how it went, MAGA was 1980, then Morning in America was 1984, the Left ran their Nuclear Hitler campaign from 1964 against it for eight straight years, and got nowhere fast doing it, in fact, they got George H. W. Bush next.

The Left didn't win again until they got off Nuclear Hitler and switched to It's The Economy Stupid.

There's never anything new in the American political cycle, it's basically Groundhog Day on a generational loop.

[BjornP]

On the topic of blowing up the scale of Russia's intervention for political purposes. slate.com surprises me sometimes. Most of their post-election articles regarding Trump, has been that concern-trolling Smitty talks about, and very little introspection about their own role. I may think of Trump as one does of shit beneath one's shoe, but I sympathize with the various needs to elect him over Clinton, as expressed by the Americans on this forum. So it's nice to see that the mag devotes digital space to a dissenting (though still insider) from time to time.

Favorite part:

Clearly something horrifying has happened to America’s great liberal intellects. One moment they were yapping along in the train of a historic political movement; now, ragged and destitute, they wander with lolling tongues in search of anything that might explain their new world to them. This is, after all, how cults get started. Cultists will venerate any messianic mediocrity and any set of half-baked spiritual dogmas; it’s not the overt content that matters but the security of knowing. If Trump’s devoted hype squad of pustulent, oleaginous neo-Nazis can now be euphemized as the “alt-right,” the Eichenwalds and Jefferys of the world might have turned themselves into something similar: an alt-center, pushing its own failed political doctrine with all the same vehemence, idiocy, and spleen.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... erals.html

[Smitty-48]

Oleaginous, eh? Can mean obseqiuous, but can also mean "greasy", which in the game of hockey, is in fact a badge of honour.

Grey Area Players; hate to play against them, love to have them on your team.

Superpests FTW.