Trump 2024?

[Ironhold]

23 hours ago, zil2 said:

I'm confused...  What does this have to do with donuts?

Over the last decade, Hungary has slowly become decidedly old-school about certain things, such as ordering all "gender studies" programs at all public schools in the nation to close due to how few students majored in the field and how little demand there was for graduates. 

This has led to a number of left-leaning and "progressive" individuals here in the United States accusing Hungary of sliding towards fascism. 

The statement here is basically Hungary saying "Get your own affairs in order before criticizing us, as you're doing things even *we* find unconscionable." 

[zil2]

7 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

Over the last decade, Hungary has slowly become decidedly old-school about certain things, such as ordering all "gender studies" programs at all public schools in the nation to close due to how few students majored in the field and how little demand there was for graduates. 

This has led to a number of left-leaning and "progressive" individuals here in the United States accusing Hungary of sliding towards fascism. 

The statement here is basically Hungary saying "Get your own affairs in order before criticizing us, as you're doing things even *we* find unconscionable." 

@NeuroTypical did a much better job of explaining what this has to do with donuts.

(I was not in the least bit confused as to the political situation here or in Hungary.)

[Carborendum]

11 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

I am of the opinion that there'd be no war in the Ukraine if Trump had won a 2nd term.

We all saw the war coming.  If the bombastic orange dealmaker had been there at the time, he would have made a deal with Putin to keep it from happening.  Eastward NATO expansion was becoming intolerable to Russia.  So Trump would have worked a deal where Putin didn't go to war, Russia would get some NATO expansion curtailing treaty or deal or something, and both of 'em would get some mutually beneficial deal regarding Russian oil exporting and Ukrainian grain.

And he would have been all loud and self righteous about it on Twitter every step of the way.  Shaming NATO member nations into paying more, crowing about how he owned Russia, shaming the Biden pay-for-access family mafia over their involvement with the corrupt Ukraine, basically taking really loud credit for every bit of good to come out of him leading the free world, while at the same time publicly humiliating his opponents and enemies.   And we would have all hated him for it.  And there would be no war in Ukraine right now.

While you make a reasonable argument, I'm going to disagree with your opening statement.

Hilary and all the Dems saying in public during debates that they had no intention of working with Putin because he was the devil incarnate.  But Trump said that he figured he could "work with him."

Putin figured, "OK, at least we have a shot with this Trump guy.  I hope he wins."

When Trump won, he was looking forward to dealing with him.  But then he found that Trump would say one thing to Russia, then he would say something completely different to the US.  Putin and most Russians realized that they couldn't believe him.

So, no, he would probably would not have found a way.  How could he?

[NeuroTypical]

8 hours ago, Carborendum said:

But then he found that Trump would say one thing to Russia, then he would say something completely different to the US. 

Geopolitical players realize that messenging to various audiences is merely one tiny part of the whole picture.  World leaders already know any nation's leader will speak whatever words to their own people that will help secure their reelection and party's power.  Deals with such foreign leaders involve actions and behavior that often don't make it to the media.  

Putin doesn't care what the American president says to his own people.  And vice versa.  Deals don't depend on such things.  If they did, deals would never get made.

Edited September 10, 2023 by NeuroTypical

[NeuroTypical]

Example: 

When COVID hit, Mexico actually secured it's own borders and took a lead in preventing the flow of migrants, legal and illegal.  We also closed the borders, and one presidential press briefing had some random person from some agency nobody had ever heard of before, talking about how zero non-Americans were crossing.  Nobody had any questions.  The ACLU and pro undocumented workers crowd howled a little, but nobody ran with it.  Nobody seemed to notice that historic low numbers of people were attempting to cross in the first place.  Mexico was doing something to stop the flow from their cities to the border.   A pretty impressive feat, since populations fleeing plagues to better places is something humans have done forever.

Other news at the time: The entire oil industry slammed to a crashing halt as the world went into lockdown, demand plummeted, quarantine meant oil tankers were piling up on coasts, unable to get their oil into America.  The price of oil actually went negative for a while there, as oil companies started offering to pay people down the pipeline to take their oil, because it would be cheaper than continuing to hold it where it was.   A week later, Trump crowed publicly about how he forced OPEC and the oil producing world to radically cut back on production in order to deal with the impacts of COVID.   Everyone cut production except Mexico.  Nobody really said why.  Nobody asked.  Nobody talked about it.  Mexico pumping barely hit the news at all - paragraph 5 in a 6 paragraph news story about oil.

Seems pretty obvious to me that Orange man had one of his Art of the Deal discussions with President Obrador (or the cartels or whoever really controls oil production in Mexico.)  You secure the border during covid, and I'll make sure you can keep pumping oil.  

[prisonchaplain]

On 9/3/2023 at 8:23 PM, JohnsonJones said:

I enjoy Krispy Kremes a little too much. 

Nothing bad comes from donuts. Some of us do develop a bit of "tactical girth" however. 😉

[NeuroTypical]

In other news, this is kind of scary and horrifying:
 

https://x.com/grahamallen_1/status/1700909287608913974?s=46&t=X5qcMifsD8E7ppEtCxaqJw

[JohnsonJones]

19 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

In other news, this is kind of scary and horrifying:
 

https://x.com/grahamallen_1/status/1700909287608913974?s=46&t=X5qcMifsD8E7ppEtCxaqJw

As someone around that age myself (well, somewhere in that range perhaps, maybe NOT quite his age yet...thankfully) I can understand a momentary lapse in thought.  He walks as someone of his age as well. 

I think McConnell has also had some of this recently affecting him.  It comes with the territory.

If someone thinks that it means I can no longer work at the university or do research...I'll just say they are wrong.

I may be getting older but I'm not dead yet.

Edited September 11, 2023 by JohnsonJones

[Carborendum]

On 9/10/2023 at 9:29 AM, NeuroTypical said:

Putin doesn't care what the American president says to his own people.  And vice versa.  Deals don't depend on such things.  If they did, deals would never get made.

That's not what a Russian expert said while Trump was still in office.  I already posted the link a while ago.

[LDSGator]

14 hours ago, Carborendum said:

That's not what a Russian expert

I can find “Russian experts” that have all sorts of opinions. 

[NeuroTypical]

16 hours ago, Carborendum said:

That's not what a Russian expert said while Trump was still in office.  I already posted the link a while ago.

I missed the link, but you don't need a Russian expert to disagree with me.  Lots and lots of people think that when a nation's leader speaks to his own people, other nation's leaders notice or care.  They're free to think that.

[NeuroTypical]

17 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

As someone around that age myself (well, somewhere in that range perhaps, maybe NOT quite his age yet...thankfully) I can understand a momentary lapse in thought.  He walks as someone of his age as well. 
...
If someone thinks that it means I can no longer work at the university or do research...I'll just say they are wrong.

That's not the horrifying thing.   The horrifying thing is that the leader of the free world had some rando staffer just butt in to announce that the president was done and the event was over, while the president was still speaking.  Then another rando staffer cut his mike and turned up the music.

Watch it again.

You tell me - if you're happily working away at the university doing research on a normal day, and your teammates just up and decide you're done, and they take your keyboard away from you as you are typing and turn off your computer, what would you think?

Edited September 12, 2023 by NeuroTypical

[Just_A_Guy]

On 9/9/2023 at 12:40 PM, NeuroTypical said:

I am of the opinion that there'd be no war in the Ukraine if Trump had won a 2nd term.

We all saw the war coming.  If the bombastic orange dealmaker had been there at the time, he would have made a deal with Putin to keep it from happening.  Eastward NATO expansion was becoming intolerable to Russia.  So Trump would have worked a deal where Putin didn't go to war, Russia would get some NATO expansion curtailing treaty or deal or something, and both of 'em would get some mutually beneficial deal regarding Russian oil exporting and Ukrainian grain.

And he would have been all loud and self righteous about it on Twitter every step of the way.  Shaming NATO member nations into paying more, crowing about how he owned Russia, shaming the Biden pay-for-access family mafia over their involvement with the corrupt Ukraine, basically taking really loud credit for every bit of good to come out of him leading the free world, while at the same time publicly humiliating his opponents and enemies.   And we would have all hated him for it.  And there would be no war in Ukraine right now.

I’m not so sure.

You can certainly get some mileage out of being the craziest guy at the negotiating table and (appearing to be) lacking in any long-term strategic commitments or alliances.  North Korea is an excellent example of that.  I think that was Trump’s style as well, and it did yield some successes where years—sometimes decades—of traditional diplomacy had given only a stalemate.

The trouble is, the Pax Americana sort of depended on there being some basic ground rules and solid strategic alliances that could last in spite of occasional disagreements between the parties to those alliances.  If you aren’t seen as, fundamentally, a promise-keeper—if you threaten to end the deal and walk away from the table too often—then less-powerful members of your alliance will start seeking more reliable protectors.  Biden has been, of course, disastrous; but I’m unconvinced Trump was seen to have been a particularly devoted friend either.  

Additionally, presidents can only play the hand they are dealt.  Regardless of the party affiliation of the current president, the simple fact is that the American public was not willing to fight a war—nuclear or otherwise—to defend Ukraine’s territorial integrity.  And Putin knew it.  So the prospect of territorial aggression was always “when”, not “if”.  It’s also why Taiwan and the Philippines (at least, the latter’s claims over a number of islands in the region) are basically living on borrowed time.  I don’t think there’s anyone in the Republican field who can save them.  (Maybe Vivek what’s- his- name; he seems to be an effective communicator and could perhaps persuasively rally the country to a war footing.  But due to his ethnicity Chinese propagandists here would likely collude with anti-war, communist-sympathizing leftists to paint him as an agent for an India that’s looking to tweak China on its western border).

Edited September 13, 2023 by Just_A_Guy

[JohnsonJones]

19 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

That's not the horrifying thing.   The horrifying thing is that the leader of the free world had some rando staffer just butt in to announce that the president was done and the event was over, while the president was still speaking.  Then another rando staffer cut his mike and turned up the music.

Watch it again.

You tell me - if you're happily working away at the university doing research on a normal day, and your teammates just up and decide you're done, and they take your keyboard away from you as you are typing and turn off your computer, what would you think?

I'm not sure that's a horrifying thing or not.

What it indicates is what I think many have suspected all along. 

Biden is actually a VERY middle of the road moderate.  If you look at some of the choices he made for various posts...they are NOT middle of the road moderates. 

Biden has a loud voice, but the presidency is currently being run by committee.  It has been for a while. (probably from the very beginning even).

This is actually a pretty good thing though.  The BEST leaders in many instances are not the solo voices in the room.  They recognize that they have weaknesses and surround themselves with those who are smarter, cannier, and more political saavy than they are. 

Biden is still witty and fast on his feet, but if you notice some of the ways his policies have been made and done...he has some pretty sharp people in his council.  Biden probably doesn't even realize all that they've done in his name at this point.

Last guy that ran the nation like this was Reagan and that was some while ago. 

I'm wondering if they'll keep Harris as his VP choice this next election though.  It's getting closer to a point where Biden could collapse and if that happens they'll want someone that will play nice with the committee.

 

Edited September 13, 2023 by JohnsonJones

[LDSGator]

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Biden is still witty and fast on his feet,

Jj I got love for you bro and agree with you many times, but I’m not sure about this one. 
 

You are the only bulldogs fan I can tolerate. 😜 

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, LDSGator said:

5 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Biden is still witty and fast on his feet,

Jj I got love for you bro and agree with you many times, but I’m not sure about this one. 

I actually agree with JJ on this one.  Biden is often NOT witty or fast, his gaffes and stumbles and whatnot are increasing with age.  But that said, every big prepared speech I've watched him give has had him pulling it off pretty flawlessly.  

(Wherever this thing was, it wasn't exactly a major speech.)

Plus, flying to different nations on a whirlwind schedule and being expected to perform and work deals and give speeches? That's hardly light work.  I hope to be able to do half as good when I'm a million years old like him. 

 

 

9 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

You can certainly get some mileage out of being the craziest guy at the negotiating table and (appearing to be) lacking in any long-term strategic commitments or alliances.  North Korea is an excellent example of that.  I think that was Trump’s style as well, and it did yield some successes where years—sometimes decades—of traditional diplomacy had given only a stalemate.

The trouble is, the Pax Americana sort of depended on there being some basic ground rules and solid strategic alliances that could last in spite of occasional disagreements between the parties to those alliances.  If you aren’t seen as, fundamentally, a promise-keeper—if you threaten to end the deal and walk away from the table too often—then less-powerful members of your alliance will start seeking more reliable protectors.

I don't think any world leaders think of Trump as crazy.  Just strong, mean, and Mr. What-Have-You-Done-For-Me-Lately.  To be honest, the world runs off of that notion, Trump just says it out loud more publicly.

Alliances and treaties come and go at an admittedly slow pace.  And Trump was good at really loudly and boisterously modifying and ending some.  No more NAFTA, embassy moved to Jerusalem come to mind.  But it's not like Europe has any other options when it comes to defending itself, containing Russia, keeping everyone cohesive (looking at you Germany).  They have to have the US.  And Trump reads the same reddit/BadJobs threads I do, and knows how to make a few threats about quitting in order to force a raise or a promotion.

In the realm of global public opinion, there are an awful lot of folks looking at America in constant amazement, wondering why we got rid of our strong man and replaced him with a frail old stumbler.  

[LDSGator]

3 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

actually agree with JJ on this one.  Biden is often NOT witty or fast, his gaffes and stumbles and whatnot are increasing with age.  But that said, every big prepared speech I've watched him give has had him pulling it off pretty flawlessly.  

Totally legit. 

[Carborendum]

On 9/12/2023 at 11:05 AM, NeuroTypical said:

I missed the link, but you don't need a Russian expert to disagree with me. 

Actually, I did.

Obviously, we all have a tendency to choose our own "experts" to confirm our own biases.  The thing is that I would have normally agreed with you.  But, this guy actually changed my mind.

What made him so interesting is that he is somewhat left of center and was speaking to an audience who was further left than he was.

He actually seemed to bring many of them closer to the center.  And he also dispelled some of my very conservative notions and brought me closer to the center.  That should say something.

You don't have to watch the entire video -- it's a really long video.  But I'd really encourage you to watch at least 5 minutes starting at 41:16.  If it sounds like rubbish, then fine.  But I think you may find him enlightening.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ  It took me a while to find this video again.  So, if you could reward me for the effort by giving at least that 5 minutes...

If I understood correctly, he had triple citizenship (US, French, and USSR).  I'm not sure if after the fall of the wall, his USSR citizenship transferred to Russia or not.  He seems to currently identify more with the French citizenship than the others. 

He's spent his entire career studying & commenting on Russia/Soviet-US relations.  His arguments are not twisted or convoluted.  They're very matter-of-fact common-sense arguments.  I found it difficult to deny his conclusions.

Edited September 13, 2023 by Carborendum

[NeuroTypical]

Thanks - I watched his full answer to that question, then read through his wiki entry.  Really interesting guy.  I didn't hear him say anything with which I disagree.  I agree that nations are often engaged in meddling in the affairs and elections of other nations.  Russia has been attacking our culture for a while.  For example, they were trying to polarize us against each other regarding vaccines as far back as 2015. 

I also remember seeing a propaganda video traced back to either Ukraine or Russia pushing the gender divide, where a (supposedly) European woman boarded a subway and poured water on the laps of every "manspread" he could find.  It wouldn't surprise me at all if Russian twitter bots had a boosting effect in the Western world's gender confusion of the last 3 years. 

Regarding my statements in this thread, I stand by them.  Putin looked at the election, and he saw an orange dealmaker signalling he'd be happy to work with Russia, and Clinton's wife who screwed up the reset button while working for Obama.   Putin would have seen that, regardless of any public statements made by either candidate in America.

[askandanswer]

If I was contemplating how to vote in the 2024 election my intentions would be influenced by the idea that there has never been a closer alignment between Trump and Putin's interests. Both want more than anything else what the other is best placed to give. No one more than Putin can help Trump win the 2024 election and no one more than Trump can help Putin avoid defeat in Ukraine. That sounds like a great opportunity for a deal to be done. 

Edited September 16, 2023 by askandanswer

[Vort]

4 hours ago, askandanswer said:

If I was contemplating how to vote in the 2924 election my intentions would be influenced by the idea that there has never been a closer alignment between Trump and Putin's interests. Both want more than anything else what the other is best placed to give. No one more than Putin can help Trump win the 2024 election and no one more than Trump can help Putin avoid defeat in Ukraine. That sounds like a great opportunity for a deal to be done. 

What exactly do you think Putin can do to materially help Trump in the election? And what exactly (or even approximately) do you think Trump would be willing to do to help Putin win a wildly unpopular war?

[askandanswer]

Putin has an army of trolls waiting to do his bidding, just waiting for the word to start sending messages by the millions aimed at influencing opinions. They've had three years to learn from the last election. 

I wasn't talking about Putin winning the war, I was talking about him avoiding defeat. Trump could probably arrange a safe place for Putin to live in peaceful retirement in return for a cessation of hostilities, similar to what the US did with former President Marcos in the Philippines in the 1980's. Or maybe even just lifting the sanctions might be enough. Or pressuring allies not to be so generous with their aid to Ukraine.

There's a growing body of speculation here, and probably in the US, that Putin's main strategy at the moment is stretching out the war until Trump is elected in the expectation that a Trump victory will be of major benefit to Putin.

Edited September 16, 2023 by askandanswer

[Carborendum]

4 hours ago, askandanswer said:

Putin has an army of trolls waiting to do his bidding, just waiting for the word to start sending messages by the millions aimed at influencing opinions. They've had three years to learn from the last election. 

I think you overestimate the Russian ability to understand American mentality to effectively influence us.  Good propaganda and psychological warfare has been the mainstay of China, not Russia. 

Russian propaganda has been notoriously off the mark.  We have decades of the Cold War to attest to that.  You think they finally "got it" after three years? 

Their mentality is much more sledge hammer than finesse.

4 hours ago, askandanswer said:

There's a growing body of speculation here, and probably in the US, that Putin's main strategy at the moment is stretching out the war until Trump is elected in the expectation that a Trump victory will be of major benefit to Putin.

Putin does not have any faith that Trump will win, much less be able (or willing) to help him.

Edited September 16, 2023 by Carborendum

[JohnsonJones]

On 9/16/2023 at 4:03 AM, Carborendum said:

I think you overestimate the Russian ability to understand American mentality to effectively influence us.  Good propaganda and psychological warfare has been the mainstay of China, not Russia. 

Russian propaganda has been notoriously off the mark.  We have decades of the Cold War to attest to that.  You think they finally "got it" after three years? 

Their mentality is much more sledge hammer than finesse.

Putin does not have any faith that Trump will win, much less be able (or willing) to help him.

NYTimes Russian influence reached 126 million through facebook alone

Facebook says Russia still biggest disinformation Player (2021)

From the lower article

Quote

Facebook report released Wednesday says that Russia is still the largest producer of disinformation, a notable finding just five years after Russian operatives launched a far-reaching campaign to infiltrate social media during the 2016 presidential election campaign.

 

Facebook says it has uncovered disinformation campaigns in more than 50 countries since 2017, when it began the cat-and-mouse game of cracking down on political actors seeking to manipulate public debate on its platform. The report, which summarizes 150 disinformation operations the company says it has disrupted in that period, highlights how such coordinated efforts have become more sophisticated and costly to run in recent years — even as these operators struggle to influence large numbers of people as they once did.

--------------

The top countries Facebook identified as originators of most disinformation operations both domestic and foreign were Russia, Iran, Myanmar, the United States and Ukraine.

I think it depends on which social media platform you are using.  It also shows the trends of the voters.  Russia targets Facebook which composes a lot of the older voters (and no surprise, they vote similar to how Russia tries to influence them).

On the otherhand, places like Reddit, TikTok, Discord, instagram are more places China tries to infiltrate, and no surprise, the younger audiences from there tend to sway more in the direction China wishes them to.

In regards to why Russia would be wanting Trump in office now...it DEPENDS on how reliable John Bolton is and if Bolton is reliable, if Trump would still do the same thing he was planning to do...

Bolton says Trump Might have pulled us out of Nato if he had been reelected

John Bolton Putin was waiting for possible US withdrawal from NATO

The top article is the Washington Post article quoted by the bottom article

Quote

Former national security adviser John Bolton said on Friday that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin was “waiting” for a possible United States withdrawal from NATO, claiming former President Trump would have likely made such a move had he been reelected.

Bolton, during a Washington Post Live event, was asked about his memoir, in which he claimed that Trump wanted to leave the military alliance in 2018. The newspaper’s Opinions Editor-at-Large Michael Duffy asked him how close Trump was to withdrawing the United States from NATO.

------------------------------

“I sat back down, I had no idea what he’d do. I thought he’d put his foot over it, but at least he didn’t withdraw then,” he continued. “In a second Trump term, I think he may well have withdrawn from NATO, and I think Putin was waiting for that.”

 

Edited September 17, 2023 by JohnsonJones