The Trump Presidency

57Brave said:
Trump’s analysis of people and situations hinges on whether they exalt him. A news organization that challenges him is inevitably “failing.” A politician who pushes back at him is invariably a loser. Middle-school cliques have more moral discernment.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/04/...-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region
...........
Click to expand...
This was back in August when nobody thought DT'd actually win. Wonder what Krauthammer thinks now.

Columnist and Fox commentator Charles Krauthammer is a board-certified psychiatrist . . . attempted to diagnose what he thinks is wrong with Donald Trump.

Trump’s hypersensitivity and unedited, untempered Pavlovian responses are, shall we say, unusual in both ferocity and predictability.

"This is beyond narcissism. I used to think Trump was an 11-year-old, an undeveloped schoolyard bully. I was off by about 10 years. His needs are more primitive, an infantile hunger for approval and praise, a craving that can never be satisfied. He lives in a cocoon of solipsism where the world outside himself has value — indeed exists — only insofar as it sustains and inflates him."
 
i have no problem with that part

i do have a problem that he is overall always deflecting or scared to call Putin out. it's beyond strange
 
mqt said:
C'mon, you have to come with a source more credible than a tabloid.
Click to expand...

Daily Mail is a hard one to figure, but it's not a tabloid. They actually had credentialed reporters on both campaign trails this cycle.
 
sturg33 said:
Love the outrage about Trump's comment to o'Reilly about the US not being innocent...

HOW DARE HE SAY THE MOST OBVIOUS THING IN WORLD HISTORY. WE APOLOGIZE FOR NOTHING
Click to expand...

I have absolutely no problem with him saying that--in fact, I think it should be an acceptable part of public discourse instead of something that people get shamed for. What I object to is that Donald Trump basically mentioned it as a way to excuse state violence and bad actions.
 
Hawk said:
Daily Mail is a hard one to figure, but it's not a tabloid. They actually had credentialed reporters on both campaign trails this cycle.
Click to expand...

it's a tabloid for sure

it might have reporters on campaign trails but it's still a tabloid

it has also paid money out for liable cases a bunch of times too

The Daily Mail is a British daily middle-market tabloid newspaper owned by the Daily Mail and General Trust and published in London. ... Its sister paper The Mail on Sunday was launched in 1982.
Click to expand...
 
goldfly said:
it's a tabloid for sure

it might have reporters on campaign trails but it's still a tabloid

it has also paid money out for liable cases a bunch of times too
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not talking about the British edition (which I think is one of the most read papers in tony Britain).

I'm talking about the website, which is what is hugely popular in the United States and the only reason why they received a credential this cycle.

I mean, I struggle with Daily Mail as a reputable source (and never take anything originating from there as the gospel truth unless I can confirm it elsewhere). But I confess, I do read it. Almost every day. Their curation algorithm and site layout are very, very good.
 
Hawk said:
Well, I'm not talking about the British edition (which I think is one of the most read paper in tony Britain).

I'm talking about the website, which is what is hugely popular in the United States and the only reason why they received a credential this cycle.
Click to expand...

Did you just say it was YUGE?? ;)
 
"It's amazing the amount of respect and civility that Trump & admin have shown Russia/Putin when you compare it to how they've treated pretty much everyone else."
 
Hawk said:
Daily Mail is a hard one to figure, but it's not a tabloid. They actually had credentialed reporters on both campaign trails this cycle.
Click to expand...

I still think it's pretty fair to say that if the only news outlet picking up on what would be a major scandal is best described as "hard to figure out" then perhaps we might want to take that report with a grain of salt.
 
sturg33 said:
Love the outrage about Trump's comment to o'Reilly about the US not being innocent...

HOW DARE HE SAY THE MOST OBVIOUS THING IN WORLD HISTORY. WE APOLOGIZE FOR NOTHING
Click to expand...

Like Julio, I have no issue with Trump suggesting we might be awful sometimes, but he's literally using that to defend killing political enemies and journalists.
 
goldfly said:
i have no problem with that part

i do have a problem that he is overall always deflecting or scared to call Putin out. it's beyond strange
Click to expand...

It is beyond strange.

There's this narrative that he's a master negotiator. There's a parallel narrative that we're going to become ISIS-fighting pals with Russia, and make some kind of grand arms-control/security bargain. Why is it that the master negotiator approaches every other party to negotiation with extreme bluster and hostility, but treats this one with deference that borders on the obsequious?
 
Julio3000 said:
Why is it that the master negotiator approaches every other party to negotiation with extreme bluster and hostility, but treats this one with deference that borders on the obsequious?
Click to expand...

Isn't this a bit of a Catch-22 though? I mean, honestly, who would you rather he bluster? Enrique Nieto or Vladimir Putin?

We saw 8 years of essentially the exact opposite tact from Obama (kind words for our 'friends' and a stone wall for the former USSR) and nobody found it curious then.
 
mqt said:
I still think it's pretty fair to say that if the only news outlet picking up on what would be a major scandal is best described as "hard to figure out" then perhaps we might want to take that report with a grain of salt.
Click to expand...

That's a misquote. I didn't say the Daily Mail was "hard to figure out". I said it was "a hard one to figure" ... it has a conservative bent, but is largely just a syndicated content mill (with the exception of scattered reports like the one in question). So, in that sense, it's no different than Daily Kos or Huffington Post except it actually has a legitimate print publication behind it.

Truth be told, you want your news media to be "hard to figure" and not blatantly partisan (like the NYT).
 
Hawk said:
Isn't this a bit of a Catch-22 though? I mean, honestly, who would you rather he bluster? Enrique Nieto or Vladimir Putin?

We saw 8 years of essentially the exact opposite tact from Obama (kind words for our 'friends' and a stone wall for the former USSR) and nobody found it curious then.
Click to expand...

That's a false choice. I'd rather people stop rationalizing and making excuses for his behavior.
 
Hawk said:
Isn't this a bit of a Catch-22 though? I mean, honestly, who would you rather he bluster? Enrique Nieto or Vladimir Putin?

We saw 8 years of essentially the exact opposite tact from Obama (kind words for our 'friends' and a stone wall for the former USSR) and nobody found it curious then.
Click to expand...

What do those quote marks mean?

Should we have sent Putin a fruit basket after the annexation of Crimea?
 
Julio3000 said:
I'd rather people stop rationalizing and making excuses for his behavior.
Click to expand...

At some point - if it hasn't happened already - most people are likely to stop considering every word, action, or tweet, emanating from DJT as an apocalyptic flare or example of gross misconduct.

That's the danger of crying wolf too early and too often.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top