The Trump Presidency

I'm gonna say the light switch thing is probably apocryphal. Considering the number of aides and attendants, it's doubtful they go into any room that a flunky hasn't already flipped the switch for.
 
mqt said:
[tw]828768074031587328[/tw]

What in the actual ****?

Although in the White House's defense, nobody covered the San Bernadino shootings because that place doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

they also can't spell "attacker"
 
striker42 said:
I'm gonna say the light switch thing is probably apocryphal. Considering the number of aides and attendants, it's doubtful they go into any room that a flunky hasn't already flipped the switch for.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't buy the light switch thing for a second, and I'm willing to accept a lot of crazy stories from the Trump WH.
 
you probably doubt Palin could see Russia from her house
or the Clintons removed all of the W's !!!!

Hater
 
C4BwRM1UMAEu3v_.jpg:large
 
57Brave said:
C4BwRM1UMAEu3v_.jpg:large
Click to expand...

This one is dubious at best, but I'd at least be willing to believe it. I'm wary of any of these weird character stories, though. Besides, Trump gives enough ammunition in his own words that I don't particularly care what absurdly childish things he might be thinking or saying behind closed doors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
The stories about the administration are a little out of control. While I'd absolutely believe that Trump and his advisers aren't particularly happy with Spicer and might ponder making a change at some point, I think the idea that getting lampooned by SNL is the biggest issue is a little far fetched. I think the fact that Spicer has done such a poor job handing the press that he's become a joke is probably a much bigger problem.

Spicer is an oddity. I would have thought someone like Trump who is all about branding and image would have had a better feel for picking a guy whose sole job is to press relations. I don't doubt Trump knows some of the best PR guys in the country. You'd think he'd tap one of them.
 
Spicer seems like a sacrificial lamb to me, in line with a pattern we've seen from Trump.
Go full bore crazy, people are outraged, back off a little bit, people are a bit mollified.
Hire a disaster of a press secretary, let him be mocked, can him, hire a still confrontational but mildly respectable replacement, bask in the glory of the replacement's acceptance.

I voted for this man and am still optimistic about his presidency. But he is tarnishing the credibility of the office in a way that I find reprehensible.
 
This is his hire to be the face of his administration.

Brings us back to questioning his "temperament"

We have given a man the nuclear codes that conceivably loses it over a woman playing his Press Secretary.
Though not verified -- it is conceivable
Frighteningly conceivable
 
Hawk said:
I subscribe to the NYT (the writing, if not the reporting, is top notch) and have defended them at various times in the past. Print media needs all the love it can get.
Click to expand...

I'm not gonna claim the NYTimes is void of perspective when it comes to how they present the news, but if you are claiming their reporting is lacking, then you must believe there is no good reporting. No extant media outlet compares to the Times in the depth, breadth, and quality of their reporting.
 
Let's not forget that Spicer is Reince's guy from the RNC, so it seems likely that he came 'recommended' in the Priebus package.
 
Metaphysicist said:
No extant media outlet compares to the Times in the depth, breadth, and quality of their reporting.
Click to expand...

Good grief man - get out some.

Reuters, AP, AFP ... that's actual reporting.

The public editors of the NYT are world-class content curators, but propping the Gray Lady up beyond that is one risky proposition.
 
Metaphysicist said:
lol, nevermind. We clearly live on different planets.
Click to expand...

Frankly, I'd rather live on another planet than in a box.

If you don't think Breitbart is worth a read (or RT worth a watch) in 2017 - if only to see how one side is spinning a particular issue or event - then you are only seeing the half you want to see.
 
57Brave said:
This is his hire to be the face of his administration.

Brings us back to questioning his "temperament"

We have given a man the nuclear codes that conceivably loses it over a woman playing his Press Secretary.
Though not verified -- it is conceivable
Frighteningly conceivable
Click to expand...

I get this, but we're past the point of questioning whether or not he's fit for office. At this point we need to shift our focus to his policies and actions. We can't un-elect him based on him being a toddler. We can, however, beat him in 2020 by focusing on how he does as President.
 
Actually the 2018 mid terms we can elect a congress to keep him in check
We can constantly identify each and every legislator to Trump through their votes on bills and confidence.
And that is the on going conversation.

Public resistance has been effective.
On a number of issues

3 weeks in
.......

Keep a light on them
 
Hawk said:
If you don't think Breitbart is worth a read (or RT worth a watch) in 2017 - if only to see how one side is spinning a particular issue or event
Click to expand...

Sure, they are great examples of spin. I'm on board with that. But that's pretty different that what I quoted.

If you dismiss the NYTimes, you have bought into propaganda. End of story.
 
Hawk said:
Reuters, AP, AFP ... that's actual reporting.
Click to expand...

... those are wire services. There is more to a news outlet than that. I stand by my statement that no American media outlet has the depth, breath, and quality of reporting that the Times does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top