Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6816

  • DRW50

    5989

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3461

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

In the meantime, I don't know any country that will trust the U.S. at this point, especially with Trump in office.  Perhaps some of the damage can be repaired once he's out of office, but that will take a lot of time an effort. It has gone beyond undoing agreements that the Obama administration put in place, Trump has actually been destroying some long-standing accords, treaties and agreements that have been in place for generations. Angela Merkel alluded to the U.S. no longer being a reliable partner during the nascent days of the Trump administration and things have only deteriorated since then. 

Trump has been wrecking long-existing partnerships and obliterating what level of trust there was, not to speak of the countries (Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa) that often tended to look warily on the U.S. where the Obama administration had just begun to cultivate trust--I seriously doubt those places will ever have one iota of trust where the U.S. is concerned.

 

Trump has done a ton of damage, diplomatically speaking. His foreign policy is the worst I've ever seen of any president in my lifetime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think the trust probably went away for good after the way we treated the world following the sympathy and support they showed us post 9/11 - we went on to bully them into war, and shamed and belittled any country that didn't agree. I think Obama knew that trust, and those relationships, were gone, and was pragmatic enough to base relationships on a mutual need. 

 

That's the question - do any of these countries need us anymore, after Trump? 

 

I doubt it. 

 

I think we've turned a corner in terms of isolationism and shutting ourselves off. Unless Biden is getting a second wind, then the Democratic nominee is likely to still want to keep much of the world at arm's length. Not in the same way Trump does, but enough to continue to push us more and more into our own bubble that no one can ever penetrate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I actually agree with some things but not totally. 

 

Having family from other countries and getting their perspective, I get more of a clear-eyed perspective of how the U.S. has been perceived over the last couple of decades.  The U.S. was never perceived as being totally trust-worthy by many countries (particularly those with a majority non-white population) but hear me when I say that Obama definitely made inroads in that respect.  Also when it came to formulating treaty agreements, there was almost always a base level of some sort of trust (perhaps out of mutual necessity, as you mentioned) that the U.S. had that, it would, as a nation be a reliable partner (as Angela Merkel alluded to) and keep their end of the agreement.  The U.S., under Trump, doesn't even have that base level of assumed integrity.  Under Trump, the U.S. has shown that not only will they say one thing, one day, only to reverse themselves the very next day but not a word that is said or put into writing, can be taken seriously.  That has not always been the case--that is a new contribution from the Trump administration to the perception of the U.S. worldwide. 

The level of damage that Trump has done is brand new and it will last generations.

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm quoting this from Facebook, but it's truly how I feel as well: I never, ever want to hear again how a businessman can run this country better than any politician.  Because, if this is the best that a businessman can do for the U.S., then, for Christ's sake, bring back the career politicians who've been groomed for the job since they were in the cradle!

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Arnold Schwarzenegger's term as Governor of California pretty much showed that being a businessman and being an elected official have no correlation. Businessmen are about making profit and government is not for profit.

 

One reason that Clinton lost was because she played up experience so much and a lot of voters took that to mean career politician (which isn't necessarily a bad thing to have in a President). Voters are often far to obsessed with choosing outsiders over who is actually qualified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Amen!

 

Meanwhile, Facebook has officially decided to help out Trump again:

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/facebook-trump-biden-ukraine-ad-removal-154944386.html

 

But seriously.  FB knows damn well the claims made in those ads have been debunked, over and over again.  They know, too, how misinformation like that ("BUT HER EMAILS," 'member?) helped Trump enormously in the last election.

 

Again, though, Zuckerberg doesn't give a [!@#$%^&*] about any of that.  He's just there for the clicks.

 

And as much I would miss chatting with many of my peeps on FB, I would not shed one damn tear if someone were to take it down for good.

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Is it just me, or is the wording in that first tweet ("Two foreign-born men who have worked with Rudy Giuliani [...] are expected to be unsealed later today") oddly funny?

 

"Unsealed"?  So, does that mean they've been kept inside Ziploc bags until now?

 

(Don't worry, I get what Tom Winter is saying, no need to explain it to me, lol.)

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Which is, perhaps, the saddest thing to happen in my lifetime.  Since when was it wrong to be educated, or to have paid one's dues, in order to be trusted to run a damn country?  I shouldn't feel like I'm SMARTER than the president, when it's always been the other way around!

 

But, you see, I blame George W. Bush for that.  He was the first Commander-in-Chief who made it okay to be "intellectually incurious," as my hero, Linda Ronstadt, once so aptly put it.*

 

America should have learned never again to elect a man into the WH, who only got married because his wife was a librarian and he needed help reading the big words.

 

 

 

(*Yes, I'm a Linda Ronstadt fan.  Fight me.)

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • @BroderickThank you for the reply. Such acting that they Sharon Gabet and the actor playing Draper still played their relationship after it's over. I picked up on it even though I had no idea about their history. That's such good acting/continuity.  Raven has just moved to London and a custody battle is now brewing for Jamey.
    • Ha-ha-ha, I thought it was Marland who turned Mike into a jerk, but apparently not. I get that they probably felt the Mike/Leslie story had run its course, but they should have at least let them have a kid. Especially since they were soon ensnaring him in a storyline with a woman who couldn't have children (Elizabeth). Of course, no one could have predicted there would be a dearth of Bauers a few years later. I remember this! I remember Holly sitting by the phone, desperate for Ed to call so they could stop the divorce. I forgot it was Rita who never gave him the message. What a bitch. 

      Please register in order to view this content

       But, yeah, this is the Rita I remember at the beginning: very determined to bag Ed. I contend that Holly never, ever got over it, never stopped regretting that the divorce went through. I wish at some point over the years they had let Holly and Ed reunite for more than a brief affair. It feels like a thread that was left hanging. There she is! I was beginning to think I had dreamed up the Rita/Tim/Evie triangle.
    • In the interview posted on knotslanding.net, William Devane described the Greg/Paige storyline as "juvenile".  From that interview I also got the impression that William Devane was on his way out near the end so he wouldn't have returned if there was a season 15.
    • Just started this show. I’m on episode 3. I’m starting to make the connections and understand the family tree better. Still will take time to fully understand everything but it’s exciting. So glad we have a new soap opera in 2025! Excited to join the discussion once I’m caught up.
    • Haley and Jacob had more chemistry in their small interaction than I ever saw between Naomi and Jacob. Same with Haley and Derek actually - that was one of the few times I can recall Derek ever having any life in him. 
    • -- Anita going through Ted and Nicole's wedding album. Really??? -- Dani defending Ted in her conversation with Nicole. Really??? -- Bill wants a child with Hayley. Really??? -- Many people are saying "Dana can't be Eva's mother" because of the way Dana treats her. Maybe she's not her mother, but that biological connection has nothing to do with it. Dana has functioned as Eva's mother all of her life. There's no reason to believe giving birth to her makes the difference. -- Hayley is hilarious for being so clueless and tone deaf when she comments on others' mistakes and flaws. God, she's dumb. -- Alex Alegria continues to suck as Tomas. Soooooo wooden. -- Ambyr Michelle stole the episode.  
    • I was fine with Greg and Paige as a couple (ick factors and all, lol).  What I didn't like was how juvenile their push-and-pull was, with Greg alienating her repeatedly and arbitrarily, and Paige leaving him and/or The Sumner Group in a huff, only to come back together, like, thirty minutes later, lol. I get that Greg was not someone who enjoyed sharing his feelings with others, but c'mon.  He was a little too old for all that on-again/off-again [!@#$%^&*]; and so was Paige, and so were we. Mary Robeson wasn't her aunt, though.  Thanks to WBTV's Primetime Soaps app, I was able to rewatch all of S14, and I learned, in fact, Mary was her aunt - which I guess made Joe her uncle? Truly, I thank the streaming gods for being able to rewatch the final season, because, for the past 30+ years, I never was able to understand how Mary and Joe, Nick and Vanessa, Val's disappearance and Treadwell (and Abby) all fit together; and even now, it still seems a trifle sketchy to me.  (The shortened season and reduced budget wreaked some havoc on the storytelling, did it not, lol?)  But I do appreciate the attempt, because it's probably the first time since Val's pregnancy that the show even attempted to tie the cast together under the same story umbrella. And even if she was trepidatious (sp?) about raising Meg alone, she wasn't the type to express those feelings outwardly.  Laura wasn't going to fidget and cry like Val, or shout wild-eyedly at others like Karen.
    • Oh Lord! They don't dare put her near Jacob. 
    • And knowing Hayley she’d somehow feel like she was the victim

      Please register in order to view this content

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy