The Former Trump Presidency Thread

raydude · Post by **raydude** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 11:37 am

Rip wrote:The problems/issues aren't dog whistles. Calling people a racist if they don't bend to your agenda desires is the dog whistle.

My apologies. In the heat of the moment I used a sentence as shorthand for all the Trump promises, that, if he tries to deliver on them, will still not affect you. Hence, no skin off your back if he does. To wit:

1. Roll back Roe vs. Wade. No effect on you since you don't have a uterus.
2. Bring back stop and frisk policies and implement them on a national level. No effect on you since you're not the targeted demographic of stop and frisk.
3. Repeal Obamacare. No effect on you since you don't carry health insurance anyway.
4. Renegotiate NAFTA and implement border tariffs in a vain attempt to bring jobs back to America. No effect on you since you're not in the tax bracket that would be affected by price increases that would inevitably happen.
5. Ban Muslims or impede their ability to come into the US. No effect on you since you're not the target demographic.
6. Remove regulations on industry related to restricting emissions/pollution and pulling out of the Paris Climate Change Accords. No effect on you because your expected life span won't intersect with the results.

Bottom line, you are free to suggest that the things Trump promises won't happen because, even if they do, you still are relatively unaffected by the outcome.

Captain Caveman · Post by **Captain Caveman** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 11:39 am

Rip wrote:Just that quickly ADL starts walking back their libelous accusations against Bannon.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... acks-down/

Breaking News: Brietbart article defends Brietbart editor who as Chief Strategist will expand Brietbart's access and influence.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 11:41 am

I was laughing at the same thought - first off - self-serving defense that totally misconstrues what the ADL said. And two - anyone who can buy that obvious contrivance isn't paying attention.

Dogstar · Post by **Dogstar** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 11:42 am

Rip wrote:*** Rip quoted a Breitbart article.***

I've read both articles. The way Rip portrays it is a healthy amount of spin. Yes, there's a paragraph from the ADL article:

While there is a long fact pattern of evidence that Breitbart served as a platform for a wide range of bigotry and there is some controversy related to statements from Mr. Bannon’s divorce proceedings in 2007, we are not aware of any anti-Semitic statements made by Bannon himself. In fact, Jewish employees of Breitbart have challenged the characterization of him and defended him from charges of anti-Semitism. Some have pointed out that Breitbart Jerusalem was launched during his tenure.

The rest of the ADL article is basically tying Bannon to the alt-right and bigoted statements and articles that have appeared on his watch. This is opposed to what Rip quoted, which is the article from Breitbart, which is basically a denial of the claims of the ADL article. They're not the same thing.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 11:47 am

It's funny because RIp explicitly states the point of the ADL "walkback" - which is likely why they added that last statement.

Rip wrote:...libelous accusations against Bannon...

It is sort of chilling when the Chief Strategist of the White House is working for a guy who has promised to loosen libel laws to muzzle free speech. And then you can use that fear to propagandize. Never say these guys aren't smart.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 11:58 am

raydude wrote:
Rip wrote:The problems/issues aren't dog whistles. Calling people a racist if they don't bend to your agenda desires is the dog whistle.
My apologies. In the heat of the moment I used a sentence as shorthand for all the Trump promises, that, if he tries to deliver on them, will still not affect you. Hence, no skin off your back if he does. To wit:

1. Roll back Roe vs. Wade. No effect on you since you don't have a uterus.
2. Bring back stop and frisk policies and implement them on a national level. No effect on you since you're not the targeted demographic of stop and frisk.
3. Repeal Obamacare. No effect on you since you don't carry health insurance anyway.
4. Renegotiate NAFTA and implement border tariffs in a vain attempt to bring jobs back to America. No effect on you since you're not in the tax bracket that would be affected by price increases that would inevitably happen.
5. Ban Muslims or impede their ability to come into the US. No effect on you since you're not the target demographic.
6. Remove regulations on industry related to restricting emissions/pollution and pulling out of the Paris Climate Change Accords. No effect on you because your expected life span won't intersect with the results.

Bottom line, you are free to suggest that the things Trump promises won't happen because, even if they do, you still are relatively unaffected by the outcome.

What tax bracket am I in?

Either way just because certain things won't effect team doesn't mean I don't care about them.

In the end I care about tons of things but I care about each one in different amounts and with different priorities. Just like pretty much every other person in the country. Kinda how democratic government works.

PLW · Post by **PLW** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:03 pm

Nice, long, analysis in Slate Star Codex about why Trump will probably not be bad for minorities in the U.S. Obviously, no argument like this can be fully convincing, but it led me to update by priors a bit. And to be clear, Scott Alexander is no Trump fan:

Stop centering criticism of Donald Trump around this sort of stuff, and switch to literally anything else. Here is an incompetent thin-skinned ignorant boorish fraudulent omnihypocritical demagogue with no idea how to run a country, whose philosophy of governance basically boils down to “I’m going to win and not lose, details to be filled in later”, and all you can do is repeat, again and again, how he seems popular among weird Internet teenagers who post frog memes. In the middle of an emotionally incontinent reality TV show host getting his hand on the nuclear button, your chief complaint is that in the middle of a few dozen denunciations of the KKK, he once delayed denouncing the KKK for an entire 24 hours before going back to denouncing it again. When a guy who says outright that he won’t respect elections unless he wins them does, somehow, win an election, the headlines are how he once said he didn’t like globalists which means he must be anti-Semitic.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:05 pm

Captain Caveman wrote:
Rip wrote:Just that quickly ADL starts walking back their libelous accusations against Bannon.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... acks-down/
Breaking News: Brietbart article defends Brietbart editor who as Chief Strategist will expand Brietbart's access and influence.

Perhaps you missed the ADL walkback?

They added this.

We are not aware of any anti-Semitic statements from Bannon.

Not that you guys won't be trying to suggest he is anyway.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:11 pm

That is literally what we are talking about - they don't have evidence - they have inference. They are covering themselves for that reason. And it sure doesn't look like a walk back at all. They never called him explicitly an anti-Semite - they linked the alt-right with anti-antisemitism (true statement) and then linked Bannon with the alt-right (alleged but pretty much acknowledged).

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:14 pm

malchior wrote:That is literally what we are talking about - they don't have evidence - they have inference. They are covering themselves for that reason. And it sure doesn't look like a walk back at all. They never called him explicitly an anti-Semite - they linked the alt-right with anti-antisemitism (true statement) and Bannon's link with the alt-right (alleged but pretty much acknowledged).

There is no link to the alt-right other than observing and reporting on it.

Not sure how you can even say acknowledged with a straight face when the article I linked DIRECTLY addressed that. Perhaps you missed it?

Breitbart.com is not “the premier website of the Alt Right.” The only supposed “alt-right” content on the site, among tens of thousands of articles, is one widely-cited journalistic article, “An Establishment Conservative’s Guide to the Alt-Right.”

As one author more familiar with the alt-right noted recently, the main alt-right sites are “/r/altright, Stormfront, and 4chan’s politics board” — not Breitbart News.

Captain Caveman · Post by **Captain Caveman** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:17 pm

"We're the platform for the alt-right"-- Steve Bannon

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:18 pm

Rip wrote:
malchior wrote:That is literally what we are talking about - they don't have evidence - they have inference. They are covering themselves for that reason. And it sure doesn't look like a walk back at all. They never called him explicitly an anti-Semite - they linked the alt-right with anti-antisemitism (true statement) and Bannon's link with the alt-right (alleged but pretty much acknowledged).
There is no link to the alt-right other than observing and reporting on it.

"We're the platform for the alt-right," Bannon told me proudly when I interviewed him at the Republican National Convention (RNC) in July.

edit:

CC beat me to it.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:44 pm

Obviously something he worded poorly and miscommunicated. But if the are the voice of the alt-right they are doing a pretty shitty job of it. I read tons of articles and I can't remember a single one telling me how horrible non-white people are.

In the end he is no more attached to the Alt-Right than lots of Democrats including Ellison are to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas which could give the Alt-right lessons in hate.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:45 pm

Steve Bannon Suggests There Are Too Many Asian CEOs In Silicon Valley

No, the white supremacist clearly isn't a white supremacist

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:49 pm

hepcat wrote: edit: CC beat me to it.

But you provided a link

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:50 pm

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:07 pm

I'm failing to see why that's newsworthy. Isn't that what he's been saying all along?

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:08 pm

Rip wrote:Obviously something he worded poorly and miscommunicated.

Spin, Rip...spin as if your life depended on it!

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:15 pm

Rip wrote:Obviously something he worded poorly and miscommunicated. But if the are the voice of the alt-right they are doing a pretty shitty job of it. I read tons of articles and I can't remember a single one telling me how horrible non-white people are.

For a guy that's never on record for saying white nationalist things, he sure is popular among white nationalists. Weird, right?

I have no evidence that Bannon’s a racist or that he’s an anti-Semite; the Huffington Post’s blaring headline “WHITE NATIONALIST IN THE WHITE HOUSE” is overstated, at the very least. With that said, as I wrote at The Washington Post in August, Bannon has openly embraced the racist and anti-Semitic alt-right — he called his Breitbart “the platform of the alt-right.”

Unrelated to the topic, but I'm thinking Snopes will be asking for donations soon. I have to believe their servers are getting pounded over the last few weeks.

Captain Caveman · Post by **Captain Caveman** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:16 pm

I'm just a renegade Jew, but it's hard to escape the alt-rightness of a website that publishes defenses of the "glorious heritage" of the Confederate flag, has a "Black Crime" that affirms people's beliefs in inherent black criminality, and encourages women to stay offline to avoid harassment.

Archinerd · Post by **Archinerd** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:17 pm

Rip wrote:Obviously something he worded poorly and miscommunicated.

What's the obvious interpretation of his comment then?

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:20 pm

Archinerd wrote:
Rip wrote:Obviously something he worded poorly and miscommunicated.
What's the obvious interpretation of his comment then?

That his favorite pudding is butterscotch. D'uh.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:25 pm

Smoove_B wrote:For a guy that's never on record for saying white nationalist things, he sure is popular among white nationalists. Weird, right?

My argument is similar - a market based one. You have to figure any surviving media outlet has an audience and caters to that audience. Like if you saw a bunch of people who look a whole lot like junkies hanging outside a house - you might suspect it is a shooting den. Even if you go in the front door and see that they are a "legit" pain management shop; even then you might still be suspicious it is not on the up and up when that waiting room has a whole lot of those same people hanging around. Hearing the waiting room staff say, "Hey we only treat pain - nothing to see here" *might be* undermined by the totality of the circumstances such as the head doctor bragging, "Yeah we are the platform for people who like to ride the dragon".

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:28 pm

Rip wrote:
Captain Caveman wrote:
Rip wrote:Just that quickly ADL starts walking back their libelous accusations against Bannon.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... acks-down/
Breaking News: Brietbart article defends Brietbart editor who as Chief Strategist will expand Brietbart's access and influence.
Perhaps you missed the ADL walkback?

They added this.

We are not aware of any anti-Semitic statements from Bannon.
Not that you guys won't be trying to suggest he is anyway.

This is just idiotic, Rip. It's not a "walkback." It was one of the 5 things that are part of the original ADL backgrounder on Bannon, "Stephen Bannon: 5 Things to Know." It wasn't originally 4 things. It was always 5 things. And the 5th thing was that no verifiable anti-semitic statements are directly attributed to Bannon.

That's not a walkback. You see, including facts that don't actually fit a particular narrative - even if it's the story you are trying to tell - isn't a bad thing. It's typical of ADL backgrounders. They try to be objective and non-inflammatory. That's a good thing!

And, by the way, trying to say that Bannon and Breitbart have no connections to the Alt Right movement is laughable.

Freyland · Post by **Freyland** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:30 pm

Any chance of you guys not quoting Rip? It's messing up my otherwise readable forum, even if some things appear out of context.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:33 pm

We're the platform for the alt-Rip.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:47 pm

Smoove_B wrote:
Rip wrote:Obviously something he worded poorly and miscommunicated. But if the are the voice of the alt-right they are doing a pretty shitty job of it. I read tons of articles and I can't remember a single one telling me how horrible non-white people are.
For a guy that's never on record for saying white nationalist things, he sure is popular among white nationalists. Weird, right?

I have no evidence that Bannon’s a racist or that he’s an anti-Semite; the Huffington Post’s blaring headline “WHITE NATIONALIST IN THE WHITE HOUSE” is overstated, at the very least. With that said, as I wrote at The Washington Post in August, Bannon has openly embraced the racist and anti-Semitic alt-right — he called his Breitbart “the platform of the alt-right.”
Unrelated to the topic, but I'm thinking Snopes will be asking for donations soon. I have to believe their servers are getting pounded over the last few weeks.

and Clinton is popular among the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Is she a terrorist?

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:50 pm

Freyland wrote:Any chance of you guys not quoting Rip? It's messing up my otherwise readable forum, even if some things appear out of context.

Yeah, that thought's occurred to me too. What can you do though, right?

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:52 pm

Archinerd wrote:
Rip wrote:Obviously something he worded poorly and miscommunicated.
What's the obvious interpretation of his comment then?

That they report on and discuss what it is that these groups get upset about what their agenda is, then analyze the fundamental issues at play when you strip away the racial bias and hatred. You know instead of just writing them all off as deplorable and not listening to any of the issues they face that lead them to cling to those ridiculous biases.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:52 pm

Hmm...I'm thinking the Rip-bot might need a little adjustment today. It was on course for a little while but just had a complete logic loop blow out.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:56 pm

It's to be expected. You can't build up that much centrifugal force from spinning that fast without damaging something.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:56 pm

Rip wrote:and Clinton is popular among the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Is she a terrorist?

Breibart thinks so. We've come full circle.

Freyland · Post by **Freyland** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 2:12 pm

Smoove_B wrote:
Rip wrote:and Clinton is popular among the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Is she a terrorist?
Breibart thinks so. We've come full circle.

Well, she certainly bombed the election.

Archinerd · Post by **Archinerd** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 2:47 pm

Rip wrote:
Archinerd wrote:
Rip wrote:Obviously something he worded poorly and miscommunicated.
What's the obvious interpretation of his comment then?
That they report on and discuss what it is that these groups get upset about what their agenda is, then analyze the fundamental issues at play when you strip away the racial bias and hatred. You know instead of just writing them all off as deplorable and not listening to any of the issues they face that lead them to cling to those ridiculous biases.

Oh, that is obvious. Bonus points for working in an argument on why it's okay to be Racist.

Paingod · Post by **Paingod** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:07 pm

Rip wrote:analyze the fundamental issues at play when you strip away the racial bias and hatred

I think that once you strip away all the racial bias and hatred, all you have left is a white pointed hat with a couple eye holes.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:10 pm

Well, at least he's finally admitting that there is racial bias and hatred at work.

Baby steps, men. Baby steps.

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:10 pm

Freyland wrote:
Smoove_B wrote:
Rip wrote:and Clinton is popular among the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Is she a terrorist?
Breibart thinks so. We've come full circle.
Well, she certainly bombed the election.

snert

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:21 pm

Trump presents his backside to Romney. Romney displays incredible suction powers.

So much for that whole integrity thing.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:29 pm

hepcat wrote:Trump presents his backside to Romney. Romney displays incredible suction powers.

So much for that whole integrity thing.

Well, we'll see what comes out of the meeting. I don't begrudge Romney meeting with Trump and the transition team at least to see what their approach is, and whether there's a plausible service role that wouldn't involve compromising his integrity (though that seems unlikely at this point).

Also, there are a lot of crazies in the Trump orbit (not counting Trump himself). In some ways Romney taking a cabinet position would be a great comfort to me, because god knows what lunatic Trump would appoint if Romney turns him down.

That said, if Romney goes the Christie / Cruz abrupt obsequiousness role, that would be tremendously disappointing.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:31 pm

It's already been proven that if anyone stands up to Trump and calls him out on his blind spots, they're gone within 24 hours. So I doubt we'll see anything but subservience from Trump's new house pet.