Bed

New Prez

61 posts in this topic

I have never been so depressed over an election in my life.  I actually have a degree in Political Science and am just astonished that this country could elect Trump.  To me, he doesn't meet the basic minimum qualifications for being president.  The idea of him with the nuclear codes is genuinely terrifying.  Many people don't really that that is one area where the President's power is vast and absolute.  There are no constraints on it.

Also, the fact of unified Republican control of all branches of government is scary to me.

I also fear the Paul Ryan agenda being enacted.  Much of it is directly contradictory to what Trump promised people during the election.  But, I'm not sure Trump will really care.  And, even if he would, I'm not sure he would understand that Ryan was doing standard issue Republican stuff that is contrary to what he said he wanted.  Trump has the attention span of a gnat, doesn't read and listens to the last person to talk to him.  I think there is a good chance he is just a rubber stamp for whatever horrific ideas that Ryan can come up with.  Not just the ACA repeal, but wholesale destruction of Medicare and Social Security that many older people rely on.

I am dumbfounded that something like only 38% of people thought he was qualified to be president and he still won.  How can someone vote for someone that they don't think is qualified?  How can you make that person the most powerful individual in the world?

thelilbear and Clucky like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stopped drinking for my Meniere's disease and some other blood tests are showing liver abnormalities and yet...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/13/2016 at 1:08 AM, Neopetsmom said:

I have never been so depressed over an election in my life.  I actually have a degree in Political Science and am just astonished that this country could elect Trump.  To me, he doesn't meet the basic minimum qualifications for being president.

. . .

I am dumbfounded that something like only 38% of people thought he was qualified to be president and he still won.  How can someone vote for someone that they don't think is qualified?  How can you make that person the most powerful individual in the world?

I think that most of the country moved past this when Obama was elected. One of the big criticisms of him at the time was that a "nobody" senator lacked the necessary experience to be President. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that you're making the distinction that he's not qualified because he's not educated in law. I wonder what qualifications others considered? Most of the criticisms I heard people making in this regard concerned the success (or lack thereof) of his business ventures as well as his demeanor.

11 hours ago, Kirby-oh said:

I stopped drinking for my Meniere's disease and some other blood tests are showing liver abnormalities and yet...

Huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Kirby-oh said:

I stopped drinking for my Meniere's disease and some other blood tests are showing liver abnormalities and yet...

You need a few drinks after last week but you can't amirite? 

So many people here where I live had parties for Hillary... but these parties fell so short. The next morning, there were so many left-overs at work. Chips, cheese, chicken, pizza. It was somewhat delightful, but much negative energy around. The food felt tainted for some. It was a good 2 days of free food for me. :P

Edited by Bed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bed said:

You need a few drinks after last week but you can't amirite? 

So many people here where I live had parties for Hillary... but these parties fell so short. The next morning, there were so many left-overs at work. Chips, cheese, chicken, pizza. It was somewhat delightful, but much negative energy around. The food felt tainted for some. It was a good 2 days of free food for me. :P

mhm.

 

On 11/13/2016 at 2:08 AM, Neopetsmom said:

I have never been so depressed over an election in my life.  I actually have a degree in Political Science and am just astonished that this country could elect Trump.  To me, he doesn't meet the basic minimum qualifications for being president.  The idea of him with the nuclear codes is genuinely terrifying.  Many people don't really that that is one area where the President's power is vast and absolute.  There are no constraints on it.

I don't understand how a generation who lived through the Cold War could do this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Shattered Rift said:

I think that most of the country moved past this when Obama was elected. One of the big criticisms of him at the time was that a "nobody" senator lacked the necessary experience to be President. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that you're making the distinction that he's not qualified because he's not educated in law. I wonder what qualifications others considered? Most of the criticisms I heard people making in this regard concerned the success (or lack thereof) of his business ventures as well as his demeanor.

Wow.  A lot to say here.  First, I do not in any way think that a president has to be a lawyer.  While, I think it is doubtful that anyone who hasn't worked in public service previously is likely to be qualified, I think that is possible.  It just isn't true of Trump.

To be qualified, I think there are 2 parts:  knowledge and temperament.  Trump utterly and completely fails on both of these.

He is ignorant about vast quantities of things.  Much of it relates to government and our Constitutional system.  While I don't think a president has to have served in federal government, a president should have knowledge about it.  Trump didn't know what the nuclear triad is.  Trump didn't know that Russia had gone into the Crimea.  Trump shows he doesn't know anything about the Constitution.  His comments on the ACA show he doesn't understand the structure of the law (note, I am not attacking his opinion of it -- I am attacking his lack of knowledge.  Paul Ryan doesn't like the ACA, but understands its structure).  Trump still thinks vaccines cause autism (thoroughly debunked).  In fact, he is all to eager to accept conspiracy theories.

During the election he appeared with Alex Jones (Infowars) and called him after the election to praise him.  Alex Jones believes that 9/11 was a false flag incident, that the Sandy Hook shooting was a staged event with child actors, and that Obama and Hillary Clinton are actual demons reeking of sulphur.

Trump felt the attack on ISIS to retake Mosul should have been a sneak attack.  He doesn't realize that Iraq is a flat, desert.  You can't bring thousands of troops there and sneak attack.

I could go on for a long time pointing out his cavernous ignorance.  

This is far, far different from any concerns that might have existed regarding Obama or George Bush (the younger).  One could justifiably question whether Obama had enough experience in government to be president, but there was never any question as to his knowledge.  With George Bush, his only experience in government was being governor of Texas (many people don't understand the Texas governor has very little power -- the real power is in the Lieutenant Governor).  And, George Bush was also lacking in knowledge.  That said, he was nowhere near as ignorant as Trump.  And, I will give Bush credit for trying to surround himself with people who had the knowledge he didn't have.  And, he listened to them (sometimes to his detriment, but he at least gathered knowledge).  

Trump surrounds himself with sycophants and yes men and he doesn't think he needs to listen to them.  Trump at the convention said he alone could solve things and has said he knows more than generals.  He rejected the consensus of all US intelligence agencies (as well as those of the other major Western countries) that Russia was being hacking that resulted in the Wikileaks emails being posted.  He said they don't know anything.  Based upon nothing, he rejected their conclusions because he thinks he knows more than genuine experts who have studied this.

When he went to met with Obama, his staff with him didn't know that they had to replace the entire West Wing staff.  They asked how many would be staying on.  So, his staff is perhaps not much better than he is.  So far he is not surrounding himself with people of distinction.  Preibus as COS is, at best, mediocre.  Bannon as chief strategist is genuinely horrifying.

So - getting past the fact that Trump knows nothing about foreign policy, domestic policy, or the U.S. Constitution, we come to temperament.  You might be able to convince me that a person of good termperament who was ignorant of government might possibly be a good President if he knew lots of other things (and, no, Trump is not a good businessman) and hired good people who knew of government.  While I can criticize Bush or Obama, I think both of them were men of acceptable temperament.

Trump has a terrible temperament.  Let's leave aside for the moment that he is racist, xenophobic and misogynistic.  Let's look at other things.  First, he is a raging narcissist.  Look up the criteria for it.  He is incredibly thin skinned.  Almost one of the first things he did after being elected was tweet to complain about protests (protesting being one of those things that he probably doesn't understand is Constitutionally protected).

He is motivated by revenge.  He has said this himself.  This is not a good quality to have in a President.  I remember when Nixon kept an enemies list and went after his enemies (which was a big part of why he had to resign).  Trump is 1000 times worse than Nixon.  Nixon was knowledgeable but felled by his temperament (and his was better than Trump's).

He is a huge liar.  It dumbfounds me that anyone felt Hillary was less honest and trustworthy than him.  I understand why some people would question her, but Trump is far, far worse.  I would watch his rallies at times and just hear him state falsehood after falsehood after falsehood.  I could understand getting something wrong but he would repeat these day after day.  For example, when the emails on Weiner's laptop were found, there were news reports (never confirmed) that there were 650,000 emails on the computer.  Of course, the vast majority of these were Weiner's own emails.  A much smaller group were those of Abedin.  Trump repeatedly said that the 650,000 emails were Hillary Clinton emails.  No, that was not remotely true.

During the last week of the election, Trump said that Obama screamed at a protestor and said terrible things about him.  There was video of Obama and he was very polite and said the person had a right to protest.  No screaming.

He said in a debate that he never said that climate change was a Chinese hoax.  The tweet where he said it was right there online.

I could literally go on for a long time regarding things he said that were just untrue.  Telling a false thing over and over again doesn't make it true.

He has an authoritarian temperament.  He admires dictators for their "strength" such as Putin (but others as well).  He seems to think he was being elected king rather than president (one of the more amusing things is the things he said he would do when president that a president literally can't do).  In fact, his statement that he alone can fix things sounds more like a Fascist temperament than just being authoritarian.

He is easily baited which is tied to his being thin skinned.  Maybe that isn't serious when he didn't hold real power, but it is serious for a president.  It is particularly serious when he could be baited by a hostile government into doing and saying things that would get us into a war.

Speaking of war.  He doesn't understand military and nuclear power and doesn't understand you can't just start a war because you don't like what people say.  He actually said he didn't know why we had nuclear weapons if we couldn't use them (a high school student would learn the concept of nuclear deterrence).  He said that if Iranian sailors made rude gestures to U.S. sailors, that we should shoot them (thereby igniting a major war with Iran and others).

He is just not temperamentally qualified to be president.

Edited by Neopetsmom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To keep my thoughts on this brief, because it's not my country...

A: In regards to earlier comments, a plurality system will always favour two party. If you ever want to see more representation you need to push for a proportional representation system, but I can't see that happening in a few hundred years at best in America.

B: Assuming trump doesn't blow the world up...I can live with most of the things. That's obviously largely because I don't have to live with them, being in a different country and all...but a trump administration is practically guaranteed to ###### over the environment, and that affects the world. It's already thought that we've passed or are around critical mass for stopping global warming, and a trump administration is going to guarantee we cross that line and then some.

Luckily I'm not planning on having kids. But anybody that does might be bringing them into a ######ty future, based on all predictions.

Edited by Sinical
thelilbear likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I think I have no reason to doubt that Trump is completely ignoring Scientists. I speculate that he will increase drilling and oil production. It will lower gas prices, stimulate the economy, everyone will praise him. Oil was necessary for us to get out of the recession, but it's pass that time now. Even though America produces... I want to say 10% of the world's CO2 output, important agreements and initiatives is needed to help the rest of the world. This mean increased production of batteries, solar, wind, etc... Or turning away from beef, palm oil... Not only that, but the grip the oil industry has on our politics is bottomless. There's a limited amount of oil on earth too, so it's not a question that we need to be prepared to rely on a different energy source.

My version of the future: Nuclear + Renewable/Sustainable energy. Universal income (because of automation). Comes in a package with universal health care and other social security, higher education will start mixing with virtual reality / games - which will be free (something I'm interested in contributing). Genetics will probably be the center of politics. Finally, we can all live to 200 years of age! True AI will probably come after this time, which may enhance or end humanity...

I want to get to that place where I can live longer sooner than later. The environment for innovation is bleak. Yes, climate change will do major damage but It's almost pass that point of no return. I don't see the world changing anytime soon, unless asia somehow pulls a miracle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic, but, NPM -

With George Bush, his only experience in government was being governor of Texas (many people don't understand the Texas governor has very little power -- the real power is in the Lieutenant Governor).

Can you explain this? I'm interested as to why this is the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Trajectory said:

Slightly off topic, but, NPM -

 

 

Can you explain this? I'm interested as to why this is the case.

The Texas governor has little power.  He can appoint members to various boards and commissions.  Those are usually for a 4 year term and are not easily removed.  So a new governor already has people in place and has to wait for terms to end to appoint anyone.  But, even this is not that powerful since offices of any power in the state are elected.  Not just Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General but Land Commissioner (currently Jeb's son George P. Bush), Railroad Commissioner (you wouldn't know it from the name but this is the agency that regulates oil and gas which is hugely important in Texas), Agriculture Commissioner (the doofus who is head of it is on the short list for Agriculture Secretary for Trump - scary thought but it gets him out of Texas which is good) and all the way down to all judges and the state board of education.

The other main duty is that the Governor can veto bills.  

Basically, that's it (oh, he can mobilize the National Guard and Texas Rangers).

The Lieutenant Governor, on the other hand, has real power.  He is basically in charge of the State Senate.  He appoints the chair of every committee and directs what committee a bill goes to and when. In short, no bill passes the State Senate unless the Lieutenant Governor wants it to pass. Well, not unless he really messes up.

Bear in mind that the Lieutenant Governor is elected separately from the Governor.  So you should not assume that the Lieutenant Governor is there trying to pass the agenda of the Governor.  He has no interest in that agenda unless he happens to personally agree with it.  The legislative agenda that matters is that of the Lieutenant Governor.

So, when George the Younger became Governor with no public service experience I wasn't too worried since the Governor doesn't do much.  When he ran for President I was concerned because he hadn't done much as Governor....

Edited by Neopetsmom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is mostly specific to Texas.  However, you can trace this to the Reconstruction constitution after the Civil War so there might be some similiarities with other Confederate states, I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 I think I have no reason to doubt that Trump is completely ignoring Scientists

Yes, because him claiming that climate change is a hoax is a clear indicator that he wants to deal with the issue.

Clucky likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sinical said:

Yes, because him claiming that climate change is a hoax is a clear indicator that he wants to deal with the issue.

For that specific remark, Trump has called his remark a joke. I'm not sure what that means... but it seems he is correcting himself.

I think Trump knows it is an issue, but he is an Economy First! type of guy. Many Americans are... To me, the people at the top know well that Climate Change is a major issue, but due to it being associated to the far-left, the effects on the economy/big business, and donations, They can't, or they fear that America shouldn't have to sacrifice itself or put their global competitiveness at risk, well, to say this is only my own idea or understanding of the rhetoric. I'm curious, wasn't climate change negotiations initiated by Republicans in the first place?

For Trump, I can actually see him leading the paris climage change agreement, under pressure of course. The only thing stopping him would be he would lose a lot of face, or that America would lose a lot more than China... so no way.  He's prob keep  things like electric car tax incentives. I'm just speculating, I don't know... If china takes the initiative, I can see Trump following behind, in the very back. 

Edited by Bed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/18/2016 at 5:53 AM, Bed said:

For that specific remark, Trump has called his remark a joke.

What about all of these? 

 

 

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/265895292191248385

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/418542137899491328

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/349973299889057792

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/316252016190054400

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/475668993928212480https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/435574043354611712https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/270628609817976834https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/435393088383889408https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/412159674042294272https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/326875628966117376https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/349973845228269569https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/512246203967619072https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/338448296022511618https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/488825209189711873https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/427226424987385856https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/417818392826232832https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/488926006225285120https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/431018674695442432https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/428418323660165120https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/653385381526806528https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/404420095113715712https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/408977616926830592https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/319377285687939072https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/428416406280241153https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/408380302206443520https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/521862351218573312https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/489381851350319107https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/407505938774757376https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/568387798924963840https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/493935815207043072https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/420333882597466112https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/450964791985971200https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/326874524576526337https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/422819593120256000https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/568021533131718656https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/408018451362766849https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/416909004984844288https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/334254335116587008https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/535102735830773760https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/338978381636984832https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/428954382915223552https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/417816035107299328https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/264010129106665472https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/488813607958757376https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/264007296970018816https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/427556692109574146https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/412162068989874176https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/440811151283486720https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/326781792340299776https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/408983789830815744https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/416539702096052224https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/338429342646423553https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/402217536751951872https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/423179182198104064https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/314744479821205505

 

 

Has he been "joking" for years on twitter? Lol, no. He believes it's a hoax. Everything is screwed.

Edited by Sinical
Clucky likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2016 at 9:53 PM, Bed said:

For that specific remark, Trump has called his remark a joke. I'm not sure what that means... but it seems he is correcting himself.

I think Trump knows it is an issue, but he is an Economy First! type of guy. Many Americans are... To me, the people at the top know well that Climate Change is a major issue, but due to it being associated to the far-left, the effects on the economy/big business, and donations, They can't, or they fear that America shouldn't have to sacrifice itself or put their global competitiveness at risk, well, to say this is only my own idea or understanding of the rhetoric. I'm curious, wasn't climate change negotiations initiated by Republicans in the first place?

For Trump, I can actually see him leading the paris climage change agreement, under pressure of course. The only thing stopping him would be he would lose a lot of face, or that America would lose a lot more than China... so no way.  He's prob keep  things like electric car tax incentives. I'm just speculating, I don't know... If china takes the initiative, I can see Trump following behind, in the very back. 

People at the top *USED* to know that Climate Change was a major issue

But then American kicked them out and replaced them with the party that thinks profits are a major issue and climate change gets in the way of that so...

Edited by Clucky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the recent order is not the best implementation, and the guy is going really fast to get his promises in... 

I thought we can all continue with our lives after the election process is over. He's the president, that got elected through process, and he's doing what he said he'd do. And it seems the world agrees, for example brexit.

But each day, going to work, listening to the radio... and people around me... it's like nothing has changed. The mainstream media is blasting anti-trump propaganda 24/7, one after the other, nonstop. Often repeated one after the other. I carpool.. :/ I sometimes feel someones trying to hypnotize me, but I also wonder if there's some ulterior motive here? Is it really the case of discontent and putting pressure on everything the guy does? 

I think there's a lot of things that we are missing out on by electing Trump, and I'm concerned about things he might do, but I'm just glad we have things in place to stop those kind of things and there are term limits.. I can't say it is all discontent, although it might be the biggest factor for the Resisistance... I just think some of these reactions are out of hand, and suspiciously chaotic, as if there are dark forces in the works to help stir things up, perhaps from outside.

For example, you have bright people from the left, trying to work with Trump, and they get blasted for just being with him. You have people try to voice their conservative views, and it's hard to get any discussion in. 

If Trump does something against the law, he will step down or get the punishment. Until then, wish people would stop witch-hunting people that are trying to be constructive. Is someone actually trying to set up a coup or something? probably an overstatement but it is concerning to see the small signs of it .

My current perspective is:

Putting pressure on NATO... ok, but don't dissolve it. pulling out is something i strongly disagree. Influence is a great power IMO, and it'll be hard to get back, maybe. 

the "extreme vetting" of 7 countries... ok, poor implementation. I feel its just  a publicity thing to keep election promises and as a result, many people are being treated unfairly

the great wall - have yet to see how things work out with mexico

health care - seems like its going to be universal, but not. interested in the plan, but I don't feel too optimistic. So far what I'm hearing sounds good.

economics - less regulations, less taxes inside, tariffs, more taxes outside. OK, sounds reasonable. Plus, trump's got an interesting economics advisory group. Though I feel like the CEOs here have a big duty, and in a very bad position in terms of publicity.

environment - doesn't look good, but I'm not too concerned. As long as he doesn't cut renewable energy development, I'm okay. Although some demand for renewables would be nice, but I think the current resources needed are there for a transition, and a lot of people are aware and are getting elected for it. 

education - Why devos? 

war - always scout first... :/

annnd, how do we get a third party elected the next time around?

Edited by Bed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, these first 100 days feels a bit chaotic to me and it doesn't help that all my social media streams (namely Facebook) are amplifying his actions. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most presidents issue a bunch of executive orders the first 100 days? Is it mainly to uphold their campaign promises? Here's Obama's first 100 days: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_100_days_of_Barack_Obama's_presidency

Right now, I'm primarily using the Countable app to engage with politics (sees policies, gives both sides, you can contact reps, etc). I find it practically useless to engage with "debates" on Facebook and get into conversations that end up nowhere. I vent on Twitter from time to time and then I write a blog every once in a while (such as thoughts on the Women's March). But no Facebook politics for me.

As much as I want to be upset over Trump's actions and be frustrated every day with each new thing he is implementing, I decided it's not worth my time and emotions. I'm waiting the first 100 days hype to be over and then we'll see the next 4-ish years. The best I can do is keep updated, keep calm, and bug my reps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/2/2017 at 4:44 PM, Bed said:

I think the recent order is not the best implementation, and the guy is going really fast to get his promises in... 

I thought we can all continue with our lives after the election process is over. He's the president, that got elected through process, and he's doing what he said he'd do. And it seems the world agrees, for example brexit.

But each day, going to work, listening to the radio... and people around me... it's like nothing has changed. The mainstream media is blasting anti-trump propaganda 24/7, one after the other, nonstop. Often repeated one after the other. I carpool.. :/ I sometimes feel someones trying to hypnotize me, but I also wonder if there's some ulterior motive here? Is it really the case of discontent and putting pressure on everything the guy does? 

. . .

I just think some of these reactions are out of hand, and suspiciously chaotic, as if there are dark forces in the works to help stir things up, perhaps from outside.

. . .

annnd, how do we get a third party elected the next time around?

Have to give him credit for actually keeping his word. (A dubious statement, and it's not exactly what he's doing, but...)

Comparing this to Brexit is an interesting point that not nearly enough people are talking about. Worldwide, people are beginning to remember that the people best suited to handle a situation are the people closest to it. You're best suited to deal with your situation. Your city is best suited to deal with the problems of your city. Your State with the problems facing your State. And the country with problems on the national scale. Meanwhile, the social justice approach continues to try to force a worldwide sameness.

Trump declared war on the media, and they're fighting back. And this distrust of media is going to be a damning problem for our international relations, because our own distrust of our media sources will also lead to people outside the country distrusting our sources.

As far as ulterior motives, it's very clear that Trump wasn't the horse that the power players were betting on.

After Gary Johnson's spectacular failure this election (not even taking the 5% of the vote the Libertarian Party desperately needed), and Evan McMullin failing to take Utah, I don't expect to see a third party candidate elected within my lifetime. Though I sincerely hope I'm wrong about that.

On 2/3/2017 at 1:20 PM, Zilary said:

Yeah, these first 100 days feels a bit chaotic to me and it doesn't help that all my social media streams (namely Facebook) are amplifying his actions. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most presidents issue a bunch of executive orders the first 100 days? Is it mainly to uphold their campaign promises? Here's Obama's first 100 days: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_100_days_of_Barack_Obama's_presidency

Right now, I'm primarily using the Countable app to engage with politics (sees policies, gives both sides, you can contact reps, etc). I find it practically useless to engage with "debates" on Facebook and get into conversations that end up nowhere. I vent on Twitter from time to time and then I write a blog every once in a while (such as thoughts on the Women's March). But no Facebook politics for me.

As much as I want to be upset over Trump's actions and be frustrated every day with each new thing he is implementing, I decided it's not worth my time and emotions. I'm waiting the first 100 days hype to be over and then we'll see the next 4-ish years. The best I can do is keep updated, keep calm, and bug my reps.

The more time that passes, the more fault I place on Facebook and Twitter as being toxic elements in our society. They're gigantic echo chambers that a tremendous amount of the population is engaged in.

I do think things will settle down after the first hundred days or so. There's certainly a learning curve to the Presidency, as well as getting the ball rolling on various policies and approaches. Though the past few weeks have certainly been messy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the immigration order got blocked by the judicial branch... how is this even possible when it is clearly within law? That's crazy.

Edited by Bed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Step one to electing a third party candidate: When faced with two awful choices, you should become outraged and demand change. Not think "Oh he was democratically elected I can't complain" 

I haven't seen any Americans in favour of abolishing first past the post systems, but plenty complaining about the problems of the system. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Bed said:

So the immigration order got blocked by the judicial branch... how is this even possible when it is clearly within law? That's crazy.

Because there are arguments to be made that it is not within the law. When there are valid arguments, the courts usually try and minimize the harm that occurs while the legal aspects are sorted out. In this case, it's a very easy argument to make that allowing the order to be enforced during the interim will result in irreparable harm to those affected, whereas a hold on the order does not. It's also looking very likely that the ban is an overreach, and is in fact not a Constitutional use of executive power as well. The executive branch has wide latitude, but it can't ignore the laws written and passed by Congress, nor the legal interpretations of the judicial branch. Whatever Trump may think, the President is neither a king nor a CEO, and his powers are in fact constrained.

 

Maybe his orders would be less likely to be blocked by the courts if he had an actual legal expert look it over before signing it. Or if he actually read what he was signing. Since he's asserted that he didn't realize he was placing Bannon on the NSC with one of his previous orders.   

 

Also, not even touching his complete disregard for separation of powers and checks/balances. "So-called federal judge", etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Exiled Phoenix said:

Because there are arguments to be made that it is not within the law. When there are valid arguments, the courts usually try and minimize the harm that occurs while the legal aspects are sorted out. In this case, it's a very easy argument to make that allowing the order to be enforced during the interim will result in irreparable harm to those affected, whereas a hold on the order does not. It's also looking very likely that the ban is an overreach, and is in fact not a Constitutional use of executive power as well. The executive branch has wide latitude, but it can't ignore the laws written and passed by Congress, nor the legal interpretations of the judicial branch. Whatever Trump may think, the President is neither a king nor a CEO, and his powers are in fact constrained.

 

Maybe his orders would be less likely to be blocked by the courts if he had an actual legal expert look it over before signing it. Or if he actually read what he was signing. Since he's asserted that he didn't realize he was placing Bannon on the NSC with one of his previous orders.   

 

Also, not even touching his complete disregard for separation of powers and checks/balances. "So-called federal judge", etc. 

I am a little rusty with these things, but I think the term "check/balances" might be misleading here. The courts do not check or balance the power of the executive branch. It is a separation of power, and the judicial branch is merely invoking it's power. It does not take away or balances power at all. It just judges if the order is lawful or not to enact it.

The judge here is claiming that the order causes significant damage to the state in terms of finance and economics, which would harm American citizens. Businesses have talents overseas, and they are unable to come back to do work  or able to do work, or whatever it is which would cause financial loss.

We are not able to see the claimed significance of this loss until the lawsuit is over, so in the meantime the order is blocked, maybe for a very long time.

To me, this is an abuse of power. The order is clearly within law since there was nothing else other than the claim of financial loss. I don't where the line is drawn in significant loss. Obviously there will always be some amount of loss when the presidents takes advantage of the power to regulate immigration this way. I don't think it's significant and warrants blocking the order for all states, since the magnitude of effect it has on states varies from state to state. Plus, the number of people effected is like what, less than 1% of the population?

Edited by Bed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bed said:

I am a little rusty with these things, but I think the term "check/balances" might be misleading here. The courts do not check or balance the power of the executive branch. It is a separation of power, and the judicial branch is merely invoking it's power. It does not take away or balances power at all. It just judges if the order is lawful or not to enact it.

The judge here is claiming that the order causes significant damage to the state in terms of finance and economics, which would harm American citizens. Businesses have talents overseas, and they are unable to come back to do work  or able to do work, or whatever it is which would cause financial loss.

We are not able to see the claimed significance of this loss until the lawsuit is over, so in the meantime the order is blocked, maybe for a very long time.

To me, this is an abuse of power. The order is clearly within law since there was nothing else other than the claim of financial loss. I don't where the line is drawn in significant loss. Obviously there will always be some amount of loss when the presidents takes advantage of the power to regulate immigration this way. I don't think it's significant and warrants blocking the order for all states, since the magnitude of effect it has on states varies from state to state. Plus, the number of people effected is like what, less than 1% of the population?

I think you're conflating the stay of the order and the possibility that it will be judged as an unconstitutional overstep. The stay is needed, and the loss is not merely financial (e.g., green card holders who can/did get sent back to countries they haven't been to in years, that are possibly hostile to them, and in which they have no support network). The stay exists so that irreparable harm is not done while the legality of the order is being decided. The significance of the possible loss only matters for the stay, not for the eventual judgment. Once the lawsuit is entered, and there is an initial finding of enough standing to go forward (jurisdiction, facts, etc).

The amount of people impacted does not matter. What matters is that the individuals bringing suit against Trump's administration argued successfully, in front of multiple federal judges, that there is enough immediate damages that will be done by the execution of that order that it should not be enacted until the legality is determined. The key point you brought up is that the judicial system "judges if the order is lawful or not to enact it." While the process of determining lawfulness is carried out, the courts almost always err on the side of not doing anything that can not be easily undo. 

Basically, two processes. The one you're complaining about is the stay, which is an extremely common thing when lawsuits are filed, even on matters much less significant than this. If the order is found to be unconstitutional, that is another thing entirely. 

Also, the President does not have blanket power to regulate immigration, and has to abide by a number of laws Congress has passed in the past. The order is definitely not clearly within the law. If it was clearly within the law it would not have been the ######show that it was, and it would not have made it to the point where multiple federal judges are ordering it to be halted while further arguments are done. 

Also, this is distinctly part of the checks/balances. The President can write an EO that says whatever he wants it to say - one of the checks and balances on that power is the ability of an independent judiciary to tell him that what he is doing is unconstitutional or outside of his powers. His challenging of the judiciary when they do their job to properly vet the Constitutionality of his actions is concerning. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now