President Donald Trump

[Redbirds Fan]

The fact that he hasn't gotten anything done is just another example of how DC is broken and more proof that we need Trump there, rather than politics as usual.

Revo's reply pretty much nails it, but there are a couple of other things that explain why he hasn't gotten anything done.

In public office you can be ignorant and succeed, because you can surround yourself with good people and listen to them. You can be arrogant and successful if you are smart enough to make good decisions. But you can't be ignorant and arrogant. Trump had no idea what the job entailed. But he surrounded himself with cronies and yes men, and won't listen to the few good people he has around him. Don't you think there are people telling him to put down the damn cellphone?

His team did very little to get ready to start his term. They were caught flat footed, and had nothing ready to go except some poorly worded executive orders which weren't vetted by counsel. His legislative agenda was behind before it began.

He appears to this is a part-time job and vacations more than Paris Hilton. He won't read a brief if it has over nine bullet points. He doesn't give press conferences (one since he took office, by my count) and when he speaks without a script he appears to have little grasp of subject matter.

The whole world knows that he can be influenced by flattery. Say nice things about him and you become a "wonderful person".

The government is hamstrung because he hasn't filled essential positions. He won't even nominate ambassadors, which by the way cannot be filibustered. He bitches about Obama holdovers, but he has filled a tiny percentage of the essential jobs at the Pentagon and State. That may explain why we don't know where our carrier groups really are.

He makes it clear over and over that he is concerned with his base, rather than all of us. If that is not politics as usual, I don't know what is.

Draining the swamp? Look at his appointments, other than Mattis and McMaster, and tell me he has not made the swamp worse.

Alienating our historic allies does nothing to move his agenda forward. It may excite his base, but it doesn't make Congress eager to work with him. He says Dems are holding up health care and tax reform. These things only take 50 votes plus Pence. There are only 48 Dems. All he has to do is get the GOP on board, which he has been unable to do thus far.

Oh, and Russia. Setting aside for a moment all of the 'he said, she said', why do so many people in Trump's inner circle have connections to Russia, and, if these contacts are completely innocent, why go to such lengths to keep them hidden?

He misleads us and has his people mislead us. A recent example is the claim that hundreds of billions of dollars worth of contracts were signed while he was in Saudi Arabia. There was a big ceremony, but it was smoke and mirrors, vague agreements to explore opportunities in the futures, memos of understanding, etc. Instead of $110 billion in arms deals, it is actually more like $25 billion, and we hope to sell them the rest sometime in the indefinite future. We shouldn't forget that Trump is a real estate developer, first and foremost. Puffery is his stock-in-trade.

[heyelander]

Revo's reply pretty much nails it, but there are a couple of other things that explain why he hasn't gotten anything done.

In public office you can be ignorant and succeed, because you can surround yourself with good people and listen to them. You can be arrogant and successful if you are smart enough to make good decisions. But you can't be ignorant and arrogant. Trump had no idea what the job entailed. But he surrounded himself with cronies and yes men, and won't listen to the few good people he has around him. Don't you think there are people telling him to put down the damn cellphone?

His team did very little to get ready to start his term. They were caught flat footed, and had nothing ready to go except some poorly worded executive orders which weren't vetted by counsel. His legislative agenda was behind before it began.

He appears to this is a part-time job and vacations more than Paris Hilton. He won't read a brief if it has over nine bullet points. He doesn't give press conferences (one since he took office, by my count) and when he speaks without a script he appears to have little grasp of subject matter.

The whole world knows that he can be influenced by flattery. Say nice things about him and you become a "wonderful person".

The government is hamstrung because he hasn't filled essential positions. He won't even nominate ambassadors, which by the way cannot be filibustered. He bitches about Obama holdovers, but he has filled a tiny percentage of the essential jobs at the Pentagon and State. That may explain why we don't know where our carrier groups really are.

He makes it clear over and over that he is concerned with his base, rather than all of us. If that is not politics as usual, I don't know what is.

Draining the swamp? Look at his appointments, other than Mattis and McMaster, and tell me he has not made the swamp worse.

Alienating our historic allies does nothing to move his agenda forward. It may excite his base, but it doesn't make Congress eager to work with him. He says Dems are holding up health care and tax reform. These things only take 50 votes plus Pence. There are only 48 Dems. All he has to do is get the GOP on board, which he has been unable to do thus far.

Oh, and Russia. Setting aside for a moment all of the 'he said, she said', why do so many people in Trump's inner circle have connections to Russia, and, if these contacts are completely innocent, why go to such lengths to keep them hidden?

He misleads us and has his people mislead us. A recent example is the claim that hundreds of billions of dollars worth of contracts were signed while he was in Saudi Arabia. There was a big ceremony, but it was smoke and mirrors, vague agreements to explore opportunities in the futures, memos of understanding, etc. Instead of $110 billion in arms deals, it is actually more like $25 billion, and we hope to sell them the rest sometime in the indefinite future. We shouldn't forget that Trump is a real estate developer, first and foremost. Puffery is his stock-in-trade.

As if I don't understand all of this... what I don't understand is why progressives constantly expect the people who voted for him to give a shit about any of this?

[baldgriff]

A better question is why would the US do a $25 billion arms deal with the Saudi's....

[The Feral Slasher]

As if I don't understand all of this... what I don't understand is why progressives constantly expect the people who voted for him to give a shit about any of this?

They just haven't gotten the word yet, this is all new, hot off the presses stuff. I'm sure they will come around once they realize who he really is.

[Redbirds Fan]

As if I don't understand all of this... what I don't understand is why progressives constantly expect the people who voted for him to give a shit about any of this?

As I said, it is rapidly becoming irrelevant whether Trump voters care about this.

Trump claims to be the great businessman, the super deal-maker. He has spent his life punching down. He bullies small contractors and uses his pile of money to push people around. That works great in business, partly because you can always find another contractor to exploit and always find smaller kids to pick on. When you are the President, you have to deal with Congress and the Courts, and they have as much power as the President. He can't push them around quite as easily, so we are seeing that those deal-making skills are mostly in his own imagination. And he has to deal with other countries, who aren't quite as easy to push around as small time paint suppliers.

This isn't for his voters. This is for the Trump apologists who say he'll be great because he is a businessman, or that it will just take him time to learn the job.

And, BTW, he tabbed Christie's mouthpiece as his new FBI director. He worked at DOJ under Bush, but he's been repping white collar crooks since 2005.

[cardboardbox]

The paper does indeed say that warming can be reduced by 1 degree Celsius.

which page is this on?

thanks for letting me know where you found this.

[Redbirds Fan]

thanks for letting me know where you found this.

I think bg did a really good job of addressing this.

[cardboardbox]

I think bg did a really good job of addressing this.

I think he forgot the sarcasm tag.

[baldgriff]

I think he forgot the sarcasm tag.

There was no tag, because there was no sarcasm. Seriously - if you are going to site a document and post a link to it. Then you should be willing to read the damned thing and make your case.

I hardly ever see eye to eye lately with Redbird/Lucky, but in this case you are flat out wrong.

If you claim that your defense is in the document, then it is incumbent upon you to produce the information from said document to support your claim.

Sorry, but on this one well - you have some reading to do.

[cardboardbox]

There was no tag, because there was no sarcasm. Seriously - if you are going to site a document and post a link to it. Then you should be willing to read the damned thing and make your case.

I hardly ever see eye to eye lately with Redbird/Lucky, but in this case you are flat out wrong.

If you claim that your defense is in the document, then it is incumbent upon you to produce the information from said document to support your claim.

Sorry, but on this one well - you have some reading to do.

I wasnt trying to make a case or defense, all I asked was which page he read that there would be a 1 C decrease. What case do you think I'm trying to make by asking for a page number? I'm flat out wrong to ask for that?

[Redbirds Fan]

There was no tag, because there was no sarcasm. Seriously - if you are going to site a document and post a link to it. Then you should be willing to read the damned thing and make your case.

I hardly ever see eye to eye lately with Redbird/Lucky, but in this case you are flat out wrong.

If you claim that your defense is in the document, then it is incumbent upon you to produce the information from said document to support your claim.

Sorry, but on this one well - you have some reading to do.

[President Donald J. Chump]

Am eagerly awaiting what that loser Comey is going to say, as if the American people really care!

[TranaGreg]

I wasnt trying to make a case or defense, all I asked was which page he read that there would be a 1 C decrease. What case do you think I'm trying to make by asking for a page number? I'm flat out wrong to ask for that?

seriously? you made a claim (.2 degrees), and then posted a link to a document to support it but it turns out it contradicted your claim ... someone else points this out & you don't think that's on you??? SAD!!!

the smiley was for the trumpism at the end, not the main point ...

[TranaGreg]

Am eagerly awaiting what that loser Comey is going to say, as if the American people really care!

you're probably right, though they might start to care if it leads to a potential obstruction of justice charge ... then things could get interesting ...

[baldgriff]

CBB -

OK stepping back a second

Dslaw introduced the .2 degrees discussion via Yahoo column link.

As a counter you linked to a source document claiming it is not outdated, apparently as an indication that it supports Trump. But you didn’t apparently read the whole document to see if it actually supports Trumps contention.

RF called you on it, stating that he read the document that the 0.2 degrees citing is in fact out of context.

You asked which page this is on.

RF responded that “you need to read the whole paper. That’s where the context part comes in”

You then claim foul because he wont tell where you can find it. When in fact he has stated “you need to read the whole paper. That’s where the context part comes in”.

Then you go on to state that you simply don’t have time to read the whole thing.

You have argued that the document supports Trump. RF has stated if you read the whole thing and not some point taken out of context (an old lawyers trick he called it) – that you would understand that the document itself is supporting 1 degree.

In order for you to make the argument that the document does not indeed support that claim, due the contextual nature of the document – You sir are going to have to read it, and then use the information in the document to support your contention that it indeed supports Trump and the .2 degrees

At some point you have to do the work.