President Donald Trump

[Sour Masher]

he's not at all a supporter... and I doubt it speaks to the 2020... just for the midterm. He's saying it's basically "We know this guy isn't really to your liking and you're worried, but we have it handled... look at all the good we can get done on the side and just trust us to make sure nothing too crazy happens."

IDK...hard for me to buy into that theory. I mean, Trump still has a lot of support, despite so many things piling up, so piling on now with this Op-Ed seems unwise, if the underlying take away is supposed to be, "don't worry." I think if that was the real purpose of the Op-Ed, it would have been at least a little gentler. Its wording all but screams that Trump should not be re-elected, and that goes counter to the general GOP strategy of smiling and pretending everything is normal, while trying to pull people away from the Trump side-show and focus on the issues they think are winners for the GOP.

[The Feral Slasher]

I wouldn't mind fielding that one, with the preface this is all unsubstantiated speculation that I am in know way putting forth as facts, and I could easily be swayed from it with credible evidence to the contrary.

That said, personally, I never bought into the theory that Trump is a Putin puppet in the sense of Putin really have secret sex tapes of him or anything so damning that Trump was forced to obey any and all orders from Putin. But there does seem to be a lot of evidence for some combination of Trump being in bed with Putin financially, and/or him admiring Putin and wanting to be like him when he grows up into a real billionaire/authoritarian dictator/murder of people who say bad things about him, and/or him just being grateful in what a valuable ally Russia has been in his political success, and him not wanting to lose that ally.

So if he does have dealings (financial or political) with Putin that make it better for him to be on Putin's good side, he may do whatever he is okay to keep that relationship, but he may have a line where he wants to assert to Putin and the world that there are limits to his kowtowing, and Assad's actions genuinely pissed him off enough to want taking him out be that statement.

Part of that may have been a calculation that it would be better to ask forgiveness of Putin than permission on that issue, and that he felt he could smooth it over by doing the other things he has done to advocate for Russia over our traditional allies. And if he really need to make it up to Putin, I'm sure if Trump had taken out Assad, he could have appeased Putin by officially recognizing Russia's annexation of Crimea. I think that could have been his ace in the hold. Such a move would make many politicians, and the entire international community, go apeshit, but it probably wouldn't have mattered much to his voters.

Well there were are certainly a far from insignificant number of people on the left who promoted (if not believed) that Trump is a Russian puppet. I think it is far easier to explain than what you offered above, but it's really not worth arguing about.

Edit: As you noted it is all unsubstantiated speculation, which is what the whole Trump is a Puppet has been from the very beginning. And as you mentioned this could change once new facts come to light

[TS Garp]

I can't really figure out why this person wrote the piece -- what's his or her endgame? To encourage a "true republican" to challenge Trump in 2020? Or to push Trump over the edge? It can't be just to expose the white house for the circus that it is -- that's nothing new. And it can't be so the author can pat themselves on the back and parlay that into something else, because it's anonymous. Any theories?

[Sour Masher]

Well there were are certainly a far from insignificant number of people on the left who promoted (if not believed) that Trump is a Russian puppet. I think it is far easier to explain than what you offered above, but it's really not worth arguing about.

Edit: As you noted it is all unsubstantiated speculation, which is what the whole Trump is a Puppet has been from the very beginning. And as you mentioned this could change once new facts come to light

Yeah, I can't argue with that. As I said, they are just my unsubstantiated hunches. If you go through my posting history, I never got on board with the Trump Putin puppet thing, not because I think there is zero merit to it (at least in the "soft puppet" senses I mentioned), but because there wasn't any hard evidence for it, and there were so many other things that had hard evidence which we could focus on. Why go down a rabbit hole of conspiracy theories if you have actual out-in-the-open damning truths being paraded before you on the daily?

Of course, Trump's words and actions in relation to Russia are some of those damning truths, so one doesn't need to claim Trump to be a puppet to argue that he has handled world relations very poorly, including his dealing with Putin. And it isn't a conspiracy theory to put forth the claim that he has been played by a much more skilled statesman in his dealings with Putin. That claim I do think there is sufficient evidence to stand behind.

[Sour Masher]

I can't really figure out why this person wrote the piece -- what's his or her endgame? To encourage a "true republican" to challenge Trump in 2020? Or to push Trump over the edge? It can't be just to expose the white house for the circus that it is -- that's nothing new. And it can't be so the author can pat themselves on the back and parlay that into something else, because it's anonymous. Any theories?

Yeah, I put forth a few theories a few posts above (post 5349). I think it is possible that it is testing the waters for Pence to challenge Trump in the primaries in 2020. Using that lodestar term was a great way to test out how people would respond to the self-proclaimed "adult in the room" with Trump. Will people rally around said person, in which case Pence (even if Pence didn't actually write it, it seems intended to thrust Pence into this role) would allow people to think he is the masked hero, keeping the forces of chaos at bay. I doubt he'd ever come out at admit he wrote it (or that someone wrote it on his behalf), but he might be coy enough to allow people to think he did, if it turns out to be advantageous of him to do so.

On the other hand, if Trump's base rallies strongly against the "traitor," Pence can always claim he had nothing to do with it, knowing the NYT would never out him, and knowing there is no way to prove that someone else didn't plan the lodestar term to implicate Pence as a weaselly back-stabber.

There is little to no downside to it imo, aside, of course, from the risk of Trump finding out who wrote it and murdering that person, as it seems clear he very much wishes he could do.

[Teenwolf]

I wouldn't mind fielding that one, with the preface this is all unsubstantiated speculation that I am in know way putting forth as facts, and I could easily be swayed from it with credible evidence to the contrary.

That said, personally, I never bought into the theory that Trump is a Putin puppet in the sense of Putin really have secret sex tapes of him or anything so damning that Trump was forced to obey any and all orders from Putin. But there does seem to be a lot of evidence for some combination of Trump being in bed with Putin financially, and/or him admiring Putin and wanting to be like him when he grows up into a real billionaire/authoritarian dictator/murder of people who say bad things about him, and/or him just being grateful in what a valuable ally Russia has been in his political success, and him not wanting to lose that ally.

So if he does have dealings (financial or political) with Putin that make it better for him to be on Putin's good side, he may do whatever he is okay to keep that relationship, but he may have a line where he wants to assert to Putin and the world that there are limits to his kowtowing, and Assad's actions genuinely pissed him off enough to want taking him out be that statement.

Part of that may have been a calculation that it would be better to ask forgiveness of Putin than permission on that issue, and that he felt he could smooth it over by doing the other things he has done to advocate for Russia over our traditional allies. And if he really need to make it up to Putin, I'm sure if Trump had taken out Assad, he could have appeased Putin by officially recognizing Russia's annexation of Crimea. I think that could have been his ace in the hold. Such a move would make many politicians, and the entire international community, go apeshit, but it probably wouldn't have mattered much to his voters.

The level of thought you've put into this is far beyond the level of thought Trump put into the assassination order, in my opinion.

Trump just does. Not. Care. He just wants to say or do whatever makes him feel powerful, he has little understanding of international politics at all.

In the Woodward book, apparently Senior officials tried explaining the historical importance of US allies before a G7 summit, and Trump literally could not grasp the concept of allies. His lack of basic understanding is unprecedented.

You all follow the lead of the mainstream media and give way too much credit to his intellect.

[Sour Masher]

The level of thought you've put into this is far beyond the level of thought Trump put into the assassination order, in my opinion.
.....

You all follow the lead of the mainstream media and give way too much credit to his intellect.

I think, without a doubt, Trump is the least knowledgeable president we have ever had, by leaps and bounds. He revels in not being a reader or a student of history or politics, or really anything not related to him and his business dealings. That fact is high on the list of things that disgust me about him being our country's president. And I've long mocked that idea that everything he says and does is carefully planned out. The idea that he is playing 3d chess is absurd.

That said, it is hard to deny he is shrewd and possesses an animalistic cunning. I think he has more intellectual capacity than you give him credit for, but that just makes it all the more appalling to me that he has zero interest in putting the mental work into learning about things. He doesn't think he needs to learn anything, because he thinks he already knows everything he needs to know, and if anything conflicts with his opinions or gut beliefs, he can shout it down as fake news or meaningless.

In short, I don't think he has a low IQ, but I also do think he cares not one iota about anything that matters about this country. All he spends his mental capacities on are him. He certainly knows less about government, our country's laws, and values than anyone who has ever been president. He probably knows less about everything that isn't directly related to Donald Trump than any president we have ever had. And he has the verbal skills of a 4th grader with an over-inflated ego. But again, I doubt he is inherently incapable of learning. He just never wanted to. Why learn about the world when you can bend it to your will, I imagine he thinks.

[The Feral Slasher]

Yeah, I can't argue with that. As I said, they are just my unsubstantiated hunches. If you go through my posting history, I never got on board with the Trump Putin puppet thing, not because I think there is zero merit to it (at least in the "soft puppet" senses I mentioned), but because there wasn't any hard evidence for it, and there were so many other things that had hard evidence which we could focus on. Why go down a rabbit hole of conspiracy theories if you have actual out-in-the-open damning truths being paraded before you on the daily?

Of course, Trump's words and actions in relation to Russia are some of those damning truths, so one doesn't need to claim Trump to be a puppet to argue that he has handled world relations very poorly, including his dealing with Putin. And it isn't a conspiracy theory to put forth the claim that he has been played by a much more skilled statesman in his dealings with Putin. That claim I do think there is sufficient evidence to stand behind.

Well I think you are agreeing with me, there are plenty of valid reasons to criticize Trump, so why go with the lazy unsubstantiated hunches ?

[Sour Masher]

Well I think you are agreeing with me, there are plenty of valid reasons to criticize Trump, so why go with the lazy unsubstantiated hunches ?

Because you asked someone to? It is the first time I've put forth those hunches, and I only did, because you wanted someone to. But maybe since you were not asking me, I should not have answered. I did, because I think that while you suggest a lot of folks buy hard into puppet conspiracies, I think most who call Trump a puppet think of him as such in the less extreme ways I outlined, not as some Manchurian candidate who talks to Putin every night before bed and ends his convos with "hail hydra."

Again, you can check my posting history. The only times I've talked about Trump and Russia or Putin, I've stayed on what I think of as firm ground, criticizing his words and actions, and stating the belief that he is an amateur in state-craft. I cannot speak for those who actually believe Trump is a legit, full on Putin puppet. I haven't seen a lot of folks making that claim, aside from a small conspiracy fringe. Since you were responding to DMT, maybe he has? I don't recall seeing that, but I'll let him speak for himself if he has made such claims.

[The Feral Slasher]

Because you asked someone to? It is the first time I've put forth those hunches, and I only did, because you wanted someone to. But maybe since you were not asking me, I should not have answered. I did, because I think that while you suggest a lot of folks buy hard into puppet conspiracies, I think most who call Trump a puppet think of him as such in the less extreme ways I outlined, not as some Manchurian candidate who talks to Putin every night before bed and ends his convos with "hail hydra."

Again, you can check my posting history. The only times I've talked about Trump and Russia or Putin, I've stayed on what I think of as firm ground, criticizing his words and actions, and stating the belief that he is an amateur in state-craft. I cannot speak for those who actually believe Trump is a legit, full on Putin puppet. I haven't seen a lot of folks making that claim, aside from a small conspiracy fringe.

lol, let me rephrase - "why do so many Democrats/Progressives promote lazy unsubstantiated claims when there are so many valid criticisms ?"

Have you ever seen Rachel Maddow ? Anyway, you don't think the Trump/Russia angle is promoted and hyped in the most scary way possible by many Dems ? Agree to disagree I guess

[Sour Masher]

lol, let me rephrase - "why do so many Democrats/Progressives promote lazy unsubstantiated claims when there are so many valid criticisms ?"

Have you ever seen Rachel Maddow ? Anyway, you don't think the Trump/Russia angle is promoted and hyped in the most scary way possible by many Dems ? Agree to disagree I guess

I think I disagree precisely because I don't watch Rachel Maddow, or much of any 24 hour news networks anymore . I've tried to get my wife off of them as well, to no avail. If you watch a lot of Maddow and other 24 hour news network folks, that would explain why our perceptions are different. I'm generally blissfully ignorant to the claims made by those folks these days.

Edit: But speaking for myself and my thoughts on the matter, I do find the Trump/Russia stuff to be scary, without any far-fetched conspiracy stuff being on the table. Trump's words and deeds in relation to Russia are scary on their face.

[The Feral Slasher]

I think I disagree precisely because I don't watch Rachel Maddow, or much of any 24 hour news networks anymore . I've tried to get my wife off of them as well, to no avail. If you watch a lot of Maddow and other 24 hour news network folks, that would explain why our perceptions are different. I'm generally blissfully ignorant to the claims made by those folks these days.

I do not watch her at all, but I've seen my share of clips. From.what I see her positions are not at all the moderate ones you describe. I thought she was very popular with many dems who share those views, but I could be wring

[Sour Masher]

I do not watch her at all, but I've seen my share of clips. From.what I see her positions are not at all the moderate ones you describe. I thought she was very popular with many dems who share those views, but I could be wring

I stopped watching her long ago for different reasons than you probably don't watch her. While I do see how those she is not "preaching to" might find her entirely too smug, I just really hated the whole organization of her show. Her intros were (I assume still are) entirely too long, and the payoff, generally, was she was saying pretty much exactly what I'd expect her to say, and what everyone else on the network was saying.

I can't speak to her current ratings, but before Trump, I recall no one on that network got good ratings. But you may be right these days--I think Trump has been a real boon for MSNBC's ratings and influence.

[B-Fly]

As a government guy, I don't think someone penning an anonymous Op-Ed slamming the boss is a "hero". I understand the adult-in-the-room urge if someone feels that by staying in the Administration they can somehow do enough damage control to prevent Trump from destroying the country, but the Woodward book already had that largely covered. This sounds like a martyr complex. With one big caveat, I think this person either should have continued his/her internal "resistance", in the sense of doing his/her job to the best of his/her ability with concern for and loyalty to the US and our constitution...or, should resign and express his/her concerns publicly under his/her own name. The big caveat for me is if it's Mattis. If it's Mattis, please, please stay and do your very best to keep us safe, lol.

[Teenwolf]

As a government guy, I don't think someone penning an anonymous Op-Ed slamming the boss is a "hero". I understand the adult-in-the-room urge if someone feels that by staying in the Administration they can somehow do enough damage control to prevent Trump from destroying the country, but the Woodward book already had that largely covered. This sounds like a martyr complex. With one big caveat, I think this person either should have continued his/her internal "resistance", in the sense of doing his/her job to the best of his/her ability with concern for and loyalty to the US and our constitution...or, should resign and express his/her concerns publicly under his/her own name. The big caveat for me is if it's Mattis. If it's Mattis, please, please stay and do your very best to keep us safe, lol.

Lawrence O'Donnell made a convincing argument that its Dan Coates.