An interesting discussion about Trump's economic tariffs and the effect on the cycling industry in the US from bikepacking.com.
https://bikepacking.com/plog/tariff-trouble-us-made-cycling/
Maybe illiberal white men were convinced that a liberal black man would never be president of the USA, and Obama getting elected shocked them into making sure they vote every single election going forward to make sure it never happens again.
Being illiberal white men means they sure as shit won't be voting for no "DEI candidate" either, so women and People Of Colour are never going to get an X next to their name.
This narcissistic planet wrecker, is going to start digging for fossil fuels and drilling for oil asap.
what an absolute toss pot, idiotic oxygen thief.
This narcissistic planet wrecker, is going to start digging for fossil fuels and drilling for oil asap.
Big, beautiful drills.
Time to move some investments around?
Wacky, I know, but worth considering.
Definitely wacky if today all that it requires to win the US presidency is being an illiberal white guy when only 12 years ago a liberal black guy easily won.
In fact it's totally crazy! Especially when you consider how much America has moved forward since the Civil Rights movement and the days of Southern Democrats. And you also consider that 20% of black voters voted for Trump, in fact it was that that guaranteed Trumps victory - in previous elections non-white.voters had not voted for Trump in such large numbers.
But other than that the "voters are all racists" explanation for an election result which hasn't gone the way you would have liked works very well both sides of the Atlantic. It's simple and generally you are not expected to elaborate.
Fox News and Twitter weren't pumping out hate when Obama was elected is probably another factor.
But I agree with ernie for once, there are several factors in the mix and they will have changed in the last 20 years to keep it complicated.
Fox News and Twitter weren’t pumping out hate when Obama was elected
Do you honestly believe that Barack Obama (lovely Muslim sounding name btw) didn't have to battle and overcome racism to win the presidency? Blimey
There was a whole conspiracy movement specifically set up to attack Obama from a racist angle, the "birther" movement. Apparently Obama wasn't really American (some still believe that) and no one has seen his (genuine) birth certificate because firstly it would prove that he wasn't American and secondly because where it states religion it says Muslim.
But other than that the “voters are all racists” explanation for an election result which hasn’t gone the way you would have liked works very well both sides of the Atlantic. It’s simple and generally you are not expected to elaborate.
Luckily that isn't all I said. But I suspect you know that.
And luckily I didn't claim that was all you said.
Which suggests it isnt that he is great at manipulating people since otherwise he would have done so back in 2000 but instead the environment has changed so his approach now works.
Have to strongly agree with this. Obviously it's not a cliff edge of change... but the changes to where "public discussion" occurs and how opinion forming takes place over the last 30 years* have really ramped up in just the that last few years.
[ *Everyone has watched the movie, "VICE", yes? If not, make sure you do. ]
Have to strongly agree with this
So you think it was perfectly feasible for someone who was neither a Republican candidate nor a Democrat candidate to win the 2000 US presidential election?
And the fact that Trump didn't proves he lacks powers of persuasion?
Okay.
A long but interesting article by Jeremy Bowen.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgkjxlml42vo
But his Western allies are already hoping that transactional Trump may be more flexible than Joe Biden - a self-proclaimed Zionist - would ever be, especially if he wants the Saudis to join the Abraham Accords.
Peace in the Middle East is perhaps the greatest prize in global diplomacy, because it is so elusive and at the moment so distant.
I agree with Bowen's assertion that Trump is no friend of the Palestinians but then nor is the Saudi Royal Family - the Palestinians have no oil, no money, not even any land, why would the brutal self-serving Saudi dictatorship give a toss about them?
The truth is for the same reasons as Trump - for political expediency. One of the reasons why the Saudi dictatorship is so brutal towards any dissent is that like many dictatorships they feel very insecure. They cannot afford to turn their backs on the Palestinian cause, and they know it.
The reason for the likely Gaza ceasefire is that Trump let it be known to Netanyahu that he has bigger fish to fry. Including the normalisation of Saudi-Israeli relations and Trump's particular obsession, China's growing regional influence.
As an ambitious narcissist Trump is desperate to have his place in the history books. Peace in the Middle East and China's containment wouldn't be a bad legacy for an American president. But although Trump has scored a major victory before even being inaugurated as US president with the Gaza ceasefire imo peace can only come with justice, and although there might be some sort of botched deal there can never be justice whilst an apartheid regime exists in the region.
That on the previous page is a terrible thing to do to an innocent cat.
Well you reap what you sow. Can only hope its the standard US conservative agenda, with big tax breaks for the rich, and nothing too extreme internationally.
Had my eye on the crypto charts lately, noticed a new coin come in. Can it be real? Really? Yes. It can. It is.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2025/01/18/official-trump-coin-how-did-we-get-here/
So you think it was perfectly feasible for someone who was neither a Republican candidate nor a Democrat candidate to win the 2000 US presidential election?
This might come as a shock to you but Trump was the Republican candidate in 2016,2020 and 2024. Times changed to allow him to be but again if you look at him he didnt.
The only change directly for him was being in the apprentice (something driven by others) which allowed him to portray himself as a brilliant businessman and get lots of PR.
The only change directly for him was being in the apprentice (something driven by others) which allowed him to portray himself as a brilliant businessman and get lots of PR.
Americast did a very interesting article on how the Trump brand (which is what he is really, even as president) came into being. And a lot of it is about portraying himself as successful even in failure. He would manage to persuade creditors not to take the trappings of success off him when things went tits up because they had a better chance of getting some of their losses back if he continued to at least look rich. The Apprentice producers didn't want Trump, he was well known but nobody took him seriously - but they basically ended up with Trump because every real business mogul they asked turned them down, on account of real success in business being an actual full time job - it was also supposed to be a different millionaire each series, but once Trump had been featured in the first series there was no chance of anyone serious agreeing to do it after that.
Trump the billionaire is their invention - they made up his back story, gave him scripted prophetic business lessons to impart and so on - even had to build a boardroom for him becuase his real offices looked shite - they had to do those things for their format to work in the absence of the real successful businessmen that they couldn't get
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0k3hk0z
The international big guns are already there for the inauguration tomorrow….
This might come as a shock to you but Trump was the Republican candidate in 2016,2020 and 2024. Times changed to allow him to be but again if you look at him he didnt.
Yes so why did you mention his candidature in 2000 when he wasn't actually the Republican candidate?
It hardly provides an example of his alleged poor powers of persuasion as you appear to suggest it does.
It hardly provides an example of his alleged poor powers of persuasion as you appear to suggest it does.
I have no idea what you are babbling on about now. So I will let you continue to argue with an imaginary version of me.
Insert whatever shit you want {here} and then show your skills in defeating it.
Suella Braverman, with Lawrence Fox, filmed in Washington airport wearing a MAGA baseball cap.
That's a former UK Home Secretary.
Her husband has joined reform. Hope she goes over to them as well.
I have no idea what you are babbling on about now. So I will let you continue to argue with an imaginary version of me.
Insert whatever shit you want {here} and then show your skills in defeating it.
Wow. I know that your anger is constantly on a hair trigger but perhaps try to remember what you posted before launching into a personal tirade?
Here's a reminder of what you wrote. :
dissonance
Full Member
The problem with this is if you look back to older records from his first presidential campaign in 2000 and even further back to his comments on the central park five at the time his methods, techniques and arguments havent really changed.
Which suggests it isnt that he is great at manipulating people since otherwise he would have done so back in 2000 but instead the environment has changed so his approach now works.
If Donald Trump failed to convince sufficient people in the 2000 US presidential election it is more likely to be connected to the fact that he wasn't the Republican candidate in that election rather than a reflection on his poor powers of persuasion.
Her husband has joined reform. Hope she goes over to them as well.
There’s a certain inevitability to it, don’t you think?
There’s a certain inevitability to it, don’t you think?
Maybe blurring into the tory thread I would say there would be two primary considerations for her.
Best chance of keeping a seat
Best chance of being a leader.
Probably worth staying in the tories until late in the cycle giving best chance for another leadership stab before seeing which way the polls suggests she goes.
Getting back to Trump.
Looks like Tiktok have paid him off to stay online. I would say the reverse ferreting from all the republicans, who voted for the law since Trump was a firm fan of banning it in the past, would be funny but they will just deny it all and blame the democrats for it.
Maybe blurring into the tory thread I would say there would be two primary considerations for her.
Best chance of keeping a seat
Best chance of being a leader.
Probably worth staying in the tories until late in the cycle giving best chance for another leadership stab before seeing which way the polls suggests she goes.
it’ll be like that old ‘70s classic Runaround but without Mike Reid for a few of them 🙂
Back on the grifting if trump owns 80% of that coin he is now richer to the tune of 48billion
I’ve just seen the new Seal of the President Of The United States, and it’s as imposing as one would hope.
Attributed to Starhawk of the Daily Kos.
Nah thats fake. The hand/wing? isnt clearly outstretched waiting for some cash to be dropped into it.
How come Trump's son has turned into Robert Pershing Wadlow.
As part of my tiny and insignificant protests,I shall be doing a radio,TV and live news avoidance for the next 48 hrs.Music playlist and podcasts sorted.
The list of things he's apparently going to do in a hail of executive orders from the start is deeply worrying. Doing away with automatic citizenship will be the interesting one, apparently that's in their precious Constitution.
Doing away with automatic citizenship will be the interesting one, apparently that’s in their precious Constitution.
But I thought the (largely Republican) NRA supporters like to scream that "YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION!!"
I noticed at his speech last night he was still using the lectern with "Text TRUMP to 88022" on it. Still fundraising, still grifting, despite having already won.
But I thought the (largely Republican) NRA supporteRS like to scream that “YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION!!”
Its more of a guideline when it doesnt suit them. I am sure they will find a way of deciding how English was written at the time to change the meaning of it. Just like they did with the 2nd amendment when they decided the militia part was completely separate.
wonder how the blue and checkered collar workers will feel when their health care is cut to give Musk et al less tax.
wonder how the blue and checkered collar workers will feel when their health care is cut to give Musk et al less tax.
fine, it will be immigrants fault.
But I thought the (largely Republican) NRA supporters like to scream that “YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION!!”
Expect changes in "interpretation" rather than attempts to change the constitution itself. See, also, the interpretation of "invasion" used to repel migrants at the border.
Doing away with automatic citizenship will be the interesting one, apparently that’s in their precious Constitution.
Fourteenth Amendment
Section 1All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The 14th amendment was passed after the Civil War as a response to the decision in Dredd Scott vs. Sanford that blacks did not have the full rights of citizens. To amend the constitution is difficult, but not impossible. You basically need a two-thirds majority in both houses of congress and then three quarters of the states to ratify it. So, basically, 13 states opposing would be enough to sink it even if a bunch of Democrats somehow voted for it in congress.
Trump has zero chance of having it repealed. He may try to issue executive orders to work around it, for example by ordering that birth certificates and social security numbers not be issued to the children of immigrants. I doubt that any court would uphold that. The Supreme Court is quite right-leaning but this would be so obviously unconstitutional that I would expect them to reject it 9-0. The S.C. justices would know that voting to support it would destroy their legacy.
Mrs trump has just launched her own crypto coin.
How come Trump’s son has turned into Robert Pershing Wadlow.
Something thats revealing is the degree to which Melania seems to be putting together her own nest egg - what little campaign trail work she did she demanded payment for - she seems to be getting her finances in order for a separation (or at least insulate herself against the loses Trump still has looming over him)
Baron Trump reveals something pretty interesting aspect of Trump and Melania's relationship. They spend a lot of time apart - but apparently they can also be in the same house and rarely cross paths. Even when they're in the same house she spends most of her time away from him and instead with her parents and her son, mostly speaking Slovenian (which means the Secret Service largely have no idea what they are talking about)
Its worn off now but when he was younger Baron Trump spoke with a strong Slovenian accent - he clearly hardly ever spoke to or even heard his dad when he was growing up (and up and up)
