That’s just opinion. It’s not actually measuring anything.

Nothing else matters in politics 🙁

I’m slightly jealous of Trump, if I was starting a new job and the most people expected of me was to hopefully not start ww3 I’d be be pretty happy. Probably get a few box sets in and chill.

🙂 expectation management !

If he builds a fence/wall, makes the lines at customs even longer and slower, gets NATO countries to spend billions more on defence (inc buying US kit) and puts tariffs on Mexican car imports he will be a hero

he will be a hero

…. to less than 1% of the population

expectation management !

Awaits the moment he has to tell Congress that the damm Mexicans are behind on the wall mortgage, hell the desperate plea for the cash will be funnier.
Followed by the first question about import taxes for his “son’s” business.

Anyway is the world better for knowing about war crimes?

I’m slightly jealous of Trump, if I was starting a new job and the most people expected of me was to hopefully not start ww3 I’d be be pretty happy.

😆

and the most people expected of me was to hopefully not start ww3 construct a meaningful, grammatically correct sentence that actually made any sense, I’d be be pretty happy

I think you’re setting your expectations too high

IS anyone else surprised that Trump hasn’t been on twitter yet calling her a traitor and vowing to put her back in JAIL!

He is too busy inviting people to his inauguration on Facebook…

It does free up Trump up to go after Assange and Snowdon now.

That’s a facetious argument.

You started it. “Public Interest” is not, and never could be, any sort of defence as it is completely subjective.

I don’t consider the leaking of information that doesn’t put people in immediate jeopardy a serious crime.

See above, subjective. Govt’s generally do consider it a crime, and as they set the laws, you are going to be on the wrong side of any sort of justice system. And ‘immediate’ in that sentence is a weasel word to prevent a whole heap of consequence that will result from not having a lid on some things.

And what were the sentence for those who committed the war crimes?

Sentence?

They need to be found guilty first, don’t they?

So no trials either, sounds like people wanted that brushed under the carpet then. Best punish the one who embarrassed you then

I probably shouldn’t do this, but it’s good not to live in a left-wing bubble etc so I read the top rated comments on the Daily Mail page and they were horrendous. Mostly calling her a traitor and making comments about the sex change. They have now closed the comments section.

But go back a few years and the top rated comments were the complete opposite…

“35 Years, he should get the Nobel peace prize.”

“I don’t understand why the government feels that it is completely okay to spy on us, watch our finances, our internet useage our phone calls, text messages, take our money, and force us all in to following their laws, yet the second we wants to know the truth about them and what they are doing its a crime. I understand some things are kept secret for the genuine good of the country, but to be honest a lot of it is clearly just to cover their behinds!”

“This is so wrong it defies belief. Shame on you America.”

WTF? Is this just an anti-Obama thing? Or something to do with the sex change?

Did you never see the Simpsons episode when Homer spots a Gummy Bear he can’t resist?

And what were the sentence for those who committed the war crimes?

Which incidents related to the Manning case do you think should have result in war crimes?

WTF? Is this just an anti-Obama thing? Or something to do with the sex change?

Sex change thing, probably. They’re all a bloody menace to civilised society and it’s about time they were all locked up.

See above, subjective. Govt’s generally do consider it a crime, and as they set the laws, you are going to be on the wrong side of any sort of justice system. And ‘immediate’ in that sentence is a weasel word to prevent a whole heap of consequence that will result from not having a lid on some things.

Under what moral or ethical argument do you justify locking up someone who’s mentally ill for 35 years?

Mentally Ill? Who is mentally ill?

Under what moral or ethical argument do you justify locking up someone who’s mentally ill for 35 years?

If was mentally ill when he joined the army or he leaked the info then it’s one thing as the US army has some blame. If, now as a she, non-standard treatment in prison has caused mental illness then she deserves some redress. If she is just mentally ill because of the pressure of going to jail for committing what she knew was a crime when she did it then she deserves treatment and help but in a secure institution.

Obviously it depends whether you think what she did as a crime but Manning knew it was when she did it and, one assumes, accepted the consequences. TBH though I have a lot of sympathy for Manning… the commuting of the sentence makes sense.

I’ve not seen anywhere that claims she is mentally ill, though? Where are you getting this from?

Supposedly there have been several suicide attempts which would tend to point at some sort of mental illness (assumed true as the info came from her lawyer).

Oh, and this:

On the night of Oct. 10, according to her statement, four people impersonating guards conducted an hourslong attack on the prison, during which she said she heard sounds indicating that the attackers were shooting and torturing her cellblock’s actual guards.

Seems a little too bizarre to be true too.

atlaz – Member

Supposedly there have been several suicide attempts which would tend to point at some sort of mental illness

Or, hey, being told you’re going to prison for half your life (and it’s a men’s prison, despite your sex change, just out of spite)could get a person a little down too

TBH I’m slightly on the fence. Some of the leaks I genuinely think are justified… And it seems the reason for the strong reaction is basically that she was blamed for the content of the leaks. But the more indescriminate leaking isn’t cool. Or this is my feeling anyway. If it were all Collateral Murder stuff it’d be less grey.

Which incidents related to the Manning case do you think should have result in war crimes?

These 2 would be a good start

A leaked diplomatic cable provided evidence that during an incident in 2006, U.S. troops in Iraq executed at least 10 Iraqi civilians, including a woman in her 70s and a 5-month-old, then called in an airstrike to destroy the evidence. The disclosure of this cable was later a significant factor in the Iraqi government’s refusal to grant U.S. troops immunity from prosecution beyond 2011, which led to U.S. troops withdrawing from the country.
A NATO coalition in Afghanistan was using an undisclosed “black” unit of special operations forces to hunt down targets for death or detention without trial. The unit was revealed to have had a kill-or-capture list featuring details of more than 2,000 senior figures from the Taliban and al-Qaida, but it had in some cases mistakenly killed men, women, children, and Afghan police officers.

Source.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95KC7CF5B9E[/video]

The Selma lie.

Fair point. But reading the text:

OBAMA: And he met this woman, whose great-, great-, great-, great-grandfather had owned slaves, but she had a different idea. There’s some good craziness going on because they looked at each other and they decided, we know that in the world as it has been it might not be possible for us to get together and have a child.

But something stirred across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks were willing to march across a bridge. And so they got together, Barack Obama Jr. was born.

I’m not sure that it’s somehow misappropriation of the events I think he’s building a narrative with a lazy speech writer.

gobuchul – Member

That’s just opinion. It’s not actually measuring anything.
A crystal clear measure of his legacy came last November, at least in the short term, when the republicans swept all three branches of government. A president has to bear some responsibility for who comes after him, so preparing the ground for the most bizarre appointment in history doesn’t speak to much of a concrete legacy in the here and now.

In the longer term, who can say. Plenty of examples of unpopular / average-seeming leaders who have been dramatically reassessed by the passage of time (e.g. Truman, Eisenhower, Chamberlain in the UK). Obama’s presidential CV is so thin, though, so I wouldn’t bet on this happening. He seemed to have an almost Corbyn-esque distaste for politics as the art of the possible, with his major achievement in healthcare looking extremely shaky before he’s even left office.

the correspondent’s dinner, an event that’s supposed to be a light hearted get together where every one takes the gentle mikey out of each other

off-topic but what are the chances of trump continuing this tradition 😆

I’ve not seen anywhere that claims she is mentally ill, though? Where are you getting this from?

See NPR’s interview here:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=207458025

dragon – Member
It does free up Trump up to go after Assange and Snowdon now.

Duckin’ n diving

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/314783-assange-lawyer-conditions-not-met-for-assange-manning-extradition-offer

gobuchul – Member

On Obama – Gallup did a poll, his approval ratings are mostly negative in terms of achievements. Yes he’s charasmatic but that’s not enough.

That’s just opinion. It’s not actually measuring anything. [/quote]

Yes it is, it is measuring something very specific – his approval ratings. Obama’s average approval rating is lower than most other US presidents in modern times.

One of the reasons why someone as odious and unfit for office as Trump won the presidency is because his rival was so closely associated with Obama.

I know it’s hard for some people to accept but just because Obama is black, good looking, polite, a brilliant orator, and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for wining an election, it doesn’t automatically mean that his presidency was a huge success.

I know it’s hard for some people to accept but just because Obama is black, good looking, polite, a brilliant orator, and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for wining an election, it doesn’t automatically mean that his presidency was a huge success.

Sadly, many people rely on the BBC for analysis, and they failed miserably in the US, they been infatuated with him.

Far be it from me to be all factual and shit but…

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0703/04/le.02.html

I can’t find a single part where he claims he was conceived as some sort of response to the marches. That said I’ve not READ the whole thing, just scan read it and searched for keywords.

I’m going to call… bullshit

yeh,..you need to read it properly and take a look at the video on page two of this thread before calling me out.

Nadhmi Auchi played a very significant role in Obama’s rise to power…

Why was there such heavy censorship of Nadhmi Auchi’s dealings?

Eight stories on Obama linked billionaire Nadhmi Auchi censored from the Guardian, Observer, Telegraph and New Statesman

The archive contains eight stories censored or removed from the on-line archives of the Guardian, Observer, Telegraph and New Statesman. Seven stories were removed in their entirety and one partly redacted following legal pressure by Iraqi-British billionaire fraudster Nadhmi Auchi who has been linked to US senator Barack Obama via the so-called “Rezko Affair”. The action was taken during April-June 2008.

The material complements the Wikileaks release a few days ago of a significant 2004 Pentagon Inspector General’s report into Mr. Auchi’s, apparently grossly fraudulent, activities in Iraq — see US Defense Inspector General: Mobile Telecommunications Licenses in Iraq, 2004.

Also referenced is the Auchi related bank, BNP Paribas, which was the sole financial institution receiving billions in “oil-for-food” program money during the reign of Saddam Hussien.

Oops, double post…

some might say that if you look at the president on the very left hand side of the graph there could be a concern that the data may not be 100% true and accurate

Yeah the data is correct even though they’ve included Barlet. I used that graph because the format is the easiest to read and understand. Here’s other charts/graphs which paint the same picture but not as easy to read or make comparisons :

The bottom line is that Obama’s average approval rating is lower than most other US presidents in modern times.

Fictional TV presidents more popular than Obama: Reuters-Ipsos poll