Bannon: Trump has only 30% chance of finishing term

trouble13 said:

I thought we were talking about Trump removing himself from office to which you injected Nixon as an example of one who did so I offered you clinton an example of one who did not. What are trumps sins that he should resign his post?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

It took 2 years of investigation to bring to light Nixon's sins that led him to resign. I think that it be a useless endeavor for me to inject any opinions that I have that defines reasons, which I believe will ultimately be the impetus that will encourage Trump to resign prior to the end of his first term. Let's just say that I'm waiting as patiently as I can while keep watch on my speculations that I believe will be his demise.

haymarket said:

I must've missed that story. Could you provide it please?

Click to expand...

I believe it is linked in the OP.

AlbqOwl said:

I believe it is linked in the OP.

Click to expand...

I wrote the OP and have no idea what you are talking about regarding the story being debunked . Can you be more specific?

haymarket said:

I wrote the OP and have no idea what you are talking about regarding the story being debunked . Can you be more specific?

Click to expand...

Many of the items the writer of the OP used as illustration have been thoroughly debunked. Such things as Secretary Tillerson calling President Trump 'a moron'. Never happened. Never will. I would have to do some lengthy research to come up with all the different sources I consult for the truth on things and I have already commented on most on threads here and on other sites. But it didn't take long to figure out the Vanity Fair peace was just another leftist hit piece to attack the President and it most likely contains very little of any credible substance to do that.

All the other themes used to attack President Trump--racist, Russia, etc. etc. etc.--have run out of steam so the latest thing is that he is mentally unbalanced. That will run out of steam too when it can't be substantiated with anything honest.

AlbqOwl said:

Many of the items the writer of the OP used as illustration have been thoroughly debunked. Such things as Secretary Tillerson calling President Trump 'a moron'. Never happened. Never will. I would have to do some lengthy research to come up with all the different sources I consult for the truth on things and I have already commented on most on threads here and on other sites. But it didn't take long to figure out the Vanity Fair peace was just another leftist hit piece to attack the President and it most likely contains very little of any credible substance to do that.

All the other themes used to attack President Trump--racist, Russia, etc. etc. etc.--have run out of steam so the latest thing is that he is mentally unbalanced. That will run out of steam too when it can't be substantiated with anything honest.

Click to expand...

So you have no evidence of any debunking. You only have opinion and denial.

Got it.

Removable Mind said:

It took 2 years of investigation to bring to light Nixon's sins that led him to resign. I think that it be a useless endeavor for me to inject any opinions that I have that defines reasons, which I believe will ultimately be the impetus that will encourage Trump to resign prior to the end of his first term. Let's just say that I'm waiting as patiently as I can while keep watch on my speculations that I believe will be his demise.

Click to expand...

Well when you have something and you want to share it. We can talk then. Until that day I will continue to support our president

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

Mach said:

We'll I wrote that too! By changing the constitution seems like it. And with two parties controlling, we'd have to be some pretty united people to usher in that change. Seems unlikely even in the best of conditions. Republicans can't even pass legislation they ran on for 8 years, when fully in control...I mean, that sort of sets the tone.

We have two big strikes of divisiveness against us.
1. Plurality voting (which leads to the two party division)
2. Dramatic capitalist power over economic means vs labor power over economic means. And aside from that obvious division, also resulted in a progressive tax system (necessarily due to that division), which even furthers that division of class/us against them (look at the 99% vs 1% of recent years).

Division seems to be built into our system. Not that this is necessarily bad, but it sure is stressful in a way.


Yes, Duverger's ideas of political systems, are also found all over. It think we even see this in nature where competition is analogous to "voting", and even in physics where we have positive and negative. Yin and yang. True/false and middle excluded. Duality has a gravity well of sorts it seems.... that's just me geeking out in poorly thought-out philosophical land.

Click to expand...

To the bolded: Yes, I'm aware of the obvious technical method for change - via the Constitution! But I was hoping you had some "possibly realistic" method! :2razz:

But yes, I agree with everything you wrote above.

And in support of Duverger's principle in a more general context, I too briefly thought of its broader aspects as I weaved it into my post:

In marketing, there's an axiom that in every market segment there's room for a #1 and #2. And they can both succeed and profit well (together), both holding strong & stable positions -
even for the long-term. However in general, the lessor competitors (3 --> n), have no guarantee of success or major market penetration, and often flounder, fail, or remain small players.

This then leads to where if a market niche is found with only a single player, it's possible your organization can do well by jumping-in, even if it never dethrones the current majority player. But if you jump in, you better make sure you get to a solid #2 before your competitors join the fray, because being #3 or less will be precarious.

This marketing duopoly theory, seems consistent with Duverger's.

AlbqOwl said:

In my opinion, there isn't all that much difference between the two parties. They all seem to be mostly permanent political class, i.e. professional politicians in it to increase their personal influence, prestige, power, and wealth. The only difference is the constituencies they represent.

The Democrats represent the statists/leftists/political class/progressives i.e. modern day liberals and the Republicans represent the nationalists/libertarian/patriots/modern day conservatives. So they each use rhetoric and make mostly empty promises to please their differing constituencies and throw different kinds of bones while neither do much of importance to make things better and both are much more interested in maintaining a status quo that benefits them personally.

Click to expand...

I agree with you up to here.

However, there is much to unpack/dispute on the rest...

So enters a President Trump who is neither partisan nor ideologue or politically correct or permanent political class.

Click to expand...

Narcissists don't usually care much for ideologies. They care for only what benefits them. So while it may seem nice to have a politician that does not seem to care about 'towing partisan lines' (and yes, that aspect is nice), a narcissist is dangerous for a number of other reasons...

He seems to be in it for the satisfaction of a legacy of actually getting something good done for the country. He is a problem solver and businessman who approaches problems with the intention of solving them, thus he rethinks, changes course, goes from Plan A to Plan B or beyond as becomes necessary to accomplish an objective or goal, and works for real solutions.

Click to expand...

This whole being a businessman as a qualification for public office is VERY overrated. Running a business is not the same thing as running a government. Trump is painfully figuring that out. Businesses/corporations rely more on a strict top-bottom hierarchy where the top dog(s) call the shots. Governments, at least the democratic-republic form of governments, have their hierarchical powers dispersed. No one person or group has the ultimate power. Trump has spent decades calling all the shots and now, as a politician, he is finding he cannot simply do that. As a result, he gets into petty spats with government officials, the media, and celebrities.

They don't CARE that he is politically incorrect, unorthodox, unconventional, or doesn"t toe the mythical rule book for how a President is supposed to behave and/or conduct himself.

Click to expand...

As a teacher, I would not excuse a student's disgusting, bullying behavior just because that student was getting an 'A' in my class. The fact some of you would look the other way, or even nod in approval, to his behavior tells me his supporters have no spine to defend what is decent.

And the permanent political class and all those who support it, both Democrats and Republicans et al, hate him with a passion and are doing their damndest to cut the legs out from under him and destroy him. And they don't care how dishonest they have to be in order to do it.

Click to expand...

I find it funny you talk about dishonesty while defending probably the most dishonest president we've ever had in office.

Chomsky said:

To the bolded: Yes, I'm aware of the obvious technical method for change - via the Constitution! But I was hoping you had some "possibly realistic" method! :2razz:

Click to expand...

The other thought is that if media/political propaganda can be reigned in, the divisiveness will diminish. It will still swell when it's time to debate some big policy initiative, but in that context partisanship is understood and seems appropriate. But this "two different worlds" stuff that's going on is something else entirely. It's possibly people will get wise to it without other action, if reactions like "cry wolf" will kick in, but it's scary that it's been so long and it hasn't yet.

But I'll be honest, I thought we were sort of in the "safe zone" on this in recent years. It felt, naively it seems, that our population was to the point where most of the absurd/partisan news stuff was considered "extremism", and just in the news for ratings. And that it would only continue to improve. I assumed most adults didn't *really* buy into the crazy. Not just because it's crazy, and obviously absurd, but because many I thought also had a healthy dose of skepticism for any/all political stuff. Really, when I would watch Fox news, I'd think no one *really* believes this fully, it's just kind of like nude women doing weather reports, you can understand if people think it's fun to watch and you get a little weather news too. Drunk history. Etc. So the extreme right sometimes says crazy stuff for ratings...just like click-bait right? Wrong. They shaped culture and opinion for a generation (!).

But as it turns out, apparently (I'm an idiot) people really do believe it, and pattern their lives around it. I knew some did, some old southern white men for sure. But I didn't know how bad it was. I was busy during the Obama years, and nothing overly controversial was going on in politics, Obama seemed level-headed, where was the drama? But apparently on Fox, it was doomsday every day. I thought government was meh...largely not doing much except keeping up with foreign affairs, social acceptance, and new technology/changes. But we had Fox and friends pushing that Obama was the anti-christ and liberals were ushering in an era of communistic dictatorship.

This marketing duopoly theory, seems consistent with Duverger's.

Click to expand...

Interesting!
Siblings everywhere are saying to their parents, "See I KNEW you had a favorite, it's almost a natural law that you would!".

lurchadams said:

Fake news!

TDS!

Lying liberal media using anonymous sources!

I hope I didn't miss any of the standard responses.

Click to expand...

Speaking of "standard responses," when did Bannon suddenly become credible?

trouble13 said:

Well when you have something and you want to share it. We can talk then. Until that day I will continue to support our president

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Supporting Trump is your business.

I always chime in when I feel like I want to. But you are keenly aware of that. You aren't at all shy about voicing your opinions and beliefs.

Since I'm here, I'll leave you with this: I believe Trump is toxic to our nation's general welfare. I choose not to subscribe to his self-will-run-riot narcissist, megalomania behaviors that's been chronicled for decades. He's always been a bully, not a leader, and has made his way through life using unscrupulous business practices.

I realize that you find some redeeming qualities in Trump and I can't change that except to use my ability to vote against him if he survives his first term.

As the Roy Rogers theme song says, "Happy Trails to you, until we meet again." :2wave:

Removable Mind said:

Supporting Trump is your business.

I always chime in when I feel like I want to. But you are keenly aware of that. You aren't at all shy about voicing your opinions and beliefs.

Since I'm here, I'll leave you with this: I believe Trump is toxic to our nation's general welfare. I choose not to subscribe to his self-will-run-riot narcissist, megalomania behaviors that's been chronicled for decades. He's always been a bully, not a leader, and has made his way through life using unscrupulous business practices.

I realize that you find some redeeming qualities in Trump and I can't change that except to use my ability to vote against him if he survives his first term.

As the Roy Rogers theme song says, "Happy Trails to you, until we meet again." :2wave:

Click to expand...

Always a pleasure disagreeing with you RM.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

Harshaw said:

Speaking of "standard responses," when did Bannon suddenly become credible?

Click to expand...

Yes, Where has that "Bannon has only a 0.0003% chance of talking sense" thread gone? I can't find it.

Harshaw said:

Speaking of "standard responses," when did Bannon suddenly become credible?

Click to expand...

I didn't realize Bannon's credibility was being impeached in this thread. I was referring to the news report regarding Bannon's statements.

lurchadams said:

I didn't realize Bannon's credibility was being impeached in this thread. I was referring to the news report regarding Bannon's statements.

Click to expand...

No, Bannon's credibility appears to be taken as golden in this thread, you're right. Interesting, that.

Harshaw said:

No, Bannon's credibility appears to be taken as golden in this thread, you're right. Interesting, that.

Click to expand...

You should start another thread with that as the subject. I honestly don't care about Bannon.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

lurchadams said:

Fake news!

TDS!

Lying liberal media using anonymous sources!

I hope I didn't miss any of the standard responses.

Click to expand...

Revoke Vanity Fair's license. :lol:

Geoist said:

I agree with you up to here.

However, there is much to unpack/dispute on the rest...



Narcissists don't usually care much for ideologies. They care for only what benefits them. So while it may seem nice to have a politician that does not seem to care about 'towing partisan lines' (and yes, that aspect is nice), a narcissist is dangerous for a number of other reasons...




This whole being a businessman as a qualification for public office is VERY overrated. Running a business is not the same thing as running a government. Trump is painfully figuring that out. Businesses/corporations rely more on a strict top-bottom hierarchy where the top dog(s) call the shots. Governments, at least the democratic-republic form of governments, have their hierarchical powers dispersed. No one person or group has the ultimate power. Trump has spent decades calling all the shots and now, as a politician, he is finding he cannot simply do that. As a result, he gets into petty spats with government officials, the media, and celebrities.



As a teacher, I would not excuse a student's disgusting, bullying behavior just because that student was getting an 'A' in my class. The fact some of you would look the other way, or even nod in approval, to his behavior tells me his supporters have no spine to defend what is decent.




I find it funny you talk about dishonesty while defending probably the most dishonest president we've ever had in office.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry. I don't respond to chopped up posts that destroy context, introduce straw man arguments that didn't exist before, and imply I am arguing something I did not argue. Thanks for understanding.

Trump: Bannon has no chance of finishing his term.

trouble13 said:

Do it and see how that works out. That will create an unrepairable divide in this country.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I rather think Trump has already done that. He's used fear and hate at every opportunity. NFL and kneeling was pretty much a non-issue until he stirred it up. Then he has Pence stage a walk out on taxpayer money. But hey it's Trump so it's all good, right??
:roll::roll::roll:

Redress said:

So we should never impeach any president, no matter what he has done?

Click to expand...

Nope only a democratic one. Can't you tell??

Trump's approval rating is now hovering around 24% so I don't think that many people would revolt.
We survived Nixon resigning. I think we'd get over Trump.

jghiretire said:

I rather think Trump has already done that. He's used fear and hate at every opportunity. NFL and kneeling was pretty much a non-issue until he stirred it up. Then he has Pence stage a walk out on taxpayer money. But hey it's Trump so it's all good, right??
:roll::roll::roll:

Click to expand...

Yeah yeah yeah its all trumps fault but the lefts total disregard for anyone who disagrees with them had nothing to do with how we got here.

How dare them deplorables think they are entitled to do anything but sit down and stfu. They frogot there place but thankfully we have people like you to remind them of it.





Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

haymarket said:

Actually Trump himself could go along with it even if it was a ruse. If Trump was convinced by Republican leadership that he no longer has any real support on the Hill,and there were real questions about his mental health and fitness for the job, he just night embrace a graceful way out and a health problem - physical and not mental - would be the way to do it and still save face - at least on the surface.

Click to expand...

I don't see that happening with Trump. He has the best IQ - he's smarter than everyone and he's never wrong........no it's going to have to be something air tight and most of the population is going to have to believe it. The problem is, Trump is lashing out at news broadcasters because he doesn't like what they are saying about him. It's not necessarily untrue at all - you can usually find back up for what the media is saying. Trump has tweeted it or it's on video somewhere or another reliable source.
The problem is that so many Trump supporters only listen to Fox or someone like Hannity, Jones or Limbaugh. They blatantly lie - Like Limbaugh told people that hurricane Irma was a hoax and not to evacuate - until HE had to evacuate. Trump is playing this quite well because a lot of his fans don't bother to fact check him.
Look at what's happening to Weinstein with the allegations of sexual abuse. Yet Trump is on tape with Hollywood Access saying much the same - yet Weinstein gets fired - Billy Bush got fired - Clinton was impeached but Trump still gets elected.

trouble13 said:

Yes. If he could get some help. I don't think he can do it alone

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Trump has no interest in trying to repair it at all. All he cares about is the glory - certainly not the nuts and bolts of OMG actual people.

jghiretire said:

Trump has no interest in trying to repair it at all. All he cares about is the glory - certainly not the nuts and bolts of OMG actual people.

Click to expand...

Ty for your unsolicited opinion

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk