SMBC Comics Forum

So at what point should the UN send in troops to protect the people in the US from their government? This week or next?

I'm more worried about Trump internationally than I am domestically. Granted, I am Canadian.
I think hope that America will be able to sort out Trump on their end. There are some positive signs on that front.
But it's the next four years on the international scene that worry me. My hope is that the rest of the world is able to level the scales that Trump is trying to put his finger on.
Trump moves, the world counters, and we come to a peaceable middle. It's not ideal, but it's the world in which we find ourselves.

The rush to overturn as many environmental protections as possible is what scares and angers me the most, long-term. Astro by damn hold on to Merkel.

No numbers attached to it, but 538 is giving solid consideration to him not lasting a full term. I generally hate Mike Pence, but he'd probably keep us out of hot water internationally.

It's been two fucking weeks. Hold us.

538?

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/14 ... peachment/

The above is really what you are looking for, in regards to the various President Trump scenarios.
I wouldn't call it bi-partisan, but it does do a decent job at looking at various futures we might see with Trump as President.


That said, I do see Pence ultimately being a flip-side of Trump.
Pence would probably be much more detrimental domestically, but more stable internationally.
I'm not sure if that's an exchange that's worth making?

I read that article earlier. #2 is my favorite and is already looking even more likely since that was written. He somehow didn't realize he was elevating Bannon to the National Security Council? Cabinet members haven't found the light switches?

Lethal Interjection wrote: That said, I do see Pence ultimately being a flip-side of Trump.
Pence would probably be much more detrimental domestically, but more stable internationally.
I'm not sure if that's an exchange that's worth making?

I don't really think you can be more detrimental than Trump domestically considering what he's done already, honestly. Not that I think Pence would be any better, but my biggest concerns would be human rights issues. Especially lgbt rights, which actually so far is looking like Trump might leave alone (though this is Trump so who the fuck knows.)

The three big advantages Pence has over Trump is that A. he's somewhat stable and predicable, like basically any normal politician is. B. He's probably not going to nuke anyone. (Though I still wouldn't be shocked if he got America involved in another middle eastern war.) C. he probably won't undermine American democracy anymore than any other republican leader tends to.

I still see him filling all the government appointments with republican shills though, and he's really deep in the Koch brother's pockets, so don't expect any reversals on any of the anti-environment/global warming stuff Trump's already done. He'll be just as bad on that front.

The Koch brothers actually went against trump during the primaries (not surprising), but then also refused to support him during the general. I don't know if they think Trump is just that unstable and incompetent that he is a danger to business or if they figured HRC was pro business enough that it wouldn't be too bad to have her, some combination of both or what. But when the Koch brothers are sitting an election out because they don't see anywhere they can get an advantage, things are not good.

Eh, they're not that anti-Trump. Picking Pence as his VP was generally seen as an attempt to appease the Koch brothers, and they did still heavily fund the republican senate race in swing states with a heavy focus on getting republican voters to the polls. One of the Koch brothers was also at Trump's election night victory party and he met with them in December for a private meeting.

Like I agree it's obvious the Koch brothers didn't like Trump as the republican candidate and they were definitely choosing to send a message by not funding his campaign, but now he's president they seem willing to work with what they've got. Definitely the massive environmental deregulations has the Koch Brothers written all over it.

There's also Mike Pompeo who has a long history with the Koch Brothers and who are also major donors of his, and Betsy DeVos who's a major donor to Americans for Prosperity, already in Trumps' cabinet.

I wasn't saying they were anti Trump. They just weren't pro Trump. Obviously they aren't going to completely withdraw their support from the GoP or start supporting the DNC. That would be madness. I do think it is a big deal that they didn't support him once he was nominated though.

I listened to most of the live stream of the 9th circuit hearing on the stay appeal for the TRO on the anti-totally not about muslims-immigration ban last night. That was fun. The justices were really aggressive with Flenjte (the federal council). He also kept trying to deflect and failed. Mitchell hammered Purcell (the Washington state council) pretty hard, especially on the establishment clause claim. But Canby and Friedlander went pretty easy on him and it sounded very much like Canby deliberately bailed Purcell out once when he was struggling with Mitchell's questions.

Washington wants them to send it back to the district court, they didn't seem too keen on that. But I think the best chance the Fed has is the justices restricting the TRO so it doesn't apply to temporary visas like visitors and students, but does apply to green card holders, long time resident aliens and immigration visas. That would basically be a win for them since they've already backpedalled on those. But it would at least somewhat show that the very broad powers of the president on this issue are not limitless like the Trump adminstration keeps claiming.

It's almost like there are three branches of government, Trump is discovering.

I know, it turns out we aren't an authoritian dictatorship.*

*Yet**
**Going to cry myself to sleep again now. And I'm a hetero, cis, white, upper-middle class, male. So privilege-wise I'm one trust fund short of being the most priveleged of US citizens.

smiley_cow wrote:I don't really think you can be more detrimental than Trump domestically considering what he's done already, honestly. Not that I think Pence would be any better, but my biggest concerns would be human rights issues. Especially lgbt rights, which actually so far is looking like Trump might leave alone (though this is Trump so who the fuck knows.)

The three big advantages Pence has over Trump is that A. he's somewhat stable and predicable, like basically any normal politician is. B. He's probably not going to nuke anyone. (Though I still wouldn't be shocked if he got America involved in another middle eastern war.) C. he probably won't undermine American democracy anymore than any other republican leader tends to.

I still see him filling all the government appointments with republican shills though, and he's really deep in the Koch brother's pockets, so don't expect any reversals on any of the anti-environment/global warming stuff Trump's already done. He'll be just as bad on that front.

That's fair.
Ultimately I see Trump as a narrow-minded and unpredictable populist and Pence as a staunchly social-conservative Republican.
So while Trump's domestic policy might see some drift occasionally (presuming* his appointments aren't ultimately holding the reigns), I think Pence would more out-rightly use the Republican house-domination to pursue his social-conservatism, and maybe to greater effect.
And I think the latter would be more detrimental to the domestic policy over time, even though Trump has done plenty of damage in just a few weeks.

*I understand that's a pretty big presumption at this point.

I'm enjoying the theory that Trump can't read very well at all. With his insecurity over his position, hopefully we'll continue to see fighting between his advisors as they move in and out of favor.