Will the Trump-Russia connection lead to Trump's downfall?

Mevater

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 9:57 pm

Generally, Im not a fan of the New York Times, but on this topic, and some other non-Israel related topics, I tolerate them and sometimes Im interested in their outlook.

"The mystery at the core of the Trump-Russia story is motive.

President Trump certainly seems to have a strange case of Russophilia. He has surrounded himself with aides who have Russian ties. Those aides were talking to Russian agents during the campaign, and some are now pushing a dubious peace deal in Ukraine. Trump recently went so far as to equate the United States and Vladimir Putin’s murderous regime."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0......html

youngishbear

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 10:23 pm

I like this line: "The first is the justification that Trump himself gives, and you shouldn’t dismiss it simply because he has an open relationship with reality." LOL

I don't dabble in prophecy. I would be very glad to see him go, but Mike Pence is not a reassuring alternative.

gold21

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 10:32 pm

youngishbear wrote:

I like this line: "The first is the justification that Trump himself gives, and you shouldn’t dismiss it simply because he has an open relationship with reality." LOL

I don't dabble in prophecy. I would be very glad to see him go, but Mike Pence is not a reassuring alternative.

I always wonder why Trump haters claim they davka hate Trump when the truth is that they take issue with nearly all conservative candidates. Pence is a nice likeable guy.... But he is a conservative.... Why don't you like him?

gold21

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 10:35 pm

Trump has no real connections to Russia, but has surrounded himself with people who will help encourage a better US-Russian relationship. It's something he would like to accomplish during his presidency. No, I don't think this will take Trump down. Not at all. Although the media would like it to.

amother

Denim

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 10:41 pm

There are no Russian ties. Great that the NYT is now dabbling in conspiracy theories.

Sad though that a major news organization is so gleefully hoping for the country's president to be taken down.

Mevater

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 11:01 pm

Interesting point of view:

"And the crowd that really matters—at voting booths in November, 2020—will continue to have the choice of President Trump and a party that stands in opposition, but doesn't stand for much of anything else. "

Why the Russia scandal will hurt Democrats more than Trump
Jordan Chariton

As I travel the country reporting on injustice and life-or-death situations like big oil trampling on Standing Rock and lead-poisoning clouding minority communities in Flint and East Chicago, Indiana, I've been met by a painful smack of cognitive dissonance.

Establishment Democrats and some Republicans have made a collective mad dash to the cameras to convince the American people that Russiais the source of all of our ills.

Aiding them is the corporate media industrial complex, whose engines are humming along ferociously, offering 24/7 cable news airwaves and print columns to hyperventilate over Russia influencing our elections—allegations still unaccompanied by incontrovertible evidence—and the scary, big bear that is President Donald Trump's inner circle holding untoward calls with Russian officials.

President Donald Trump answers questions during a news conference at the White House in Washington, February 16, 2017. Trump: I have nothing to do with Russia
Thursday, 16 Feb 2017 | 1:57 PM ET | 01:46
Meanwhile, the blue-collar workers, millennials, and former Obama voters who abandoned Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party in November, remain standing alone at the dance, with scarce outreach to them other than email blasts spinning Trump controversies into donation requests.

Instead, the corporate Democrats are sticking with their failed election campaign strategy: demonize and oppose Trump at all ends, making him so unpalatable to the majority of Americans, that they'll have no choice but to vote for Democrats.

Ask Clinton how that worked out.

Is Trump proving to be a menace to progress and basic American values? Absolutely.

Are the grassroots (no, sorry President Trump, George Soros isn't paying hundreds of thousands of protestors) protests swarming the country against Trump's xenophobic immigration and refugee policies a good thing? Absolutely.

Should the Democratic Party be leading the charge of that "resistance" to Trump's fascistic tendencies? Absolutely.

And should there be a mass pressure campaign to get Trump to release his taxes, so we can see the full extent of his ties to Russia, and an independent investigation into whether his campaign in any way coordinated with Russian officials during the presidential campaign.

Of course.

But, alas, resistance is not enough. On the issues the exploding progressive movement and reignited blue-collar workforce cares about, like jobs, student debt and health care, the Democratic Party continues to be absent.

"Democrats are sticking with their failed election campaign strategy: demonize and oppose Trump at all ends, making him so unpalatable to the majority of Americans, that they'll have no choice but to vote for Democrats. Ask Clinton how that worked out."
Aside from Senators Bernie Sanders and Tom Udall and House Representatives Tulsi Gabbard and Raul Grijalva, the Democratic Party has been largely MIA on the Dakota Access Pipeline, a crude oil pipeline currently being routed under the longest river in America, which upon its inevitable spill will poison the drinking water for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and 18 million others downstream. (Parent company Energy Transfer Partners has had 69 spills between in the last two years.)

Neither Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi nor Elizabeth Warren—who has proudly boasted about her Native American heritage—have led press conferences or town halls on the desecration of Native American lands by DAPL and other big oil companies; the grave threat DAPL poses to clean water; or the brazen conflict of interest President Trump has considering he's personally invested in DAPL.

There's also been crickets from the Democratic Party regarding a predominately minority community in Indiana being lead-poisoned. East Chicago, a poor Latino and African American community built up for decades on top of lead plants, insecticide factories, and other toxic industrialized plants, now has a lead crisis that may prove to be even worse than Flint.

Lead levels in ground soil have been found to be as much as 212 times the EPA's "allowable limit," and despite the EPA telling me in August that there's no issue with the water, the water is now showing toxic lead levels.

Even more egregious than these facts, VP Mike Pence, who was Indiana Governor when these troubling numbers came out, ignored this crisis in a minority community, failing to visit East Chicago and later denying the city's request to declare it an emergency disaster (which his Lt. Governor, and new Governor, Eric Holcomb just granted).

But Pence acted quickly months before East Chicago's crisis became public. In the face of a less severe water contamination issue in 97 percent white Greentown, Indiana. Pence swiftly met with officials and within two months, the problem was fixed.

East Chicago isn't the only lead and water crisis. As Reuters reported, there are 3,000 other municipalities with lead problems.

And that's not to mention that, despite highly questionable EPA proclamations that Flint's water levels are now under the "allowable" lead limit, the city is still embroiled in a crisis, with thousands of residents still suffering through water-related health issues and still unable to safely drink water.

But Democrats flood the media to rail about Russia, making abstract claims it stole the election—which in reality is the Party's safety blanket to avoid dealing with the fact that they've been exposed as public servants for corporations and special interests—while largely ignoring the suffering of the people they claim to represent.

If Democrats continue to exclusively deploy the obsess-over-all-things-Trump strategy, without simultaneously rallying crowds to offer alternative policy prescriptions for a number of issues, or speaking out loudly on behalf of the movements like DAPL or crises' like East Chicago, they'll continue to simply ride the coattails of organic crowds and activism in opposition to Trump.

But Trump will continue to toss crumbs to organized labor, conservative Democrats, and the blue-collar workers that put him in office, keeping them in his voting column.

And the crowd that really matters—at voting booths in November, 2020—will continue to have the choice of President Trump and a party that stands in opposition, but doesn't stand for much of anything else.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/21......html

ectomorph

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 11:06 pm

gold21 wrote:

exactly. The Democrats think Republicans are crazy and don't respect any of their opinions. That is why they can't see past the end of their noses.

zaq

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 11:14 pm

To answer the question--one can only hope so.

Simple1

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 11:42 pm

gold21 wrote:

I didn't vote for Trump. But I would be happy to see Pence replace him. I understand that liberals dislike him because he is very conservative.

gold21

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 11:52 pm

Simple1 wrote:

I didn't vote for Trump. But I would be happy to see Pence replace him. I understand that liberals dislike him because he is very conservative.

Is he very conservative? I'm saying, more than like George W Bush, Mitt Romney, types? I don't honestly know. Now I'm curious.

youngishbear

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 11:56 pm

gold21 wrote:

I view Trump as unfit for the presidency, and a shanda. Pence is perfectly fit for office. I don't dislike him as a person. He is very conservative, though, and if you're fairly liberal, that is not on your checklist of ideal qualities in a president.

My point was basically "it's not like removing Trump will put a Democrat in office."

gold21

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 11:59 pm

youngishbear wrote:

Ah, OK. Gotcha.

33055

Wed, Feb 22 2017, 12:00 am

Mevater wrote:

The democrats are also wrong on immigration and sanctuary cities. The large majority of Americans are against Sanctuary Cites and for immigration reform.

http://thehill.com/homenews/ad.....ities

The tax burden on the local population to support sanctuary cities is unfair. Our laws need to be enforced and the tax burden redistributed across a broader base.

marina

Wed, Feb 22 2017, 12:10 am

I voted for the Other option because although I think Trump has acted/will continue to act improperly with Russia, his core base won't care. So it won't be his downfall.

youngishbear

Wed, Feb 22 2017, 12:14 am

gold21 wrote:

Is he very conservative? I'm saying, more than like George W Bush, Mitt Romney, types? I don't honestly know. Now I'm curious.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/n.....t-co/

The ACU gave him the highest rating of all vice presidents.

gold21

Wed, Feb 22 2017, 12:54 am

youngishbear wrote:

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/3/american-conservative-union-mike-pence-the-most-co/

The ACU gave him the highest rating of all vice presidents.

Interesting!

Maya

Wed, Feb 22 2017, 6:45 am

marina wrote:

I voted for the Other option because although I think Trump has acted/will continue to act improperly with Russia, his core base won't care. So it won't be his downfall.

Same.

SixOfWands

Wed, Feb 22 2017, 9:16 am

gold21 wrote:

Is he very conservative? I'm saying, more than like George W Bush, Mitt Romney, types? I don't honestly know. Now I'm curious.

He's well to the right of Bush and Romney who were, in the grand scheme of things, relatively moderate. Pence is a True Believer, and while True Believers may (or may not) be great people, they rarely make great politicians, as its difficult for them to compromise.

For example, Pence signed a bill that would have made abortion because of a diagnosis of genetic anomaly illegal. Now, as I think we can agree, there are times when Jewish law would counsel abortion for those reasons, so that law would have been contrary to Jewish law. And I'll be perfectly honest and say that I am pro-choice, so its entirely contrary to my political beliefs. But it is wholly consistent with Pence's religious beliefs.

He's also made some homophobic comments -- nothing that would make your hair stand on end, but homophobic nonetheless.

SixOfWands

Wed, Feb 22 2017, 9:23 am

youngishbear wrote:

Agreed.

I might disagree with virtually every position that Pence has, but I've no reason to doubt that he has a basic core of competency, and undertakes all of his actions with serious thought as to their consequences.

I don't feel that way about Trump.

amother

Coral

Wed, Feb 22 2017, 9:30 am

"Democrats are sticking with their failed election campaign strategy: demonize and oppose Trump at all ends, making him so unpalatable to the majority of Americans, that they'll have no choice but to vote for Democrats. Ask Clinton how that worked out."

I actually believe that negative campaigning is often a very effective and useful strategy. To imply that it doesn't work and substantiate it with the election result is inaccurate. Negative campaigning and smearing political opponents normally works. It's just that in this case Clinton was such an awful candidate that she couldn't overcome Trump's patheticness.