Refried Boogaloo: Trump Just... Sucks

They'll have a hard time moving forward because Vance -- and everyone else in the administration has been responding to Trump's rando decisions: invade Venezuela, take Greenland, annex Canada, tariffs, tariffs, tariffs, etc. None of those objectives are part of any sort of thought out plan or policy position. It's a bunch of Trump's rando thoughts. The sprinkle on top of that a bunch of retribution using made-up charges against political opponents.

That's not a party platform -- so Vance would need to decide what his policies are moving forward. Based on what I've seen so far, it won't be coherent, but I have no idea which direction he'll move in -- I guess I should do more research on Peter Thiel, since that's likely the best source of information about Vance's positions.

 

Retreat from Europe and direct all miltarism to the American continents-including the US.

 

I honestly don’t know what the future holds for the Republican Party post-Trump. The party leadership has shown itself to be completely feckless and unable to gatekeep craziness out of the party. Vance is the presumptive nominee in 2028, so the earliest a non-MAGA nominee will be on the Republican ticket is 2032.

 

I was wondering what his current take on Trump is.

Interesting he voted for Trump in 2020 to save Western values.

 

Rod 2026-Not like that!

 

Think that might code for something

 

I might be wrong but I didn't take dave as saying that Trump was a 'feature of democracy'... quite the opposite.

I thought he was saying that an UNdemocratic state can be a more reliable precisely because it's undemocratic. Its leaders don't have to worry about all that pesky 'voting' nonsense, where the leadership will change.

Personally, I don't think either is inherently more reliable as a partner, tbh. Authoritarians can flip-flop as well, depending on their situation.

 

This seems sub-optimal...



Apparently, DTH is planning on having his own 'justice department' to do justice stuff against political opponents.

As BG would say...

 

Yes

 

Adolf screaming, crying, throwing up in Hell:

 

I think he is a feature of institutions that have proven to be weak and also an opposition that lacked the stomach to do what was necessary when they had the chance.

 

This makes sense in the point that they won't get enough votes from the senate. I just wouldn't be talking to any press. Makes you look spineless.

 

It's interesting, the way the US system with its codified system of checks and balances, pretty much collapsed, (in terms of the political restraints rather than legal), whereas the British system has held up reasonably well, despite its reliance on the 'good chap' theory of keeping people in check...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/"Good_chap"_theory

The "good chap" theory is a fundamental principle in British political culture, identified by the political historian Peter Hennessy. The "good chap" principle is expressed in the idea that ministers and civil servants recognize unwritten rules regarding the limits of their power, act accordingly, and resign when necessary—even when there are no written or enforceable laws concerning the matter.​

As I've said before, I think describing it solely as the 'good chap' system is a fundamental error as it ignores the fact that the MP's have complete control of most of the levers of government.

It doesn't matter how much someone like Boris Johnson might want to do something, if he can't get the votes in parliament, he's screwed.

There's a lot more immediacy in the power of the government as individual MP's, voted for on that basis, than the US presidential system, which incorporates a lot of its power in the person of the president.

SInce 1945 there have been 8 prime ministers sacked by their OWN party whilst nominally 'in power', mostly among the tories it has to be said.

That also doesn't include those instances where PM's have altered their policies or approach due to pressure from their own backbenchers, which are too many to count, tbh.

 

Financial Times

https://www.ft.com › content › b2872a49-3d43-4a55-a483-de7b19e8e436

EU readies €93bn tariffs in retaliation to Trump's Greenland ...
1 dag geledenEU capitals are considering hitting the US with €93bn worth of tariffs or restricting American companies from the bloc's market in response to Donald Trump's threats to Nato allies opposed ...


I think we should target heavily the US states/companies in those staes with republicans in support of trump's green land aggression.
Hit the Miller/Vance/ etc states big time.

 

The Trump ass kissers like Melonie from Italy are forced to come out with critical statements, as their buddy is ever more eroding their credibility.

 

Xi already found out the hard way the EU bazooka really hurts.

 

Isnot there a kind of Ross Perot to cause havoc now you need it?

 

https://en.protothema.gr/2026/01/18...reenland-tariffs-what-is-the-anti-brexit-act/

 

Ross Perot started this.Reform voters were pulled into the right by Buchanan and talk radio.