Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37

Thread: What da Trump?

  1. #1

    What da Trump?

    Interesting times, eh? If there's one thing we might agree upon it's that nobody has yet made comprehensive sense of Trump's election, what the likely trajectory of his administration might be given internal & external influences, Trump's relationship with his class(who also happen to own the media which pillories him daily). There is disagreement about who Trump's base actually are, and the reactions to those judgments are telling too. Across the board people are getting weird, in real life the formerly apolitical are rabid or clinically depressed. Left punditry, even in a more restrictive sense, has sometimes found itself in a position of defending that asshole against the owned media, whose attacks, snickers and derision have been non-stop. All deserved, but what is their agenda? And the Europeans, especially the Russians, are delusional.

    A few other things floating around in my head:

    Trump got elected. Unlike 2000 or possibly 2004 this one was not gamed to assure the ruling class consensus, or if it was it was done poorly. How does Trump factor into class politics in the US?

    For a lot of liberals Trump is a proxie for the working class.

    Trump's inexperience, native stupidity and arrogance will lead him to being played by various parties whose long standing agendas might be realized.

    If there's one thing about this guy it's that he's all about 'appearance', his appearance.
    "We say to the workers: 'You will have to go through fifteen, twenty, fifty years of civil wars and international wars, not only in order to change existing conditions, but also in order to change yourselves and fit yourselves for the exercise of political power."'

    MARX (On the Communist Trial at Cologne, 1851).

  2. #2
    The Democrats Anti-Russia Campaign Falls Apart

    A while ago Matt Tabbi in Rolling Stone warned: Why the Russia Story Is a Minefield for Democrats and the Media:

    If we engage in Times-style gilding of every lily the leakers throw our way, and in doing so build up a fever of expectations for a bombshell reveal, but there turns out to be no conspiracy – Trump will be pre-inoculated against all criticism for the foreseeable future.
    Sanity is finally winning over. After raising all kinds of shambolic rumors about "Russian interference" the "western" intelligence agencies are walking back their previous outrageous claims:

    Former DNI James Clapper admits (vid) that he has zero evidence for any Trump-Russia collusion;
    The British Foreign Secretary now says there is "no evidence" of any Russian interference with British democracy;
    The German secret services have no proof (in German) for any Russian disinformation campaign.
    There is no evidence for any Russian interference in the U.S., or any other, election. No evidence has been show, despite many claims, that Russia or its proxies hacked John Podesta's emails or the DNC or collaborated with Wikileaks.

    Even the Democrats now concede that the whole mountain of bullshit their anti-Trump and anti-Russian campaign created stinks to high heaven:

    [S]ome Democrats on the Intelligence Committee now quietly admit, after several briefings and preliminary inquiries, they don’t expect to find evidence of active, informed collusion between the Trump campaign and known Russian intelligence operatives, though investigators have only just begun reviewing raw intelligence. Among the Intelligence Committee’s rank and file, there’s a tangible frustration over what one official called “wildly inflated” expectations surrounding the panel’s fledgling investigation.
    Ardent Russia critics like Masha Geesen and former ambassador Michael McFaul now warn of irreparable damage the irrational anti-Russian campaign may cause. A New York Times opinion piece points out that the reignited anti-Russian attitude goes back to the 19th century and was as wrong then as it is now. Claims that meetings between the incoming Trump administration and the Russian ambassador were nefarious are hard to hold up when members of the Clinton campaign also met him. Trump's National Security Advisor Flynn was accused of colluding with Russia when in fact he was paid by Turkey to lobby for Erdogan.

    The disinformation campaign against Russia is falling apart for lack of any evidence. The media who ardently supported it have lost trust. As they obviously lied about Russia how much truth are they telling on other issue?

    Tabbi's warning was late. The damage is done. "Western" relations with Russia have been hurt. But also hurt are the reputations of the media and of the Democratic party. Trump though has been justified with his rejection of that campaign. He now is, as Tabbi predicted, "pre-inoculated" against other accusations - at least with his followers and those sitting on the fence. Trump has now the space to develop his original grand strategic idea of seeking amiable relations with Russia before getting embroiled in any other international dispute. Those relations are now developing on the ground in Syria where cooperation between Russian and U.S. troops intensifies:

    Moscow, Pentagon spokesman Jeff Davis added, has "kept us abreast of their operations" in Manbij, ..
    Signs are that there is way more of that then the Pentagon admits. There have been several meetings at the highest levels of Russian and U.S. military and whoever commands U.S. forces in Syria will surely have a direct line to the Russian ground commander to coordinate their moves.

    The Democrats failed in their anti-Trump, anti-Russia campaign.

    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/03...lls-apart.html
    "We say to the workers: 'You will have to go through fifteen, twenty, fifty years of civil wars and international wars, not only in order to change existing conditions, but also in order to change yourselves and fit yourselves for the exercise of political power."'

    MARX (On the Communist Trial at Cologne, 1851).

  3. #3
    GOP’s Obamacare replacement plan breaks Trump’s campaign vows
    CBO numbers worsen tough sell for GOP on Capitol Hill

    By Tom Howell Jr. - The Washington Times - Tuesday, March 14, 2017
    President Trump vowed to have health care coverage for everybody, to cut costs and to leave Medicaid alone during his historic romp to the White House, but the Republican health care plan he has endorsed would flout each of those promises.
    The Congressional Budget Office says 24 million fewer people will hold insurance a decade from now under the Republican bill. More than half of those would be driven off Medicaid as a result of spending caps Republicans would impose. Meanwhile, rates would increase for older Americans.
    The CBO numbers are proving to be a major hurdle for Republican leaders looking to shore up support on Capitol Hill, but also for a White House that struggled to square the changes with Mr. Trump’s campaign promises.

    White House officials have tried to discredit the CBO’s conclusions, saying the analysts didn’t take into account steps the administration plans to take through regulations, or other bills Congress might pass in addition to the American Health Care Act.
    But press secretary Sean Spicer did retreat from Mr. Trump’s push to get “insurance for everybody,” saying Obamacare failed by trying to mandate universal coverage and the Republicans’ goal is to try to entice people — if they want it.
    “The idea is actually if you could bring down costs and choices and allow people to find a plan that fit their budget — that was tailored to their needs — there’s actually a higher likelihood that they will find something that they want at a price that they can afford,” Mr. Spicer said.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...utm_medium=RSS

    The first of many contradictions Trump gonna have to live with. The Repubs don't give a flying fuck what he promised, it's time to strike while the iron is hot. Same goes for his other 'populist' pronouncements, 'entitlements' that Trump declared sacrosanct will be violated wholesale. At this moment he looks to be keeping to the script, perhaps he will continue to do so but I doubt it can last, unless they got something on him beyond the pall. As these bill take form he's gonna get called out, segments of campaign speeches will be re-played ad nauseaum, a volatile reaction is almost inevitable. Which could go almost anywhere, who knows?

    Perhaps I'm imagining things but the Republicans can and I think are using the legislative process as subtle revenge on the guy who made a monkey out of all of them and putting restraints on his ill-considered populist pronouncement, which is gonna chafe, but how much. They're gonna use him like a borrowed mule to execute their bucket list and then take some degree of an ass-whooping in 2018 as the pendulum swings. Small matter, the Dems will not rescind anything, even if they got the strength, which I doubt they'll have. They are the piss that sets the Republican dye.
    "We say to the workers: 'You will have to go through fifteen, twenty, fifty years of civil wars and international wars, not only in order to change existing conditions, but also in order to change yourselves and fit yourselves for the exercise of political power."'

    MARX (On the Communist Trial at Cologne, 1851).

  4. #4
    In my experience, the majority - the vast majority, in fact - of Trump's support is pretty much entirely negative, i.e. "Fuck you all, I'm voting for fuckin' TRUMP!" Very fatalistic/nihilistic. No hope or expectation of things "getting better" - certainly not on a broader scale. While yes, the racism, misogyny, and general crass, chauvinistic dick-waving play significant roles here, I maintain that these are better understood as manifestations of the aforementioned "We're all going to hell anyway, so we might as well hasten the inevitable" outlook.

    I remember hearing about a post-election poll that revealed that a significantly disproportionate number of Trump's voters would not live to see him be inaugurated - or at the very least, were unlikely to live to his inauguration. Says a lot about "the state of American politics", don't it?

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Allen17 View Post
    In my experience, the majority - the vast majority, in fact - of Trump's support is pretty much entirely negative, i.e. "Fuck you all, I'm voting for fuckin' TRUMP!" Very fatalistic/nihilistic. No hope or expectation of things "getting better" - certainly not on a broader scale. While yes, the racism, misogyny, and general crass, chauvinistic dick-waving play significant roles here, I maintain that these are better understood as manifestations of the aforementioned "We're all going to hell anyway, so we might as well hasten the inevitable" outlook.

    I remember hearing about a post-election poll that revealed that a significantly disproportionate number of Trump's voters would not live to see him be inaugurated - or at the very least, were unlikely to live to his inauguration. Says a lot about "the state of American politics", don't it?
    Well, you are where you is, a place where I expect Trump voters are a distinct minority. Quite the opposite of my environment....'what have we got to lose' is certainly a factor, a big one. And the big question is what happens to his support when grandma loses benefits.

    I don't think a disproportionate number of near death geezers voted Trump, probably more the opposite, and suspect his 'sweet spot' is in the 40-60 range, petty booj and aristos of labor.
    "We say to the workers: 'You will have to go through fifteen, twenty, fifty years of civil wars and international wars, not only in order to change existing conditions, but also in order to change yourselves and fit yourselves for the exercise of political power."'

    MARX (On the Communist Trial at Cologne, 1851).

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by blindpig View Post
    Well, you are where you is, a place where I expect Trump voters are a distinct minority. Quite the opposite of my environment....'what have we got to lose' is certainly a factor, a big one. And the big question is what happens to his support when grandma loses benefits.

    I don't think a disproportionate number of near death geezers voted Trump, probably more the opposite, and suspect his 'sweet spot' is in the 40-60 range, petty booj and aristos of labor.
    It strikes me as a difficult task to "demographize" Trump voters. Trump has no real "base" in a US political sense, this because he has no discernible political ideology. With out the ideology it is exceedingly hard to analyze the Trump Voter. You got a disgruntled Bernie-Bro on one hand and a racist tow-truck owner on the other; a middle-aged waitress and mother of four next to a small town school principal. There is a real element of "the protest vote" in all this, but it is too obscure and unstudied to make much of it. I doubt anyone will take any time or effort to study the actual Trump Voter - they are too unimportant...
    "America was never great"

    "Anyone who analyzes the state of affairs in the world will find that it is the imperialists and capitalists, who subject the world to the worst poverty, the worst backwardness, and they are simply the scourge of mankind." - Fidel

    "Privilege begets psychopathy" - blindpig

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Dhalgren View Post
    It strikes me as a difficult task to "demographize" Trump voters. Trump has no real "base" in a US political sense, this because he has no discernible political ideology. With out the ideology it is exceedingly hard to analyze the Trump Voter. You got a disgruntled Bernie-Bro on one hand and a racist tow-truck owner on the other; a middle-aged waitress and mother of four next to a small town school principal. There is a real element of "the protest vote" in all this, but it is too obscure and unstudied to make much of it. I doubt anyone will take any time or effort to study the actual Trump Voter - they are too unimportant...
    Yup, besides being very (though not exclusively...) white and very not-liberal (as in, the liberals seem to be the ones who are uniquely horrified by the guy, seeing him as "abnormal" or "beyond the pale") the only significant generalization you can say about Trump voters is that it's impossible to generalize about them.

    In the same vein, I think it's important to remember that Trump's hardcore "alt-right" supporters, Trump's primary voters, and Trump's general election voters are to a significant extent, different people. Very much a muddled "coalition" riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions, for sure...

  8. #8
    This post does not directly apply to what has been posted on this thread so far but if we can get the thread on track it will.

    *******************************

    No Falsehood! Our Strength Lies in Stating the Truth!

    Written: Written in September 1905
    Published: First published in 1926 in Lenin Miscellany V. Published according to the manuscript.
    Source: Lenin Collected Works, Progress Publishers, 1972, Moscow, Volume 9, pages 295-299.
    Translated: The Late Abraham Fineberg and Julius Katzer
    Transcription\Markup: R. Cymbala
    Public Domain: Lenin Internet Archive (2004). You may freely copy, distribute, display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet Archive” as your source. • README


    Letter to the Editorial Board[3]

    "We are not strong enough to launch an uprising ... there fore there is no point in linking it up with the Duma ... a constituent assembly should be the battle-cry of our agitation.” That is what the Bund wrote, and no adequate reply was provided by the author of the article in No. 16.[1]

    These words of the Bund’s are an excellent reflection of philistinism within the Social-Democratic movement, philistinism in the sense of banality, the golden mean, insipidity, generalities, mediocrity (qualities that have always been characteristic of the Bund, which, as is known, played the part of an ideological parasite in 1897-1900, in 1901-03, in 1904, and now in 1905).

    That is the current view, the commonly accepted stand point, “common sense” (“the triumph of common sense” in Osvobozhdeniye and “seeing the light”).

    This is a tremendous falsehood, the exposure of which is of the utmost import to the Russian revolution and to the class-conscious proletariat, as the only possible creator of a victorious revolution.

    We are not strong enough to launch an uprising; therefore we should not link it up with anything; therefore the slogan must not call for an armed uprising, but for a constituent assembly.

    It is just like saying: “Naked and unfortunate, hungry and tormented, we are unable to emerge from the swamp in which we are perishing, and ascend to the mountain top where there is light and sunshine, clean air and all the fruits of the earth. We have no ladder, and without it we cannot ascend. We are unable to acquire a ladder. Therefore we should not link up our struggle for an ascent with the slogan of obtaining (respective, making) a ladder. Therefore our slogan should be ’To the mountain top, to the mountain top: there happiness and deliverance, air and light, new spirit and vigour await us’.”

    Since there is no ladder, without which an ascent is impossible—therefore you should not make the acquisition of a ladder your slogan, and work on making one—therefore the slogan should be: “Get to the summit; to the mountain top, there happiness, etc., await you!”

    “As ever, weakness had taken refuge in a belief in miracles,” as Marx said![4]

    Is it the weakness of the proletariat, or the weak thinking of the Bund and the new Iskra that is now taking refuge in a belief in miracles, in the belief that the mountain can be scaled without a ladder, in the belief that a constituent assembly is possible without an uprising?

    Such belief is that of the insane. Without an armed uprising a constituent assembly is a phantasm, a phrase, a lie, a Frankfort talking shop.

    The deceit and falsity of the Osvobozhdeniye trend, of that first bourgeois slogan in Russia to assume a broadly political, mass-political, popular form, consist in that very support of a belief in miracles, in the support of that lie. For the liberal bourgeoisie needs the lie, since to it that is no lie, but the greatest of truths, the truth of its class interests, the truth of bourgeois liberty, the truth of capitalist equality, the holy of holies of the huckster fraternity.

    This is its (the bourgeoisie’s) truth, for what It needs Is not the victory of the people, or the mountain top but a swamp for the masses; it wants the bosses and money-bags to be seated on the backs of the common people; it needs not a victory, but a deal, a compromise with the enemy=a sell-out to the enemy.

    For the bourgeoisie this is no miracle”, but reality, the reality of treason to the revolution, not of the victory of the revolution.

    “...We are not strong enough to acquire a ladder ... we are not strong enough to launch an uprising.” Is that the case, gentlemen?

    If that is the case, then recast all your propaganda and agitation, begin to speak to the workers and the entire people in new and different words, in language framed in a new and different way.

    Tell the people: workers of St. Petersburg, Riga, Warsaw, Odessa, Tiflis ... we are not strong enough to launch a rising and be victorious in a rising. Therefore there is no point in thinking, no point in vain talking about a popular constituent assembly. Don’t debase grand words with petty subterfuges. Don’t cover up your weakness with a belief in miracles. Proclaim your weakness aloud to one and all—a fault confessed is half redressed. False rhetoric and false boastfulness spell moral ruin and lead unfailingly to political extinction.

    Workers! We are too weak to bring about an uprising and win victory in one! Therefore stop all talk about a popular constituent assembly, drive away those liars who speak about it, expose the treachery of the Osvobozhdeniye gentry, the “Duma enthusiasts”, the Constitutional-Democrats, and the rest of the vile crew, for it is only in word that they want a popular constituent assembly; actually they want an assembly directed against the people, one that will not constitute anything new, but will merely patch up the old, one that will not give you new garments, a new life, a new weapon for the great new struggle, but will give you only tinsel over your old rags, only mirages and deceptions, popguns instead of rifles and chains instead of weapons.

    Workers! We are too weak for an uprising. Therefore, do not talk and do not let the Osvobozhdeniye prostitutes, the Constitutional-Democrats, and Duma supporters talk of a revolution; do not allow those bourgeois scoundrels to sully a great popular concept with their claptrap.

    We are weak? That means that we have no revolution, nor can there be one. That is not a revolution of the people, but swindling of the people by the Petrunkeviches and a pack of liberal lackeys of the tsar. That is not a struggle for liberty, but a bartering away of the people’s freedom in exchange for parliamentary seats for the Osvobozhdeniye League. That is not the beginning of a new life, but perpetuation of the old starvation and drudgery, the old stagnancy, and putrefaction.

    We are not strong enough to bring about an uprising, fellow-workers! We are not strong enough to rouse the people to the pitch of revolution! We are not strong enough to attain freedom.... We have only enough strength to jostle the enemy, but not to overthrow him, to jostle him in such a way that Petrunkevich will be able to take a seat beside him. Hence, away with all talk about revolution, liberty, and popular representation; whoever talks of these things without actually working at the ladder needed to attain to these things, at the uprising needed to win them, is a liar and a humbug, who is merely deceiving you.

    We are weak, fellow-workers! We are backed only by the proletariat, and by the millions of peasants who have started a scattered and unarmed struggle in their blind and ignorant way.

    Against us are the entire Court clique and all the workers and peasants clad in soldiers’ uniform and[2]

    To sum up. We are weak. Weakness seeks salvation in a belief in miracles. That is a fact which emerges from the Bund’s statements, from Iskra’s plan.

    But what is the fact, gentlemen? Is it the weakness of the forces of the proletariat of all Russia or the weak thinking of the Bundists and the new-Iskrists?

    Speak the truth:

    1) There is no revolution. There is only a deal between the liberal bourgeoisie and the tsar....

    2) There is no struggle for liberty. There is only the bartering away of the people’s freedom.

    3) There is no struggle for popular representation. There is only representation for the money-bag.

    We are weak ... from this inevitably follows all treachery to the revolution.

    If you want a revolution, freedom, popular representation ... you must be strong.

    You are weak?
    Revolution is for the strong!
    Our lot is to remain in rags.

    You are weak?
    Only the strong win freedom.
    The weak will always remain slaves. The experience of all history.

    You are weak?
    You will be represented by your masters, the slav-owners, the exploiters.
    "Representation” is either conquest by the strong, or a scrap of paper, a hoax, blindfolding the one who is weak so as to dull his faculties....

    Starting from the end

    ω) Who is weak? The forces of the proletariat, or the minds of the Iskrists and Bundists?

    χ) Do you want a revolution? Then you must be strong!

    ξ) We must speak the truth: therein lies our strength, and the masses, the people, the multitude will decide in actual practice, after the struggle, whether we have strength.

    Have we strength?

    Or are we weak.

    ω) Who is weak.

    https://www.marxists.org/archive/len...05/sep/00c.htm
    "We say to the workers: 'You will have to go through fifteen, twenty, fifty years of civil wars and international wars, not only in order to change existing conditions, but also in order to change yourselves and fit yourselves for the exercise of political power."'

    MARX (On the Communist Trial at Cologne, 1851).

  9. #9

    Facing defeat in Republican-controlled House, Trump scuttles Obamacare replacement bill

    Both Trump and the Democrats signaled their readiness to collaborate in devising new means to slash health care benefits.

    More...

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by World Socialist Website View Post
    Both Trump and the Democrats signaled their readiness to collaborate in devising new means to slash health care benefits.

    More...
    While the collapse of the bill is a significant setback for Trump, the claim by Democratic leaders that it is a “victory for the American people” is a lie. The failure of the Republican bill leaves in place the scheme largely devised by the insurance and health care corporations and implemented by the Democrats under Obama, which has already dramatically cut health benefits for millions of working people, increased their out-of-pocket costs, and imposed deductibles so high as to make it impossible for many workers who have policies to see a doctor or obtain prescription medicines.
    Obamacare is a program to slash costs for the corporations and government, undermine employer-paid insurance, and impose the burden of extending bare-bones coverage to some 20 million previously uninsured people on the working class as a whole.
    While the above is certainly true it is very good to display the dysfunction of the Republican Party and the haplessness of Trump in the face of that and his putting the blame on the Dems put the icing on the cake. As best I gather this puts a stick in the spokes of 'tax reform' as the 'savings' from health would largely finance the tax cut. And despite efforts at putting face on this failure ya know there's bad blood and you know who is petty and vindictive. All to the good. May Bannon get his wish but not in the manner he had in mind.
    "We say to the workers: 'You will have to go through fifteen, twenty, fifty years of civil wars and international wars, not only in order to change existing conditions, but also in order to change yourselves and fit yourselves for the exercise of political power."'

    MARX (On the Communist Trial at Cologne, 1851).

  11. #11

    Ask not for whom the cock crows..

    ..it crows for thee

    The American bourgeoisie political system broke on exactly the rocks you would expect: the weakest point, the malcontents. They couldn't appease enough of them (even considering the extremely low standards for appeasement) and that failure has ushered in a peculiar kind of chaos that threatens the particular planks of their agenda AND called in to question their big picture agenda, such as they even have one (or competing versions thereof). The raw, untreated sewage of the capitalist system is bubbling through the cracks in the foundation.

    Whadda they gonna do? Launch a massive re-shoring initiative? Frack til it cracks and pump the world's gas? Divide the world into island enclaves that are the natural extension of their last descent into barbarism in the '40s?

    Truth is, they have very little idea..and no matter how much they squint into the crystal ball to imagine that their own volition will determine the outcome, they are wrong.

    All they can really agree on are: loot, pillage, plunder..

    Political barbarism..
    "What our fish really cost us now is not the positive labour-pain expressed by the number 10 — for this we should have undergone at any rate — but the negative loss of an enjoyment which we might have had, indicated by the number 12."
    Abstinence makes the hare grow fonder

    "Bern" it down Prop it up

    No Child Left Behind Alive; (White) Race To The Top

    H for America: The White Devil you know is better than the White Devil you don't.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Dhalgren View Post
    It strikes me as a difficult task to "demographize" Trump voters. Trump has no real "base" in a US political sense, this because he has no discernible political ideology. With out the ideology it is exceedingly hard to analyze the Trump Voter. You got a disgruntled Bernie-Bro on one hand and a racist tow-truck owner on the other; a middle-aged waitress and mother of four next to a small town school principal. There is a real element of "the protest vote" in all this, but it is too obscure and unstudied to make much of it. I doubt anyone will take any time or effort to study the actual Trump Voter - they are too unimportant...
    This is [U.S.] politic's answer to "I'm not religious, but I'm spiritual." I sense a shift in party marketing after this term: the lack of consistent idealogy will no longer be hidden--it will be encouraged. I'm nervous to see what clowns either side will come up with next.
    "Живём в материал мире, а я материал девушка"
    - Сталин

  13. #13
    My prediction for the next election is either Jon Stewart v. Trump, or a Tupacesque hologram of JFK controlled by Beyoncé vs. Trump.
    "Живём в материал мире, а я материал девушка"
    - Сталин

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by solidgold View Post
    My prediction for the next election is either Jon Stewart v. Trump, or a Tupacesque hologram of JFK controlled by Beyoncé vs. Trump.
    Hologram JFK vs Trump's brain in a jar
    "What our fish really cost us now is not the positive labour-pain expressed by the number 10 — for this we should have undergone at any rate — but the negative loss of an enjoyment which we might have had, indicated by the number 12."
    Abstinence makes the hare grow fonder

    "Bern" it down Prop it up

    No Child Left Behind Alive; (White) Race To The Top

    H for America: The White Devil you know is better than the White Devil you don't.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by solidgold View Post
    My prediction for the next election is either Jon Stewart v. Trump, or a Tupacesque hologram of JFK controlled by Beyoncé vs. Trump.
    What about Cory Booker? He's being aggressively hyped as the "next Obama." As in, an empty-suit black bourgeois "reformer." No less an "influencer" than Mark Zuckerberg has enthusiastically given him his seal of approval.

    Then again, maybe Zuckerberg himself will run. Or at the very least, he'll be Michael Bloomberg's running mate. Hey, celebrity billionaires can be President too! Just look at the guy they have in there now...

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Kid of the Black Hole View Post
    ..it crows for thee

    The American bourgeoisie political system broke on exactly the rocks you would expect: the weakest point, the malcontents. They couldn't appease enough of them (even considering the extremely low standards for appeasement) and that failure has ushered in a peculiar kind of chaos that threatens the particular planks of their agenda AND called in to question their big picture agenda, such as they even have one (or competing versions thereof). The raw, untreated sewage of the capitalist system is bubbling through the cracks in the foundation.

    Whadda they gonna do? Launch a massive re-shoring initiative? Frack til it cracks and pump the world's gas? Divide the world into island enclaves that are the natural extension of their last descent into barbarism in the '40s?

    Truth is, they have very little idea..and no matter how much they squint into the crystal ball to imagine that their own volition will determine the outcome, they are wrong.

    All they can really agree on are: loot, pillage, plunder..

    Political barbarism..
    Yep, no good can come of this.....for them.

    A little 'appeasement' would be so easy, but the Dems are barely even pretending nowadays & in any case they've ginned up Trump-hatred so much that they're in the same situation as the Republicans were 8 years ago, cooperation with the prez is verboten. And so, more legislative paralysis(probably a good thing).In the meantime he's gonna fuck up some shit, and incidentally show that any apparent 'progress' in capitalist society is ephemeral at best.

    Loss of the Soviet Union as a counterweight to their rapacity has deranged them, with the end of history comes the end of restraint. And who better to epitomize the state of the ruling class than their boy Donald. They despise his crudity and arrogance but know in their hearts that he's just like them. Trump is the perfect face for the USA, it's most natural expression. That's some dirty laundry they'd rather not be put on display.

    All the while the hunt for a 'decent' return on investment becomes ever more ruthless when ya didn't think that was possible.
    "We say to the workers: 'You will have to go through fifteen, twenty, fifty years of civil wars and international wars, not only in order to change existing conditions, but also in order to change yourselves and fit yourselves for the exercise of political power."'

    MARX (On the Communist Trial at Cologne, 1851).

  17. #17

    U.S. Becomes Ungovernable, Elites Blame it on Russians


  18. #18
    Ya see? Ya dumb motherfuckers wouldn't listen to commies barking into the night, nooooo.....

    It may be too early to tell for sure, but Donald Trump is looking more and more like a phony. He’s also looking like a weakling. And a political ingrate. All this is coming into stark relief with accelerating events involving Syria. The United States launched dozens of missiles against Syrian military installations to retaliate for the chemical attack on rebel-held territory. Thus did Trump demonstrate that, to the extent that his foreign policy differs from that of his predecessor, it is more aggressive and adventuresome than Obama’s. That’s the opposite of how he campaigned.

    more....

    http://www.theamericanconservative.c...campaigned-on/
    and a dope-slap for all those Russians too....
    "We say to the workers: 'You will have to go through fifteen, twenty, fifty years of civil wars and international wars, not only in order to change existing conditions, but also in order to change yourselves and fit yourselves for the exercise of political power."'

    MARX (On the Communist Trial at Cologne, 1851).

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by blindpig View Post
    Ya see? Ya dumb motherfuckers wouldn't listen to commies barking into the night, nooooo.....



    and a dope-slap for all those Russians too....
    A demonstration of dumbassery is reading the Russian tweets over the last two months! Now, all of a sudden, The Donald is not being honest! What silly bullshit.
    "America was never great"

    "Anyone who analyzes the state of affairs in the world will find that it is the imperialists and capitalists, who subject the world to the worst poverty, the worst backwardness, and they are simply the scourge of mankind." - Fidel

    "Privilege begets psychopathy" - blindpig

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Dhalgren View Post
    A demonstration of dumbassery is reading the Russian tweets over the last two months! Now, all of a sudden, The Donald is not being honest! What silly bullshit.
    Ha, I told Mark Sleboda that anyone who pushed that line needed to eat crow. No response yet.
    "We say to the workers: 'You will have to go through fifteen, twenty, fifty years of civil wars and international wars, not only in order to change existing conditions, but also in order to change yourselves and fit yourselves for the exercise of political power."'

    MARX (On the Communist Trial at Cologne, 1851).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •