Donald Trump, US President #47, US President #45, convicted felon, twice impeached, four times indicted, liable of rape, convicted for financial fraud, guilty of hiding hush money payments to porn actress in attempt to influence 2016 elections

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Donald Trump, US President #47, US President #45, convicted felon, twice impeached, four times indicted, liable of rape, convicted for financial fraud, guilty of hiding hush money payments to porn actress in attempt to influence 2016 elections

1 | ... | 435 | 436 | 437 | 438 | 439 | 440 | 441 | 442 | 443 | 444 | 445 | ... | 2486

9662 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15653

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1833631 30-Jul-2017 09:21

CNN - Donald Trump ranked himself 2nd on a list of most 'presidential' presidents

At a rally in Youngstown, Ohio, Tuesday night, President Donald Trump mused on critics who say he doesn't act "presidential" enough.

"It is much easier to act presidential than what we are doing here tonight, believe me," Trump assured his audience. "With the exception of the late, great Abraham Lincoln, I can be more presidential than any president that's ever held this office."

Sideface

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19086 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16356

Lifetime subscriber

#1833645 30-Jul-2017 10:16

Greater than Franklin Roosevelt, yeah, right. Lincoln is probably the only president's name he knows.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3317

Trusted

#1833649 30-Jul-2017 10:41

Rikkitic:

Greater than Franklin Roosevelt, yeah, right. Lincoln is probably the only president's name he knows.

Lincoln? That's a make of car, ain't it?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1833707 30-Jul-2017 13:35

"Greatness" is subjective and very dependant on whether you're polling internally or globally.

Putin, Erdogan, Kim Jong Un and Duterte are probably "great" leaders if you poll internally.

Trump has a long long way to go.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19086 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16356

Lifetime subscriber

#1833719 30-Jul-2017 13:58

Fred99:

"Greatness" is subjective and very dependant on whether you're polling internally or globally.

Putin, Erdogan, Kim Jong Un and Duterte are probably "great" leaders if you poll internally.

Trump has a long long way to go.

There is a difference between 'greatness' and 'impact'. The leaders you mention all have significant impact on their countries and maybe the world, and might all make the cover of Time. But Roosevelt created the New Deal, and then Lend Lease to keep the British going. And then there was Churchill, of course. Both men also had an abundance of faults, and Churchill in particular was hardly an example of enlightenment, but they rose to the occasion when called up to do so and were truly 'great'. Those others do not deserve to even be mentioned in the same breath.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1833825 30-Jul-2017 17:34

Rikkitic:

Fred99:

"Greatness" is subjective and very dependant on whether you're polling internally or globally.

Putin, Erdogan, Kim Jong Un and Duterte are probably "great" leaders if you poll internally.

Trump has a long long way to go.

There is a difference between 'greatness' and 'impact'. The leaders you mention all have significant impact on their countries and maybe the world, and might all make the cover of Time. But Roosevelt created the New Deal, and then Lend Lease to keep the British going. And then there was Churchill, of course. Both men also had an abundance of faults, and Churchill in particular was hardly an example of enlightenment, but they rose to the occasion when called up to do so and were truly 'great'. Those others do not deserve to even be mentioned in the same breath.

It depends who writes the history. Reagan is considered one of the "great" presidents by very many Americans.

gzt

18752 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7883

Lifetime subscriber

#1833843 30-Jul-2017 18:19

Fred99:
Rikkitic:

Fred99:

"Greatness" is subjective and very dependant on whether you're polling internally or globally.

Putin, Erdogan, Kim Jong Un and Duterte are probably "great" leaders if you poll internally.

Trump has a long long way to go.

There is a difference between 'greatness' and 'impact'. The leaders you mention all have significant impact on their countries and maybe the world, and might all make the cover of Time. But Roosevelt created the New Deal, and then Lend Lease to keep the British going. And then there was Churchill, of course. Both men also had an abundance of faults, and Churchill in particular was hardly an example of enlightenment, but they rose to the occasion when called up to do so and were truly 'great'. Those others do not deserve to even be mentioned in the same breath.

It depends who writes the history. Reagan is considered one of the "great" presidents by very many Americans.

The only reason for that is GW was so bad he required something to prop him up. Reagan nostalgia began.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1833847 30-Jul-2017 18:25

I preferred GWB with his cocaine-brain over DJT - who claims to be drug-free so doesn't take the anti-psychotics he clearly needs.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1833884 30-Jul-2017 19:52

His tweet about China was on the money though. The US could well shoot down the test ICBM's as "protection against our nation" PRNK will call that a declaration of war, who cares. What would China do? The US is merely protecting itself, not starting a conflict. China needs to be a bit careful here. Lack of action can be seen as encouragement. Which it is, in as far as keeping NK intact.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30018 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6218

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1833914 30-Jul-2017 20:27

twitter is the new diplomatic platform?

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80682 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41136

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1834037 31-Jul-2017 08:57

And how do you authenticate a tweet? Who says he orders something stupid via Twitter and is not an aide posting? Like the stupid transgender thing that neither Congress or armed forces knew about?

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

Paul1977

5171 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2192

#1834050 31-Jul-2017 09:07

tdgeek:

His tweet about China was on the money though. The US could well shoot down the test ICBM's as "protection against our nation" PRNK will call that a declaration of war, who cares. What would China do? The US is merely protecting itself, not starting a conflict. China needs to be a bit careful here. Lack of action can be seen as encouragement. Which it is, in as far as keeping NK intact.

North Korea's ICBM tests are for internal propaganda purposes only. Any attack on the USA or China would result in North Korea being utterly obliterated, and KJU & his generals are well aware of this (even if they have convinced their people otherwise).

Paul1977

5171 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2192

#1834056 31-Jul-2017 09:09

freitasm: And how do you authenticate a tweet? Who says he orders something stupid via Twitter and is not an aide posting? Like the stupid transgender thing that neither Congress or armed forces knew about?

Speaking of which, does the POTUS have authority to unilaterally ban transgenders in the military?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1834063 31-Jul-2017 09:14

Paul1977:

tdgeek:

His tweet about China was on the money though. The US could well shoot down the test ICBM's as "protection against our nation" PRNK will call that a declaration of war, who cares. What would China do? The US is merely protecting itself, not starting a conflict. China needs to be a bit careful here. Lack of action can be seen as encouragement. Which it is, in as far as keeping NK intact.

North Korea's ICBM tests are for internal propaganda purposes only. Any attack on the USA or China would result in North Korea being utterly obliterated, and KJU & his generals are well aware of this (even if they have convinced their people otherwise).

That's correct.

DPRK has had the capability to wreak havoc on South Korea for many decades - but haven't.

They're trolling the troll.

They also can't miniaturise a nuke to put on their ICBM - even if they had the technological know-how they can't refine Pt 239 to high enough grade.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80682 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41136

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1834066 31-Jul-2017 09:23

Paul1977:

freitasm: And how do you authenticate a tweet? Who says he orders something stupid via Twitter and is not an aide posting? Like the stupid transgender thing that neither Congress or armed forces knew about?

Speaking of which, does the POTUS have authority to unilaterally ban transgenders in the military?

Apparently not. IANAL but read earlier this week that the President is Commander-in-Chief but not manager. This is something the Congress has to authorise and the Pentagon has to implement. A tweet is not law or Executive Order.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

1 | ... | 435 | 436 | 437 | 438 | 439 | 440 | 441 | 442 | 443 | 444 | 445 | ... | 2486