Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Trump Administration
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
JustAnotherAustinOwl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,386
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #1
Trump Administration
I figured it might be worthwhile to start a thread about Trump's transition and administration, separate from the election thread.

So far looks like we might see Gingrich, Christie, Guliani, and maybe even Sarah Palin in the administration if the rumors are true.

The two names I'm hearing for Secretary of State are Corker and Bolton. God help us if it's Bolton. I would probably strongly disagree with Corker on a regular basis, but he's a qualified candidate. Bolton is a loon who is held in complete contempt by most of our allies. I could even see the Senate rejecting him.
11-11-2016 12:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


JSA Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,894
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 16
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Trump Administration
Gingrich for State and Ben Carson for Education.
11-11-2016 12:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wiessman Away
All American
*

Posts: 3,226
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 40
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Trump Administration
(11-11-2016 12:00 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  I figured it might be worthwhile to start a thread about Trump's transition and administration, separate from the election thread.

So far looks like we might see Gingrich, Christie, Guliani, and maybe even Sarah Palin in the administration if the rumors are true.

The two names I'm hearing for Secretary of State are Corker and Bolton. God help us if it's Bolton. I would probably strongly disagree with Corker on a regular basis, but he's a qualified candidate. Bolton is a loon who is held in complete contempt by most of our allies. I could even see the Senate rejecting him.

Trump is basically a Trojan Horse for all of the unelectables at this point. That's about the worst possible outcome, no matter which side of the aisle it comes from.

I am one of the few people my age that I know of that has never voted for either a Democrat or a Republican in a presidential election. You reap what you sow, America.
11-11-2016 01:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
westsidewolf1989 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,129
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Trump Administration
(11-11-2016 12:06 PM)JSA Wrote:  Gingrich for State and Ben Carson for Education.

Perhaps Ben Carson could serve as surgeon general and rid everyone of those evil vaccines.
11-11-2016 05:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgewebb Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,967
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 85
I Root For:
Location:

The Parliament AwardsDonators
Post: #5
RE: Trump Administration
When I first saw the title of this thread, my mind read it as "Truman Administration".
If only!
11-11-2016 06:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JustAnotherAustinOwl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,386
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Trump Administration
"GOP foreign policy leaders grow despondent"

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/do...icy-231453


"I told conservatives to work for Trump. One talk with his team changed my mind."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/...story.html
11-17-2016 02:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


I45owl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,374
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 184
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Dallas, TX

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #7
RE: Trump Administration
(11-11-2016 12:00 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  I figured it might be worthwhile to start a thread about Trump's transition and administration, separate from the election thread.

So far looks like we might see Gingrich, Christie, Guliani, and maybe even Sarah Palin in the administration if the rumors are true.

The two names I'm hearing for Secretary of State are Corker and Bolton. God help us if it's Bolton. I would probably strongly disagree with Corker on a regular basis, but he's a qualified candidate. Bolton is a loon who is held in complete contempt by most of our allies. I could even see the Senate rejecting him.

Bolton's a neocon, but he doesn't concern me very much. I doubt anyone will like dealing with him, but I think he'd do ok. The one that concerns me is Michael Flynn as national security adviser. Has anyone else read his book, Field of Flight? I started it, but haven't touched it in several weeks.
11-18-2016 09:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
westsidewolf1989 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,129
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Trump Administration
No Consigliere Christie for the Trump family mob, it appears.

Mitt Romney has emerged as a Secretary of State / Chief Apologizer candidate.
11-18-2016 12:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JustAnotherAustinOwl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,386
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Trump Administration
(11-18-2016 09:07 AM)I45owl Wrote:  
(11-11-2016 12:00 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  I figured it might be worthwhile to start a thread about Trump's transition and administration, separate from the election thread.

So far looks like we might see Gingrich, Christie, Guliani, and maybe even Sarah Palin in the administration if the rumors are true.

The two names I'm hearing for Secretary of State are Corker and Bolton. God help us if it's Bolton. I would probably strongly disagree with Corker on a regular basis, but he's a qualified candidate. Bolton is a loon who is held in complete contempt by most of our allies. I could even see the Senate rejecting him.

Bolton's a neocon, but he doesn't concern me very much. I doubt anyone will like dealing with him, but I think he'd do ok. The one that concerns me is Michael Flynn as national security adviser. Has anyone else read his book, Field of Flight? I started it, but haven't touched it in several weeks.

I lived in the UK during W's first term - seemed like Bolton actually appeared on the foreign press more than US, for some reason. So I have first hand experience watching him with a bunch of non-Americans in the break room while eating lunch and being completely embarrassed. Just gratuitously condescending and insulting, almost a parody of an "Ugly American".

Having said that, yes, Flynn probably the most worrisome name so far. He seems to think the problem is that we *haven't* declared war on all of Islam. I have my criticisms of W, but he went to great lengths to make clear we were not at war with Islam.
11-18-2016 12:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
I45owl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,374
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 184
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Dallas, TX

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #10
RE: Trump Administration
(11-18-2016 12:10 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  
(11-18-2016 09:07 AM)I45owl Wrote:  
(11-11-2016 12:00 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  I figured it might be worthwhile to start a thread about Trump's transition and administration, separate from the election thread.

So far looks like we might see Gingrich, Christie, Guliani, and maybe even Sarah Palin in the administration if the rumors are true.

The two names I'm hearing for Secretary of State are Corker and Bolton. God help us if it's Bolton. I would probably strongly disagree with Corker on a regular basis, but he's a qualified candidate. Bolton is a loon who is held in complete contempt by most of our allies. I could even see the Senate rejecting him.

Bolton's a neocon, but he doesn't concern me very much. I doubt anyone will like dealing with him, but I think he'd do ok. The one that concerns me is Michael Flynn as national security adviser. Has anyone else read his book, Field of Flight? I started it, but haven't touched it in several weeks.

I lived in the UK during W's first term - seemed like Bolton actually appeared on the foreign press more than US, for some reason. So I have first hand experience watching him with a bunch of non-Americans in the break room while eating lunch and being completely embarrassed. Just gratuitously condescending and insulting, almost a parody of an "Ugly American".

Bolton is aligned with folks like Paul Wolfowitz (I never thought the vitriol directed towards him was warranted, in spite of the fact that he may bear more responsibility than anyone else for the decision to go into Iraq). He would represent a return to the policies. I'd expect his problems internationally would be just as you indicated, insulting, condescending, and he'd rub people the wrong way. But, the people that have to deal with him would find a way. Flynn seems like a loose cannon and a Dominionist, as much as anything else.

(11-18-2016 12:10 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  Having said that, yes, Flynn probably the most worrisome name so far. He seems to think the problem is that we *haven't* declared war on all of Islam. I have my criticisms of W, but he went to great lengths to make clear we were not at war with Islam.
11-18-2016 05:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgewebb Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,967
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 85
I Root For:
Location:

The Parliament AwardsDonators
Post: #11
RE: Trump Administration
(11-18-2016 12:03 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  . . . Chief Apologizer candidate.

That role was filled in 2009.
11-18-2016 08:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


JustAnotherAustinOwl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,386
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Trump Administration
I have friends on both sides of the aisle who seem convinced that by the time 2020 rolls around (and possibly even the midterms) we'll be talking about President Pence.

I just don't see it. Trump would have to resign or be removed from office by the republican congress.
11-22-2016 09:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 45,377
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 608
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #13
RE: Trump Administration
(11-22-2016 09:10 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  I have friends on both sides of the aisle who seem convinced that by the time 2020 rolls around (and possibly even the midterms) we'll be talking about President Pence.

I just don't see it. Trump would have to resign or be removed from office by the republican congress.

although he seems to be in good health, he is the oldest man to take the oath of office for a first term.

I wonder if concern for his business interests could lead him to resign after the mid-terms.

I always thought Hillary's agenda would have been met when she stepped off the inaugural platform. maybe his will have been met by then.
11-22-2016 11:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
illiniowl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,006
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 54
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Trump Administration
(11-22-2016 09:10 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  I have friends on both sides of the aisle who seem convinced that by the time 2020 rolls around (and possibly even the midterms) we'll be talking about President Pence.

I just don't see it. Trump would have to resign or be removed from office by the republican congress.

I predicted before the election that whoever won would ultimately be hounded from office in disgrace before his or her term was up. I stand by that prediction. Both candidates were (are) scandal-prone to a mind-boggling degree . . . and winning the votes of 60+ million people makes for quite the form of positive reinforcement.

Neither Trump nor Clinton possesses the humility and insight to realize that his or her victory would have come in spite of, not because of, his or her primary traits, and primarily as a rejection of the other person, as a "lesser of two evils" choice. After all, the lesser of two evils is still evil, and a significant majority of the country -- not just the people who voted for the loser, but many, many of the people who voted for the winner -- would (and do) see the winner as, if not quite literally evil (although clearly some rather hysterical people do), certainly as dangerously flawed, and deserving of close, ongoing scrutiny (forget any "honeymoon period") to make sure he or she does not screw things up in the way that we all feared he or she would be quite likely to do. But of course both candidates are profoundly blind to their own flaws, and winning would only grow their already gargantuan hubris -- and therein lies the seed of downfall.

Had Hillary won, I honestly think she would be working right now on having another private server set up. The woman just can't help herself. And had she won, she would have seen her election as the ultimate vindication of her methods, giving her carte blanche to keep at it. Or, if it wasn't some new illegality committed as president, a full excavation of what she's already done through the Clinton Foundation ultimately would have done her in. She had better hope that Obama not only pardons her but that the pardon is sweepingly phrased. (Actually, she's not the type to sit around and just hope for it. She'll find a way to purchase it.)

In contrast, whereas Hillary's undoing would have (did) come through her venality and her obsession of hiding same through control, secrecy, and caution, Trump's will come through his just-as-pathological impulsiveness, carelessness, and lack of self-control -- traits that he certainly will not feel compelled to modulate now that (in his view) they have propelled him to leadership of the free world.

To say he is prone to step in it is laughably understated. But I think his actual undoing will ultimately come not from some offensive statement (or, likely, accumulation of them) or diplomatic faux pas (or, likely, accumulation of them) but from carelessly contravening some conflict-of-interest statute or some obscure foreign dealing law. After all, that's the sort of thing that can actually get you impeached. He'll accept gifts from foreign countries and fail to report them, or Trump businesses will (surprise) end up with federal contracts, that sort of thing. He has landed in a minefield full of potential missteps for someone with no experience in politics and government service. His whole life has been about wheeling and dealing and making money and serving his ego, and there is no way he can just turn that off. And he doesn't know what he doesn't know, nor does he seem particularly inclined to learn.

There is an interesting dynamic, however. First of all, Trump will never resign (Hillary never would have, either; quitting is not in either person's nature, not even when it would be better for the country, disgustingly). So he would have to be impeached.

Now the interesting thing is that I think Republicans might actually not mind this very much at all, and concomitantly, Democrats would face quite the dilemma in deciding whether taking down a man whom they viscerally hate -- but who is only barely, nominally, a Republican -- is worth it when what is behind Door #2 is a much more genuine and much less flawed conservative.

Trump is the ultimate RINO; Pence is the real deal. Trump has no true friends in Congress, only temporary allies of convenience. There is no basis for loyalty whatsoever. Trump actually did not have much of a coattail effect - most of the elected/reelected Republicans in Congress outperformed him on Election Day; in other words, they won in spite of him, not because of him, and few if any openly endorsed him or even mentioned him. Again, he was elected chiefly because he was not Hillary Clinton (which would have been true vice versa had she won), and secondarily because he had the foresight to pander to white, non-college-educated males and re-form them into a voting bloc, and now that the cat is out of the bag on that, any moron can do it, it doesn't necessarily have to be Trump himself (although I do have to admit his celebrity/outsider status, which obviously is not as easily replicated, played a huge part in his success). Thus Republicans may perceive that he could be tossed overboard without necessarily suffering blowback at the polls, and even better, they would get a real conservative in the White House ahead of schedule. Republicans just might be begging the Democrats to toss them into that briar patch.

Democrats, conversely, may actually prefer a self-hobbling, woefully-out-of-his-depth President Trump, who frankly shares at least some of their views (to the extent he has any views) to a competent President Pence who shares none of them. Anyone who watches "Survivor" knows that there's no sense voting off the most unpopular person - that person will never win jury votes anyway and only makes you look better (this was actually HRC's strategy in trying to make sure she had Trump as her general-election opponent, except she misread who, in fact, was the most unpopular person). Democrats may feel that a perpetually compromised President Trump can be managed, pumped here and there for some contrarian acts against his own (not really) party, and otherwise hung as an albatross around Republicans' necks. He can be their useful idiot.

It will be interesting, though disheartening, to watch.
(This post was last modified: 11-22-2016 12:15 PM by illiniowl.)
11-22-2016 12:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 13,046
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 514
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #15
RE: Trump Administration
Since the day after the election, I have felt a sense of relative calm I haven't felt in many years. I no longer wake up with anxiety about the economy, healthcare, my kid's future, safety of the country. Although it won't be perfect and I won't agree with everything, and there will still be some shenanigans (as there have been for the past 24 years) I am generally relaxed and interested to see exactly how the changes are implemented. That things will be much better for most Americans, even those who opposed this incoming regime (on both sides) is to me a given. The degree of success is the only real question in my mind at this point. While Trump will obviously be and handle things very differently form most career politicians, I do think he will be a superior manager, and hope we can get some of the red tape and career government workers out to cut the fat and inertia.
11-23-2016 01:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JSA Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,894
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 16
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Trump Administration
(11-11-2016 06:15 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  When I first saw the title of this thread, my mind read it as "Truman Administration".
If only!

He wasn't a leftist big-city machine Democrat politician?
Would you really have supported Truman in 1948?
11-23-2016 02:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


georgewebb Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,967
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 85
I Root For:
Location:

The Parliament AwardsDonators
Post: #17
RE: Trump Administration
(11-23-2016 02:16 PM)JSA Wrote:  
(11-11-2016 06:15 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  When I first saw the title of this thread, my mind read it as "Truman Administration".
If only!

He wasn't a leftist big-city machine Democrat politician?
Would you really have supported Truman in 1948?

I'm not sure how I would have felt at the time. But looking back on just a few of his foreign policy achievements:
- the Marshall Plan
- NATO
- the Berlin Airlift
... I know that he did more for the free world, and at a more dangerous time, than most people ever dream of.

I know less about his economic policies -- but then, that's mostly (and properly) the province of Congress.

Also, I'm not entirely sure Kansas City counts as a "big city" :)
11-23-2016 02:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JSA Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,894
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 16
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Trump Administration
(11-23-2016 02:52 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  
(11-23-2016 02:16 PM)JSA Wrote:  
(11-11-2016 06:15 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  When I first saw the title of this thread, my mind read it as "Truman Administration".
If only!

He wasn't a leftist big-city machine Democrat politician?
Would you really have supported Truman in 1948?

I'm not sure how I would have felt at the time. But looking back on just a few of his foreign policy achievements:
- the Marshall Plan
- NATO
- the Berlin Airlift
... I know that he did more for the free world, and at a more dangerous time, than most people ever dream of.

I know less about his economic policies -- but then, that's mostly (and properly) the province of Congress.

Also, I'm not entirely sure Kansas City counts as a "big city" :)

Fair answer.

1948 Democratic platform:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29599

And KC's a big city in "Oklahoma."
(This post was last modified: 11-23-2016 03:07 PM by JSA.)
11-23-2016 03:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rick Gerlach Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,529
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 70
I Root For:
Location:

The Parliament AwardsCrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #19
RE: Trump Administration
(11-23-2016 03:06 PM)JSA Wrote:  
(11-23-2016 02:52 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  
(11-23-2016 02:16 PM)JSA Wrote:  
(11-11-2016 06:15 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  When I first saw the title of this thread, my mind read it as "Truman Administration".
If only!

He wasn't a leftist big-city machine Democrat politician?
Would you really have supported Truman in 1948?

I'm not sure how I would have felt at the time. But looking back on just a few of his foreign policy achievements:
- the Marshall Plan
- NATO
- the Berlin Airlift
... I know that he did more for the free world, and at a more dangerous time, than most people ever dream of.

I know less about his economic policies -- but then, that's mostly (and properly) the province of Congress.

Also, I'm not entirely sure Kansas City counts as a "big city" :)

Fair answer.

1948 Democratic platform:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29599

And KC's a big city in "Oklahoma."

Everything's up to date in Kansas City,
They've gone about as fer as they can go . . . .
11-23-2016 03:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgewebb Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,967
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 85
I Root For:
Location:

The Parliament AwardsDonators
Post: #20
RE: Trump Administration
(11-23-2016 03:06 PM)JSA Wrote:  
(11-23-2016 02:52 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  
(11-23-2016 02:16 PM)JSA Wrote:  
(11-11-2016 06:15 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  When I first saw the title of this thread, my mind read it as "Truman Administration".
If only!

He wasn't a leftist big-city machine Democrat politician?
Would you really have supported Truman in 1948?

I'm not sure how I would have felt at the time. But looking back on just a few of his foreign policy achievements:
- the Marshall Plan
- NATO
- the Berlin Airlift
... I know that he did more for the free world, and at a more dangerous time, than most people ever dream of.

I know less about his economic policies -- but then, that's mostly (and properly) the province of Congress.

Also, I'm not entirely sure Kansas City counts as a "big city" :)

Fair answer.

1948 Democratic platform:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29599

And KC's a big city in "Oklahoma."

Interesting read.

On the foreign policy platform, I love it! And further down:
- "We condemn Communism and other forms of totalitarianism and their destructive activity overseas and at home."

- "We recognize that the United States has become the principal protector of the free world. The free peoples of the world look to us for support in maintaining their freedoms. If we falter in our leadership, we may endanger the peace of the world—and we shall surely endanger the welfare of our own nation."


On the domestic platform, these points sound pretty good, and also fairly specific:
"We are opposed to the imposition of a general federal sales tax."
"We favor the repeal of the discriminatory taxes on the manufacture and sale of oleomargarine." (Hard to believe that margarine was a platform issue...)

I would have been skeptical of this one:
"We shall enact comprehensive housing legislation, including provisions for slum clearance and low-rent housing projects initiated by local agencies."

And I'm pretty sure I would have been against this one, which seems like a classic case of conferring special benefit on an influential group of rent-seekers to the detriment of the public at large:
"Specifically, we favor a permanent system of flexible price supports for agricultural products..."
11-23-2016 04:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.