Donald Trump and the aftermath of his presidency

[Bromley boy]

At least the USA has a written constitution... and I dare say that the first amendment is a good idea.

The US also has the death penalty, enormous inequality, epidemic levels of gun violence etc. Why is a written constitution any better than the unwritten but much older one we have in the UK?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

One could argue that our constitution is written... just not all in the same document!

 

[ainsworth74]

I don't think there's necessarily anything bad about having a written constitution but only if you change it as time moves on. There are of course mechanisms within the US Constitution to add amendments (and use amendments to retract previous provisions of the Constitution) but, since 1971, no one seems to be willing to put forward an amendment for ratification. Which, compared to the rate at which they were proposed and ratified prior to 1971, is a very long time to go without a change (an amendment was ratified in 1992 but it had originally been proposed in the 1700s)!

On the Second Amendment people perhaps forget that when it was being written guns worked like this:

Rather than this:

I rather think if they'd known how guns were going to develop they'd have worded it differently...

And yet, these days because so many people and politicians (Republican's in particular) refuse to accept that perhaps the Founding Fathers included a mechanism to amend the constitution for the reason that time moves on nothing changes. The Second Amendment seems to be one of the most egregious examples but I'm sure there are other areas.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

I don't think there's necessarily anything bad about having a written constitution but only if you change it as time moves on. There are of course mechanisms within the US Constitution to add amendments (and use amendments to retract previous provisions of the Constitution) but, since 1971, no one seems to be willing to put forward an amendment for ratification. Which, compared to the rate at which they were proposed and ratified prior to 1971, is a very long time to go without a change (an amendment was ratified in 1992 but it had originally been proposed in the 1700s)!

On the Second Amendment people perhaps forget that when it was being written guns worked like this:

Rather than this:

I rather think if they'd known how guns were going to develop they'd have worded it differently...

And yet, these days because so many people and politicians (Republican's in particular) refuse to accept that perhaps the Founding Fathers included a mechanism to amend the constitution for the reason that time moves on nothing changes. The Second Amendment seems to be one of the most egregious examples but I'm sure there are other areas.

I get that guns worked differently back in the days of Founding Fathers, but they also didn't have the internet back then, so strictly speaking the First Amendment wouldn't allow people to campaign online for anti-gun or pro-gun control laws because of the different time period if going by that argument. Then again, you did say "only if you change it as time moves on", so I doubt you'd be one to cherry pick. However, I think what many forget about the second amendment is that it was written to be modeled after the Swiss militia system, not to ensure an all-out gun-toting trigger-happy nation where mass shootings have to have a certain number of deaths to be classified as such. I wouldn't argue that following the second amendment is the problem, I'd say it's not actually properly reading it. Unfortunately at this point, American culture is too past the point where any amount of control would work, and really the only way of sorting it out is a cultural and social change.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

In other Donald Trump news, I saw a news report on ITV earlier that suggests he may have "Defiance Disorder" which was described as him compulsively being unable to resist doing what he's been told not to do. I get some might think he shouldn't be President because of this, but personally if I worked at the White House I'd be using it against him. If I had a policy I think he could do with implementing, I'd tell him not to pass it. By the very nature he should do it, of course that is assuming he doesn't actually stand for anything and just changes when it suits him (which judging his history, he does). Bit of a hard one really...

 

[Bromley boy]

One could argue that our constitution is written... just not all in the same document!

You might be surprised just how much of it relies on convention and tradition and isn’t actually written down anywhere.

Personally I reject the notion that this is somehow worse than a written constitution. As I say you’ve only got to look at many of the issues in the states - from gun crime to a narcissistic lunatic in the White House to see that merely having a written constitution is no great advantage.

The content of the constitution is far more important than whether it is written or unwritten.

 

[Bromley boy]

I don't think there's necessarily anything bad about having a written constitution

Agreed. But I’d qualify that by saying there isn’t anything intrinsically good about it, either.

 

[Confused147]

Cant believe DT actually has his own topical discussion thread in here haha it just shows how powerful and brilliant he is.

He's a great guy and he will always get my support. So much has gone really well for America since he became president and he speaks the truth yet everything he says always upsets or offends. I think its media, they just need to back off and leave him alone stop sensationalising him and putting him into bad light and exaggerating. We all know this country needs someone like him

 

[96tommy]

See people are planning protests when he comes over here on a state visit later this year. Seems a bit over the top to say much more "evil" people have had state visits here in recent times.

 

[trash80]

The difference is the US president is supposed to be a beacon of democracy and decency, leader of the free world and all that stuff which is why people feel strongly about Trump as opposed to General E.V.Ilmurderer, dictator of Unpleasantstan visiting.

 

[Darandio]

Cant believe DT actually has his own topical discussion thread in here haha it just shows how powerful and brilliant he is.

He's a great guy and he will always get my support. So much has gone really well for America since he became president and he speaks the truth yet everything he says always upsets or offends. I think its media, they just need to back off and leave him alone stop sensationalising him and putting him into bad light and exaggerating. We all know this country needs someone like him

^^ Fake news.

 

[fowler9]

^^ Fake news.

.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

^^ Fake news.

I'm not a fan of Donald Trump, I never have been even before he got into the Presidential race. But that's a bit of an unfair response isn't it? I mean if this individual feels positively about Trump we can engage with them as to why they think so and why we disagree, or you can even chose to ignore them if you don't wish to engage in debate. But dismissing someone's opinion as fake news is a bit unfair if you ask me.

The difference is the US president is supposed to be a beacon of democracy and decency, leader of the free world and all that stuff which is why people feel strongly about Trump as opposed to General E.V.Ilmurderer, dictator of Unpleasantstan visiting.

That's quite unfortunate really when you consider that there hasn't really been a president in recent history that's been that beacon. In fact, because the point of decency is subjective to the individual (ie. one might think Obama is decent while another won't), I don't think it's really going to be truly represented at all.

 

[Darandio]

I'm not a fan of Donald Trump, I never have been even before he got into the Presidential race. But that's a bit of an unfair response isn't it? I mean if this individual feels positively about Trump we can engage with them as to why they think so and why we disagree, or you can even chose to ignore them if you don't wish to engage in debate. But dismissing someone's opinion as fake news is a bit unfair if you ask me.

It was tongue in cheek more than anything. They are more than welcome to justify their views, i'll respond accordingly.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

It was tongue in cheek more than anything. They are more than welcome to justify their views, i'll respond accordingly.

Apologies for the misunderstanding. Text is particularly difficult to interpret correctly sometimes...

 

[AlterEgo]

Cant believe DT actually has his own topical discussion thread in here haha it just shows how powerful and brilliant he is.

He's a great guy and he will always get my support. So much has gone really well for America since he became president and he speaks the truth yet everything he says always upsets or offends. I think its media, they just need to back off and leave him alone stop sensationalising him and putting him into bad light and exaggerating. We all know this country needs someone like him

Your username seems apt.

 

[AlterEgo]

That's quite unfortunate really when you consider that there hasn't really been a president in recent history that's been that beacon. In fact, because the point of decency is subjective to the individual (ie. one might think Obama is decent while another won't), I don't think it's really going to be truly represented at all.

Put it this way, other countries now laugh at the USA.

The USA is not calling the shots any more. Trump went and recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and all the USA’s traditional friends said “nope, bonkers, FU”.

The USA is entirely diminished with him in charge.

 

[fowler9]

I'm not a fan of Donald Trump, I never have been even before he got into the Presidential race. But that's a bit of an unfair response isn't it? I mean if this individual feels positively about Trump we can engage with them as to why they think so and why we disagree, or you can even chose to ignore them if you don't wish to engage in debate. But dismissing someone's opinion as fake news is a bit unfair if you ask me.

Darandio responded to someone supporting Trump just the way Trump responds to people he doesn't agree with. I thought it was a good bit of political satire. Entertained me anyway. I personally thought Confused147 was taking the mick anyway.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

Darandio responded to someone supporting Trump just the way Trump responds to people he doesn't agree with. I thought it was a good bit of political satire. Entertained me anyway. I personally thought Confused147 was taking the mick anyway.

There was a very clear misunderstanding because I didn't realise it was satire originally.

Put it this way, other countries now laugh at the USA.

The USA is not calling the shots any more. Trump went and recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and all the USA’s traditional friends said “nope, bonkers, FU”.

The USA is entirely diminished with him in charge.

The US has gradually been losing it's superpower status for years. Trump has managed to speed this process up, but it was inevitable that the US wouldn't rule forever. The British once ruled a third of the world in a massive Empire, now the world sees us as a tiny island who is barely holding her own against the European Union (who are one of the likely candidates to be the next superpower).

 

[96tommy]

I'm not a fan of Donald Trump, I never have been even before he got into the Presidential race. But that's a bit of an unfair response isn't it? I mean if this individual feels positively about Trump we can engage with them as to why they think so and why we disagree, or you can even chose to ignore them if you don't wish to engage in debate. But dismissing someone's opinion as fake news is a bit unfair if you ask me.



That's quite unfortunate really when you consider that there hasn't really been a president in recent history that's been that beacon. In fact, because the point of decency is subjective to the individual (ie. one might think Obama is decent while another won't), I don't think it's really going to be truly represented at all.

Yeah, thats quite true. I wouldn't say there has been a good president in my lifetime. Obama I was never huge fan of. He reminded me a bit of Tony Blair and even though I am a Labour supporter, was never a fan of Blair.

I have quite a few friends from the States and they all said choosing Clinton or Trump was an extremely hard choice.

 

[NSEFAN]

Cant believe DT actually has his own topical discussion thread in here haha it just shows how powerful and brilliant he is.

He's a great guy and he will always get my support. So much has gone really well for America since he became president and he speaks the truth yet everything he says always upsets or offends. I think its media, they just need to back off and leave him alone stop sensationalising him and putting him into bad light and exaggerating. We all know this country needs someone like him

I wonder how many of the positive things which US citizens may be experiencing are the legacy of the previous administration, or the one before that? Trump might fancy himself as the CEO of the United States, but the full effect of policy can easily take years to become apparent.

 

[najaB]

Yeah, thats quite true. I wouldn't say there has been a good president in my lifetime. Obama I was never huge fan of. He reminded me a bit of Tony Blair and even though I am a Labour supporter, was never a fan of Blair.

The two gentlemen have very little in common.

 

[fowler9]

The US has gradually been losing it's superpower status for years. Trump has managed to speed this process up, but it was inevitable that the US wouldn't rule forever. The British once ruled a third of the world in a massive Empire, now the world sees us as a tiny island who is barely holding her own against the European Union (who are one of the likely candidates to be the next superpower).

I don't think it is entirely true. As much as I don't like it the US has more carrier battle groups at sea at any one time as the rest of the world put together, not many less Nuclear Missile Submarines than the rest of the world put together, an air force that puts most of the rest of the world to shame. They are still very much "the" world superpower. When Russia sails its carrier and a few cruisers down the North Sea and send a few Tu-160's over the gap between Iceland and Scandanavia that is pretty much it for them.

 

[najaB]

an air force that puts most of the rest of the world to shame

The inventory of AMARG is the fourth largest air force in the world, if memory serves correctly. The USA is still a military superpower (they spend more than the next nine largest military budgets *combined*) but they are losing their position as a cultural superpower.

 

[fowler9]

The inventory of AMARG is the fourth largest air force in the world, if memory serves correctly. The USA is still a military superpower (they spend more than the next nine largest military budgets *combined*) but they are losing their position as a cultural superpower.

I agree, but I was talking militarily not culturally.

 

[greyman42]

Cant believe DT actually has his own topical discussion thread in here haha it just shows how powerful and brilliant he is.

He's a great guy and he will always get my support. So much has gone really well for America since he became president and he speaks the truth yet everything he says always upsets or offends. I think its media, they just need to back off and leave him alone stop sensationalising him and putting him into bad light and exaggerating. We all know this country needs someone like him

I completely agree with everything you say. Just because he is not always politically correct does not mean people have to get upset and offended so easily. I wonder at times how these people get through life in the real world. Bring on Boris Johnson.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

I completely agree with everything you say. Just because he is not always politically correct does not mean people have to get upset and offended so easily. I wonder at times how these people get through life in the real world. Bring on Boris Johnson.

You know what, I'd actually rather have Donald Trump as Prime Minister than Boris Johnson. Trump has been elected and has at least attempted to deliver on some (not all) of his promises. Boris Johnson on the other hand is just a power-hungry elitist oaf who's so desperate to become Prime Minister that he would lie, cheat and stab his friends in the back just to get there without actually taking responsibility in the role.

For example, he campaigned for leaving the EU despite him once being in favour of remain, but when the chance came for him to join the run of becoming Prime Minister, which would involve him actually negotiating the exit from the EU (and therefore delivering on his word), he backed out of the race. Now why would someone who cared about the UK's best interests do that?

It was a shame having him lead the leave campaign, because as a Eurosceptic myself I would rather have had Tony Benn leading Vote Leave. At least Benn would've done it on principle. Sadly though he died two years earlier, so instead we were left with that clown.

 

[AlterEgo]

You know what, I'd actually rather have Donald Trump as Prime Minister than Boris Johnson. Trump has been elected and has at least attempted to deliver on some (not all) of his promises. Boris Johnson on the other hand is just a power-hungry elitist oaf who's so desperate to become Prime Minister that he would lie, cheat and stab his friends in the back just to get there without actually taking responsibility in the role.

Hahahahaha.

A power-hungry elitist oat who lies, cheats, stabs his friends in the back and doesn’t take responsibility - no, not like Trump at all (!).

 

[61653 HTAFC]

My word! Has the General Discussion section merged with Wrong Planet?

 

[furnessvale]

You know what, I'd actually rather have Donald Trump as Prime Minister than Boris Johnson. Trump has been elected and has at least attempted to deliver on some (not all) of his promises. Boris Johnson on the other hand is just a power-hungry elitist oaf who's so desperate to become Prime Minister that he would lie, cheat and stab his friends in the back just to get there without actually taking responsibility in the role.

For example, he campaigned for leaving the EU despite him once being in favour of remain, but when the chance came for him to join the run of becoming Prime Minister, which would involve him actually negotiating the exit from the EU (and therefore delivering on his word), he backed out of the race. Now why would someone who cared about the UK's best interests do that?

It was a shame having him lead the leave campaign, because as a Eurosceptic myself I would rather have had Tony Benn leading Vote Leave. At least Benn would've done it on principle. Sadly though he died two years earlier, so instead we were left with that clown.

I thought it was Boris who was stabbed in the back by Gove which then forced his withdrawal from the contest?