Author Topic: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?  (Read 1838 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Texas2uk

  • *
  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: Dec 2016
  • Liked: 0
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2017, 10:22:01 PM »
Isn't that true of all presidents? Especially those of whatever party you're not in?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline margo

  • *
  • Posts: 199
  • Joined: Apr 2016
  • Location: NY - USA
  • Gender: Female
  • Liked: 27
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #16 on: January 19, 2017, 10:28:47 PM »
Isn't that true of all presidents? Especially those of whatever party you're not in?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To some extent yes, but the unprecedented nature of DJT's presidency and the imbalance in Congress is making it much more extreme. So far the majority of his cabinet picks have no government experience and massive conflicts of interest, he still has massive conflicts of interest, and is using twitter to direct policy while trying to silence any media that disagree with him. There really is no comparison between Trump and any presidents I remember, unsure if he could be compared to Reagan who was also an entertainer.

Offline Texas2uk

  • *
  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: Dec 2016
  • Liked: 0
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #17 on: January 19, 2017, 10:53:49 PM »
To some extent yes, but the unprecedented nature of DJT's presidency and the imbalance in Congress is making it much more extreme. So far the majority of his cabinet picks have no government experience and massive conflicts of interest, he still has massive conflicts of interest, and is using twitter to direct policy while trying to silence any media that disagree with him. There really is no comparison between Trump and any presidents I remember, unsure if he could be compared to Reagan who was also an entertainer.

FDR famously brought in lots of outside businessmen to break the cycle of politics as usual and get things done at a time when the country was in a depression, and the new deal was hardly a conservative master work.

JFK appointed his brother as attorney general. I mean, how do you find someone with long successful experience in an industry to run the related dept and it not be seen as a conflict of interest by everyone that doesn't approve of what they assume the policy direction will be. Frankly, how do you find anyone competent in anything that is not also directly conflicted by the experience that made them competent?

As far as the media, someone probably ought to take over his twitter account, but honestly people in power talking directly to the people and they talking back to their leaders is not a bad thing. I think I'd probably rather Justice Willet on the Texas sup Ct give Trump some lessons about how to tweet professionally and effectively rather than acting like a child, but I don't have a problem with him bypassing the media. And he's also not remotely the first to do that - at least to denigrate and cut off publications he feels are purposefully misleading the public.

Listen, I don't like the guy either. I did not vote for him. And I am apprehensive about his presidency. However, I suspect we are on opposite ends of the political spectrum. I'd point to President Obama trying to tell people to fight for what you believe in, but don't be concerned about the country. I'd point to the fact that most of those he's nominated has lengthy govt experience, and have made clear in hearings they have pretty reasonable positions.

As for him being an outsider... sure. But everyone brings different strengths and weaknesses to the job. He doesn't have lots of govt experience so he's surrounded himself with people that do. He doesn't know how to run defense so he brings in a guy that frankly should have run for President himself as likely the best secdef ever. He brings strengths from his business background though that we don't often get in that position. Obama had what one term in the state legislature and two years in the senate before he became president? Yet the world didn't come crashing down due to his inexperience. The military didn't become completely ineffective just because the guy had never served and had no foreign policy experience.

I understand your emotional position. Shouldn't we try though to be a bit more realistic and optimistic or at least wait and see before we get too concerned? These things tend to work out. It helps that the president is a lot less powerful than most people think, and there are loads of checks and balances that work just fine even when one party controls all the branches.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline margo

  • *
  • Posts: 199
  • Joined: Apr 2016
  • Location: NY - USA
  • Gender: Female
  • Liked: 27
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #18 on: January 19, 2017, 11:49:13 PM »
Quote
I understand your emotional position. Shouldn't we try though to be a bit more realistic and optimistic or at least wait and see before we get too concerned?
I tend to keep replies fairly short and relative to only my personal thoughts and experiences, as I am not an expert in American history and greatly dislike arguments with strangers on the Internet. Many of his cabinet picks currently stand to profit from the policy they direct, as well as trump himself, which breaks federal ethics laws. I have no issues with him tweeting, I have issues with *what* he is tweeting. And I currently rely on Medicaid and the affordable care act to survive so I will definitely have a different take on that than someone who doesn't. I fear a wait and see approach will result in the lasting destruction of social, environmental and regulatory laws & services that protect millions of people at the hands of both Trump & the republican congress.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Texas2uk

  • *
  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: Dec 2016
  • Liked: 0
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #19 on: January 20, 2017, 02:25:29 AM »
I tend to keep replies fairly short and relative to only my personal thoughts and experiences, as I am not an expert in American history and greatly dislike arguments with strangers on the Internet. Many of his cabinet picks currently stand to profit from the policy they direct, as well as trump himself, which breaks federal ethics laws. I have no issues with him tweeting, I have issues with *what* he is tweeting. And I currently rely on Medicaid and the affordable care act to survive so I will definitely have a different take on that than someone who doesn't. I fear a wait and see approach will result in the lasting destruction of social, environmental and regulatory laws & services that protect millions of people at the hands of both Trump & the republican congress.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just a mutually respectful conversation between friends. Definitely not my intent to have an argument of any sort.

It is debatable that Trump himself is in a position to profit from his policies. He is the principle owner of a massive global corporation. Any global corp by definition stands to win or lose depending on what policies or actions the US government takes. There's no avoiding that.

It is one thing when a person owns stock they can simply sell or transfer to a blind trust which will buy and sell stock positions without consulting the beneficiary. Then after leaving office the principle can take the portfolio back over and shouldn't have suffered any particular loss. You cannot do the same thing with an equity position in a company, especially a privately held company, and even more so with a family held company. You can't just sell that off, and you can't recreate it or buy it back after leaving office. Making it essentially impossible for anyone in that position to hold office would be hugely anti-democratic and detrimental to the country to deny that background to the possibility of good government.

As much as I understand the argument you're making on this issue, and in principle agree with it, it cannot be a black and white absolute. It must be balancing of competing interests to reach a reasonable solution. As you said, we have never had a President coming from this background/situation. The rules (which are guidelines more than rules) are not written for and frankly incapable of dealing with this situation. Yes, absolutely, there are serious conflict of interest questions, but there is no solution to comply with these rules that can work in reality with this situation. The rules have to be rewritten on the fly to create a customized situation that actually works. There will be a lot of push and pull over some time that will try to get things mostly right. A lot of that is already well underway, and I don't know that the current state of the situation is really publicly known yet - I don't know it.

As far as cabinet picks, my understanding is that's less of an issue. As an example, the former Exxon CEO will be divested and into a blind trust. At that point it doesn't matter how Exxon does cause he either doesn't own their shares or doesn't know if he does or not... which is just what the current rules say.

Trump aside, I'm not saying there are not issues with nominees, but they're really no different and no better or worse than they have been in previous administrations of both parties. Bringing on people from investment banks or hedge funds or the fed, policy folks from partisan think tanks, people with industry experience, former govt officials... that's all exactly the same as every administration does. It's rare any political party can get billionaires to set aside their work to serve in govt, but FDR did that sort of thing and we've had plenty of uber rich presidents before.

Trying to understand your situation though... You say you rely on both medicaid and ACA? Because it should be one or the other, not both. Either you have insurance or you fall so far below the income level that you qualify for medicaid. I assume you mean you are a US citizen living in the US, that you previously did not qualify for medicaid due to making too much money, are not disabled and too young to get medicare, and live within one of the 32 states that expanded medicaid, where you fall within the narrow income band that applies to. That's also known as the federal transfer money to California plan because they pushed the limits to add nearly four times as many people to medicaid as the next closest state. They did that in an unsustainable way that is bankrupting the state as the financial burden shifts over time from the federal govt to the state, and they're just hoping to be bailed out in the future from their fiscally irresponsible decision, but more likely will have to curtail benefits in line with what conservative bastions like New York, Illinois, and Michigan are doing. I don't know if you live in California or not, but you should be aware that even if Hillary had won and ACA was left untouched and fully funded, millions of people currently on medicaid would lose that coverage in the future.

To the extent you think Trump is the great satan on this issue, some of the reason I couldn't support him is I don't think he's actually a conservative. He spent his whole adult life championing liberal positions. That's what Cruz referenced with his "new york values" statement. That's a quote from a Trump interview in which he said he supports gun control and believes we should have a single payer govt run healthcare system. I don't at all believe the conservative sounding lip service he droned on about after he decided to run for president. However, you can bet that republicans do not want to fix this thing in a way that takes healthcare coverage away from people that currently have it. Can you imagine the visual that would create? The backlash they'd suffer? You can bet they'll make some changes that try to fix some of the major problems with the current law, but you should also understand that ACA is essentially the health plan Bush Sr campaigned on going up against Clinton when Hillary was pushing for single-payer US version of the NHS. ACA is essentially the republican healthcare solution that's been pushed for the last couple decades at least. It is the plan Romney implemented as Governor. What the democrats did was tweak it. I would argue they tweaked it intentionally to fail so they could then revert to single-payer, but their motivation doesn't matter as much as the result. Those real world costs have gone up unsustainable and have driven carriers out of the market leaving plans that you can't find a provider to take. No matter where you are on the political spectrum, what we have really doesn't work very well. Everyone wants everyone to have legitimate access to affordable high quality healthcare without delay. I don't know that exists under NHS either. No one wants to take healthcare away from people. They also don't want to prop up an unsustainable system designed (intentionally or not) to fail so they can take the short term credit and dump the blame on the other party forced to clean up the mess later. That's bad for the country and everyone in it, especially those like you who are counting on that care.

None of us actually have a choice but to wait and see. He is going to be President. There is no changing that by any means. He is going to execute some set of policies, for better or worse. The only choices we have are to be optimistic that things will work out for the best, as they most times do regardless of who is in office; be pessimistic, deciding in advance based on incomplete information and misinformation that the sky will fall no matter what; or, wait and see. Personally, I think wait and see is the only reasonable position. If you're going to sway one way or the other, then optimism would be better, but you're likely to be somewhat disappointed. Pessimism though doesn't do you or anyone else any good. It doesn't change what will happen. It doesn't better prepare you in case of something bad. It just doesn't help at all. So, my advice would be to listen to President Obama when he tells the country to support the next President because we want the country to be successful. Look at the core rather than the extremes. Put the emotion of the election behind you and put your faith in the country, because it is bigger than anyone and tends to take care of itself nicely regardless who holds the reigns for brief moments in time.

And sorry, that's so long. My core message is cheer up. It's not as bad as you seem to think. Let's all just give it time and see how things work out. These things have a way of working themselves out for the best most of the time.

Offline margo

  • *
  • Posts: 199
  • Joined: Apr 2016
  • Location: NY - USA
  • Gender: Female
  • Liked: 27
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #20 on: January 20, 2017, 04:06:20 AM »
Yeah, cheering up is not going to happen. When I finally find a new job I will rely on the ACA individual marketplace as the only people hiring atm are contractors and none of them offer insurance in the first 90 days of employment, which is a scenario more US citizens are in. I'm on Medicaid because of my current income, but I'm assuming that I will find a job soon. I will be no less disabled by a chronic illness though so I need continuity of insurance and care. I do not appreciate the effort to analyze my situation because I am all too acutely aware of how easy it will be for them to take away my coverage for having preexisting conditions. If they repeal the ACA with no replacement that is exactly what will happen, because I have 14 conditions that affect every part of my body that require continuous treatment & followup.

I am not replying to the rest, as that turned into a lecture that is not based in fact. Sorry, I have no optimism for the next 2 years until midterm elections, it's just waiting and seeing exactly how much damage is done. I'll be joining my spouse in England before the end of it, but I am not looking forward to anything except living with him thanks to May's promise of a hard Brexit. Sorry to be so pessimistic but it feels like xenophobia and racism is winning everywhere.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline physicskate

  • *
  • Posts: 634
  • Joined: Oct 2012
  • Location: York
  • Gender: Female
  • Liked: 53
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #21 on: January 20, 2017, 07:45:29 AM »
I am wearing black today.

You speak of experts he is surrounding himself with? What exactly is Rick Perry an expert in? Experts in racism and business? Check? Experts in Science, Education and Climate Change. Um nope (these are things I care deeply about). Well done America preparing for the future!

Awful Awful day.

2004-2008: Student Visa
2008-2010: Tier 1 PSW
2010-2011: Tier 4
2011-2014: Tier 2
2013-2016: New Tier 2 (changed jobs)
16/12/15: SET (LR) successful! - It's been a long road...
12/05/16: Citizenship ceremony!

Offline sonofasailor

  • *
  • Posts: 3313
  • Joined: Jul 2005
  • Liked: 269
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #22 on: January 20, 2017, 08:37:10 AM »
“It really doesn’t matter what they write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass":

“She is a dog who wrongfully comments on me.”

“Rosie O’Donnell is disgusting – both inside and out.  If you take a look at her, she's a slob. How does she even get on television? … If I were running The View, I'd fire Rosie. I'd look her right in that fat, ugly face of hers and say, 'Rosie, you're fired.'

"Can you imagine the parents of Kelli ... when she said, 'Mom, Dad, I just fell in love with a big, fat pig named Rosie'?

“You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever”

“Heidi Klum.  Sadly, she’s no longer a 10.”

“It must be a pretty picture, you dropping to your knees”, (2013, to former Baywatch star and Playboy model Brande Roderick

"It's certainly not groundbreaking news that the early victories by the women on The Apprentice were, to a very large extent, dependent on their sex appeal."

"Yeah" (2004 to the 'shock jock' Howard Stern after the DJ asked: “By the way, your daughter.  Can I say this? A piece of a**.")

"A person who's flat-chested is very hard to be a 10, OK?

“She was like an eating machine”

“This is someone who likes to eat,” (1997, posing with Ms Machado at a staged gym session that he had organised for her.) 

"There has to be some form of punishment," (March 2016, referring to women who might defy a ban on abortion

“If Hillary Clinton can’t satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America

“I'm not saying she's an unattractive woman, but she's not beauty, by any stretch of the imagination. And now she's like a representative of the United Nations and world peace on hunger and all of this crap … It's called give me a break. But she's not - in terms of beauty, she's not a great beauty. She's OK. But she's not a great beauty. … I really understand beauty.

"Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president? I mean, she's a woman, and I'm not s'posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?"

"When you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything …Grab them by the p***y … You can do anything."
Build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across - Sun Tzu

Offline vadio

  • *
  • Posts: 1080
  • Joined: Jun 2011
  • Location: Congleton, Cheshire
  • Gender: Female
  • Liked: 17
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #23 on: January 20, 2017, 08:49:29 AM »
I am trying hard not to cry.
He makes inappropriate comments - supporters don't care.
He shrugs off comments as locker room banter - supporters don't care.
He mocks a disabled reporter - supporters don't care.
He lies, time and time again - supporters don't care.
He advocates violence - supporters don't care.
....and so on and so on....

I will not watch and I will not give him the benefit of the doubt. I try to have hope, but Michelle Obama summed up my feelings very well when she said "this is what having no hope feels like".
Married December 1992 (my 'old flame' whom I first met in the mid-70s)
1st move to UK - 1993 (Letter of Consent granted at British Embassy in Washington DC)
ILR - 1994 (1 year later - no fee way back then!)
Back to US in 2000
Returned to UK July 2011 (Spousal Visa/KOL endorsement)
ILR - September 2011
Application for naturalization submitted July 2014
Approval received 15-10-14; ceremony scheduled for 10 November!
Passport arrived 25 November 2014. Finally done!

Online KFdancer

  • *
  • Posts: 7146
  • Joined: Jun 2012
  • Location: Wokingham
  • Liked: 892
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #24 on: January 20, 2017, 09:05:43 AM »
It's the quotes about his daughter that I find very disturbing.  I don't know how those have been brushed under the rug.

I will miss the Obama's.  I think they've been a great first family.  When you think of Barack, Dad is one of the first ways I would describe him.  He's such a proud father.  In fact, I think of George W. Bush the same way.  Another proud family man.

I cannot believe Trump's twitter account has not been taken away from him yet.  Please say that will stop TODAY as his tweets as president should be approved before he is allowed to hit send!

conjunctionjunction

  • Guest
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #25 on: January 20, 2017, 09:18:55 AM »
...And sorry, that's so long.

Please don't apologise for an extremely thoughtful series of posts that puts my open letter to mourners to shame:


So, the day has arrived. Flags flying upside-down. Black armbands, or near enough. I get it. You loathe Trump. He’s not your president, etc. A sincere question for anybody reading this who is still in a state of shock and mourning: Who is?


fig. A, which has been making the rounds amongst scholars

I guess Obama could qualify. After all, he does still get to call himself that. (Perhaps not officially. Thanks Emily Post for clearing that up. Outside of a private luncheon we must all show restraint.) He may no longer be POTUS tomorrow, but for a lot of folks the disparity between the outgoing and incoming is so acute they continue to cling to him. #44 shall remain president of their hearts.

The bible won’t catch fire when that small hand rests on it later today. See what I did there? Referenced that meme about Trump’s apparently small hands. Ha ha.


fig. B, a fine example of ha ha

You may hate his guts, but he’ll be no less legitimate than, say, Richard Nixon. (Bad example?) Er, JFK. Who was equally if not more slippery, but infinitely more cultured, and really deserved a better retirement plan.

If I sound a bit annoyed, it’s because I’m frustrated with the direction the protests have taken. Trump was legitimately elected. This is the system. Agitate for change if it bothers you, just be prepared for the hinterlands to get a lot colder if the electoral college ever goes down. Much as you dread the coming administration, I seriously doubt you’d enjoy the chaos that would follow the sort of coup the more proactive protesters are advocating.

Hillary won’t be magically summoned if your dream impeachment happens. VPEOTUS Pence is much worse than his new boss: his is a dull plodding march to the far right. Better to have someone who tweets his every zig & zag and is, much as you hate to hear it, intelligent. Anybody who did what Trump managed to do clearly has a high political IQ even as he has a deplorable emotional one. Might want to take some of what he says with a grain of salt, and he can be annoying as hell – please don’t post any more selfies of your six-pack, guy – but Dilbert creator Scott Adams has covered a lot of this ground.

I’m frustrated that it takes the possibility of gutted social programs at home to provoke the mass anger that should have been accompanying every drone strike that kills innocents and creates more enemies abroad. Not that Trump may turn out to be much better, but thanks for normalising *that*, O. And thanks for a horrible health insurance ‘fix’ that did anything but, except for some lucky folks whose lot improved even while many others are just as far if not farther away from quality healthcare thanks to unaffordable premiums and deductibles. The pre-existing condition was blindness.

I’ll spare you the rest of my laundry list. Suffice it to say I think Obama, who I voted for the first time, leaves office having in many ways made things worse than when he arrived. Upset the Rs seem to have taken over the country? Blame the dismantling of the 50 state strategy, not Trump’s nonexistent coat-tails. Hillary was about Hillary, just like Obama was about Obama.

Every time you see Sanders on C-Span doing what he’s unswervingly done for decades, mourn what could have been (I know; in my dreams) and get angry about the dark machinations of the DNC instead.

It's been said the US didn’t get the president it needed, but it got the president it deserved. A discussion worth having, I think. The pessimist’s view is that America now gets the opportunity to do to itself what it would, if it could, enthusiastically do to the rest of the world.

/rant. Time for Bunny therapy.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2017, 10:12:54 AM by conjunctionjunction »

Offline sonofasailor

  • *
  • Posts: 3313
  • Joined: Jul 2005
  • Liked: 269
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #26 on: January 20, 2017, 09:30:04 AM »
Absolutely! Hell yes!!!

One flaw....never let the madman in the room have the gun. Give it to the guy you may not like....but not to the psychotic lunatic. 
Build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across - Sun Tzu

Offline jimbocz

  • *
  • Posts: 1903
  • Joined: Sep 2015
  • Liked: 383
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #27 on: January 20, 2017, 10:51:43 AM »


If I sound a bit annoyed, it’s because I’m frustrated with the direction the protests have taken. Trump was legitimately elected. This is the system. Agitate for change if it bothers you, just be prepared for the hinterlands to get a lot colder if the electoral college ever goes down. Much as you dread the coming administration, I seriously doubt you’d enjoy the chaos that would follow the sort of coup the more proactive protesters are advocating.

Hillary won’t be magically summoned if your dream impeachment happens.


People are protesting, but they are not saying these ridiculous things.  Nobody believes that Hillary will one day make it to the White House and for you to make it sound like that is what people are protesting for is insulting. 

Here's what people will be marching for on Saturday:

https://www.womensmarchlondon.com/the-wmol-guiding-principles/

You will notice there are no calls for a coup , and no calls to bring back Hillary. 

Offline BriKH

  • *
  • Posts: 722
  • Joined: Dec 2015
  • Liked: 47
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #28 on: January 20, 2017, 12:39:49 PM »
I agree that it is insulting to say those who protest are thinking Hilary would become president. You're assuming the mindset of those protesting is somewhat stupid. Nobody thinks Hilary will suddenly become president.

People are protesting for a positive change and feel that a man who has continuously openly said horrible things about people won't bring that change and fear the opposite would happen. I know I for one feel he does NOT have the American peoples' best interest at heart, just his own. Forgive me for being upset that a man who somehow won on a campaign of hate is meant to represent me and I am suppose to just accept that? No way. I would like to say "I hope he proves me wrong," but I can't. I am devoid of hope. I cannot put an ounce of trust into someone so out of touch with reality to be the leader that everyone wants.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2017, 12:41:20 PM by BriKH »

Offline jimbocz

  • *
  • Posts: 1903
  • Joined: Sep 2015
  • Liked: 383
Re: Where can Trumps inaugaration be watched in public in London?
« Reply #29 on: January 20, 2017, 01:00:33 PM »
Texas2uk, I admire your desire have a discussion amongst friends, and the dedication it must have taken to write it.  I agree with some of it, not other bits of it, but then it just got too long to read.  I'd like to make a friendly suggestion that if you keep it shorter next time, people might find it easier to discuss.