I honestly don’t know where to post this.

DoubleEgger

Another four years of waking up every day wondering what outlandishly stupid sh!t he said. F’ me. 

Gulfcoastguy

Legume said:

Such a dumb statement - consequences for who? Canada, Denmark, Greenland, Panama didn't vote in our election. Consequences are for Ukraine, Taiwan and maybe even South Korea, they're trying to normalize in invading and taking over other countries.

He won't do any of this, it's bully diversionary tactics.

For the most part it’s the opening price in negotiations. He is expecting a deal or concessions from each of the mentioned countries. For Greenland he would settle for an Air Force and Naval base most likely. For Mexico it would be major assistance for stopping illegal immigration and helping with deportation. For Canada the exact aim I can’t guess but notice that Trudeau will no longer be a problem. 

Legume

I was hoping you would come along and explain/normalize this nutjob for us. You're gonna be busy the next four years!

lousubcap

No chance of figuring out the Clown at the head of the circus.  All for stroking CHEETO's small and fragile ego and other parts with his small hands.  What a F'tard.  

JohnInCarolina

Gulfcoastguy said:

Legume said:

Such a dumb statement - consequences for who? Canada, Denmark, Greenland, Panama didn't vote in our election. Consequences are for Ukraine, Taiwan and maybe even South Korea, they're trying to normalize in invading and taking over other countries.

He won't do any of this, it's bully diversionary tactics.

For the most part it’s the opening price in negotiations. He is expecting a deal or concessions from each of the mentioned countries. For Greenland he would settle for an Air Force and Naval base most likely. For Mexico it would be major assistance for stopping illegal immigration and helping with deportation. For Canada the exact aim I can’t guess but notice that Trudeau will no longer be a problem. 

What actual leverage does he have over Greenland?  “settle for a base” ?  This is nonsense.

Botch

DoubleEgger said:

Another four years of waking up every day wondering what outlandishly stupid sh!t he said. F’ me. 

I retired in the third week of January 2020, the fourth week my own party abandoned their Oath to the Constitution and kept the traitor in office, and six weeks later COVID hit.  I admittedly watched too much news on the TV, but I couldn't believe how, almost twice daily, the Big Red Screen came on shouting "Breaking News!", and it was always, ALWAYS, about something f'tard did or said.  
Things settled down four years ago, but it's going to start up again; worse, until actual news outlets are silenced and everyone depends on X and FB.  
I don't know what to do anymore, or where to go.  

JohnInCarolina

Botch said:

DoubleEgger said:

Another four years of waking up every day wondering what outlandishly stupid sh!t he said. F’ me. 

I retired in the third week of January 2020, the fourth week my own party abandoned their Oath to the Constitution and kept the traitor in office, and six weeks later COVID hit.  I admittedly watched too much news on the TV, but I couldn't believe how, almost twice daily, the Big Red Screen came on shouting "Breaking News!", and it was always, ALWAYS, about something f'tard did or said.  
Things settled down four years ago, but it's going to start up again; worse, until actual news outlets are silenced and everyone depends on X and FB.  
I don't know what to do anymore, or where to go.  

Have you considered trying goat yoga?

Buckwoody Egger

Gulfcoastguy said:

For the most part it’s the opening price in negotiations. He is expecting a deal or concessions from each of the mentioned countries.

this is a great way to put it. Trump is always on the offensive.  It’s not sophisticated it’s banal and constant.  he has a very low closing ratio so to speak but the abc of selling is always be closing. so a lot of this noise is setups for a close / asking for something.  

he is not original — he just works without any consideration of history, respect, norms, customs etc because it’s all about him and the future where he gets something he didn’t have before.  sometimes norms and customs are great and sometimes they are ok to revisit for a paradigm shift. 

if we (media, country, etc) really think he’s a tempestuous child then we should keep our wits about us and have calm explanations that diffuse the desires of the child crying in the shopping cart. but we too often don’t. we react and show dismay which means we are on our heels reacting. this gives away leverage. 

it’s also a distraction. there are plenty of situations starved for answers- but that work is hard and can be dissected. so it’s the “we have a plan” and “there’s a strategy but it’s confidential” short takes. 

DoubleEgger

He only wants Greenland so he and Elonia can exploit it for personal benefit. 

lousubcap

A different tact on Biden and his legacy: Charles Sykes From The Atlantic-  CONTRIBUTING NEWSLETTER WRITER

  

Joe Biden failed to grasp both the political moment and the essential mission of his presidency.

"What Biden Misread

President Joe Biden still imagines that he could have won. Asked by USA Today’s Susan Page whether he could have beaten Donald Trump if he had stayed in the race, Biden responded: “It’s presumptuous to say that, but I think yes.” Reality thinks not. Of course, we’ll never know for sure, but the evidence (including polling) suggests that he would have been crushed by an even larger margin than Kamala Harris was. Biden’s answer is a reminder that his legacy will be tarnished by his fundamental misreading of the moment and his own role in it. To be sure, Biden can point to some impressive successes. He leaves behind a healthy and growing economy, a record of legislative accomplishment, and more than 230 judicial appointments, including a Supreme Court justice. And then there were the failures: the chaotic exit from Afghanistan; a massive surge of migrants at the border in 2023. Although Biden was not solely to blame for inflation—factors included the Federal Reserve’s low-interest-rate policy and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine—his spending policies contributed to the problem. And even though he rallied Europe to the defense of Ukraine, critics suggest that he also misread that moment—Phillips Payson O’Brien argued in The Atlantic in November that the Biden administration “treated the conflict like a crisis to be managed, not a war to be won.” Ukraine’s uncertain fate is now left to Biden’s successor. A charismatic and energetic president might have been able to overcome these failures and win a run for reelection. Some presidents seize the public’s imagination; Biden barely even got its attention. He presumed that he could return to a Before Times style of politics, where the president was a backroom bipartisan dealmaker. Whereas Trump dominated the news, Biden seemed to fade into the background almost from the beginning, seldom using his bully pulpit to rally public support or explain his vision for the country. Trump was always in our faces, but it often felt like Biden was … elsewhere. Biden also misread the trajectory of Trumpism. Like so many others, he thought that the problem of Trump had taken care of itself and that his election meant a return to normalcy. So he chose as his attorney general Merrick Garland, who seems to have seen his role as restoring the Department of Justice rather than pursuing accountability for the man who’d tried to overturn the election. Eventually, Garland turned the cases over to Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought indictments. But it was too late. With time running out and a Supreme Court ruling in favor of broad presidential immunity, Trump emerged unscathed. And then came the sad final chapter of Biden’s presidency, which may well overshadow everything else. When he ran for president in 2020, Biden described himself as a “transition candidate” and a “bridge” to a new generation of leaders. But instead of stepping aside for those younger leaders, Biden chose to seek another term, despite the growing evidence of his decline. With the future of democracy at stake, Biden’s inner circle appeared to shield the octogenarian president. His team didn’t just insist that voters ignore what was in front of their eyes; it also maintained that the aging president could serve out another four-year term. Some Democrats clung to denial—and shouted down internal critics—until Biden’s disastrous debate performance put an end to the charade. Even then, Biden stubbornly tried to hang on, before intense pressure from his own party forced him to drop out of the race in July. Now he is shuffling to the end of his presidency, already shunted aside by his successor and still in denial. As the passing of Jimmy Carter reminds us, presidential legacies are complicated matters, and it is difficult to predict the verdict of history. But as Biden leaves office, he is less a transformational figure than a historical parenthesis. He failed to grasp both the political moment and the essential mission of his presidency. Other presidents have misunderstood their mandate. But in Biden’s case, the consequences were existential: By his own logic, the Prime Directive of his presidency was to preserve democracy by preventing Donald Trump’s return to power. His failure to do so will likely be the lasting legacy of his four years in office."

Botch

^^^ Can't disagree with a single word.    

DoubleEgger

When Biden was elected President, most economists and pundits predicted a recession that never transpired. That was a solid transition in my opinion. 

dbCooper

Apparently hot dogs and SPAM are now banned in North Korea . . .

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/kim-jong-un-bans-hotdogs-for-north-koreans-cooking-them-an-act-of-treason/TKN3HJF3HRHZZHCCJ5L7EPF66Q/

fishlessman

DoubleEgger said:

When Biden was elected President, most economists and pundits predicted a recession that never transpired. That was a solid transition in my opinion. 

No recession but can't buy a house,   
😁😃😁 Oh wait, buy one of mine

fishlessman

If we buy Greenland😆 Canada missed a great opportunity