# Town hall of the intellectually challenged



## notimp (Mar 6, 2020)

This audience has to be pre selected...

What do you want to do about the corona outbreak:
"I closed down the borders to china."
(There is no US border to china.)

("Against the advice of everybody, and we've been given rave reviews")

"Because of the corona virus the country is now not expected to grow economically this year, how would that impact your chances of being reelected"
"Look, nobody is blaming us for the corona virus." *bushrollsthroughimage* *reporter repeats question* (The answer then is actually proper.)

"Look, all around the world there are hundreds of thousand of cases where people have died, we have eleven!"
(Yeah, thats because your testing "didnt work". https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51761435 )

Mr. Trump, the country is very split on political issues. Could you spread your message without the inflamatory rhetoric?
"Well I dont think it is split." "Well, the way we ultimately unite the country is through success."
(You know like the old saying - we will unite the political devide, by conquering the enemy..)

"Everyone supports protecting the environment, but regulations seem to be too complex, what can you do to make it more proactive, and less punitive?"
"I can reduce regulation?"
*Audience member very impressed by the response*

FOX news asks audience member again - BECAUSE YOU ARE a former lifelong democrat, you are THE TYPICAL voter, FOX thinks your opinion is very important. So what would it take for you to vote democratic the next time around? Audience member: "There is nothing, I want deregultion". FOX lady: "So our audience understands. NOTHING would convince him to vote democrat again."
(A theatre play in three acts - sadly the answer doesnt make any sense. You dont make regulation more proactive and less punitive by having less of it.)

Whats going on here is - that they pick out a moron that reads an intelligent sounding question from a sheet of paper, that has loaded terms in it (you like proactive, you dont like punitive), an then have them be so satisfied by an answer that doesnt make sense, that the 'intelligent sounding guy', now attains the ability to speak for all undecided voters, Then that is proclaimed by the moderator to be the case (because you were a former livelong democrat you are the typical voter??!), and enforced by the moderator (so that everyone understands, I reapeat, nothing can change your mind to vote republican).

This is staging. And this is manipulation. And the answer given, the one the guy was so impressed by - that now nothing could change his voting behavior anymore? Still doesnt make sense. Its nonsense.)

"Yes Mr. President I am focused on the economy, and I like regulation - and deregulation, and I very much hope we can continue on that."
*Audience applauds and whohoos*
You very much like regulation and deregulation? Audience hollers for that? Audience hollers for you (guy) looking at the economy?

On the impeachment.
"Some guy lied. Thank god we had several guys transcribing the "perfectly fine" phone call - everything was fine! In the written down version (transcript) of the phone call. Impeachment was fake"

Thats a total lie.

They edited the transcript. Before releasing it. Then they mistakingly released a version with too little stuff edited out.
What happened was. Government aids freaked after the phone call. Immediately put the entire conversation and transcript on a classified server. Then a whistleblower came forward (probably politically motivated - sure, you can have that). Then they diverted and distracted. Then a note from one of the croneys Giuliani (on behalf of Trump) sent to Ukraine to broker the actual ('unfit for a president') deal surfaced in Vienna. Then the impeachment procedures went through. Then the republicans blocked hearing witnesses (in secrecy, under oath) - and impeachment ended because of that. They ended it politically.

What do you want to do about Obama care:
"We took the bad parts out and are managing the good parts, but once we get back the house, you get the best care ever"
*Audience very confused, because Obama care bad!*

How can you protect our borders with "democrats not helping".
"We built 120 miles of seethrough walls."
(The 1954 miles border between the United States and Mexico traverses a variety of terrains, including urban areas and deserts.)

Since you've been president you've signed in 4.7 trillion USD of debt. Do you care about the national debt?
"I want to refinance the national debt"
(You cant refinance the US national debt. Thats state bankruptcy. Thats the financial system of the world defaulting. You can devalue the Dollar, is that what you want?)
"I had to, because the military was depleted and the country was in a very bad shape" (numbers to follow)
Blames Obama for 20 trillion (total) debt. (Obama added about 9 trillion but had the financial crisis of 2008 to deal with.)

"North Korea is the biggest problem we are dealing with."
(North Korea is no problem for the US at all. It is a problem for Japan, South Korea, India, ..  - so its allies.)
"Remember they had the Olympics. South Korea couldnt sell any tickets, but then the south korean president called me, and then it was a big success, and everyone credited me, and I was the first man who stepped over the border *audience applauds".

"Ask the soviet union, which became russia, because of afghanistan"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...story-lesson-soviet-union-russia-afghanistan/

Mr Trump, the country is deeply split politically - how do you suggest that this can be mended?
"We have to win the next election, and then I really believe the country will unite again. But we have to win the next election."

"Sir you didn't like to shake peoples hands, and now you do - why?"
"Because I love america and its people."
*Audience very impressed*

*Now let me tell you a story about how great I am*
Other candidates spent 250 million a piece on becoming president.
I spent 70.
Other guys lost, lost, lost, lost, Trump won, other guys lost lost.
"I thought to myself, isnt that great"?
(Press covered him for free, because he was a reality star and the most outrageous presidental candidate there ever was, which interested the public, which made them (including the NYT which he put down in the same story for unknown reasons) money. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/leslie-moonves-donald-trump-may-871464 )
The actual question was: "Mr. Trump, what do you miss most about your life before becoming president."

"I'm feeling that we are going to be saving this country. This country was going wrong. This country was going wrong. (Talking about, why he took the burden to give up shopping without the secret service, to become POTUS)
*Audience very enthusiastic*

(Ill continue picking up the stingers.)


----------



## notimp (Mar 6, 2020)

So here is the promised breakdown on the 4.7 trillion deficit spending trump has raked up:

He said it was for "bullets for the military".



> The 2017 GOP Tax cuts: $1.8 trillion
> Spending deal under Bipartisan Budget Act (2019): $1.7 trillion
> Spending agreement under the Bipartisan Budget Act (2018): $445 billion
> Repeal of three Obamacare taxes in 2019 budget deal: $500 billion
> Other legislation: $165 billion


src: https://markets.businessinsider.com...-president-economy-watchdog-2020-1-1028807572

1.8 trillion in tax cuts (break down to follow)
0.5 trillion to repeal Obamacare related taxes (so industry didn't have to pay)

2.1 trillion in bipartisan spending (democrats agreed)

thats it.

What did the tax cuts do?
Trump Tax Cuts Helped Billionaires Pay Less Taxes Than The Working Class In 2018
src: https://www.forbes.com/sites/camilo...ay-less-taxes-than-the-working-class-in-2018/

So, thats mostly why your economy (the stock market, not the actual economy) is booming, or at least was - before the corona virus hit - there isn't much else that happened yet. You basically used that to initiate a trade war with china - make everyone elses economy suffer (relatively). And then negotiate new deals from that position. Which brings us to trade deals.


----------



## notimp (Mar 6, 2020)

Trade deals:

Trump made:
- Japan pay more, so America would defend them from China militarily.
- Canada pay more, by cutting ties with Europe, so Canada became less important (militarily and economically) - and therefore had a worse position in negotiations.
- South Korea pay more (see Japan)

- a real new trade deal (free trade) with Mexico
- a real new trade deal (free trade) with India

- mostly cut ties with europe
- mostly cut ties with china - but that one is kind of still unsure. If china invests more in the US economy, Japanese and Indien interests might suffer a little.

So Japan and Canada is free money. That will hurt people in Japan and Canada most (their economies).
EU gets fucked, because GB (half of the economic power) was pried out of it, and the rest is mostly aging people.
China gets economically controlled - but also still wants to diversify, and maybe also into the US - so isn't treated as an enemy.

India and Mexico have high quantities of cheap labor. So - they will take maybe american corn, maybe some higher tech exports america can produce, india at least will pay for military aid - and the dream is, that american companies can produce goods that will be attractive for a young (so consumption spending orientated), growing economy in those two countries.

If you do that, you have to do it by cutting production costs in the US at first. And then hope, that they will not leap you technologically later on.  But you now have a growing consumer base - for everything you produce.

That actually all makes sense (apart from forgetting the rest of the world).

Its also what Trump didn't come up with, that was pretty much the republican establishment.


----------



## Hanafuda (Mar 6, 2020)

You seem agitated.


----------



## notimp (Mar 6, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> You seem agitated.


No. Bewildered.
(I have basically quoted and shortened down the answers given in the townhall, I've added context, I've kept commentary (agitated?) to a minimum).

If you have an IQ of 90+ this is the most rotten piece of theatre acting you maybe have seen in your lifetime.

He gets points for being personable, and likeable.
But people mostly like him, because he degrades others.
And says best and bestest so often (mostly in sentences so vague you cant even refute it, because you don't know for sure what he means/is talking about ("our polls on corona are the bestest" what polls? What are you asking people about the virus? How they feel about it?)).

And they understand, that he is an idiot, on some level. But they like him, because he is an idiot and could still become president. Thats 'merica for them.

This is so effing strange...

The thing is - they havent profited from any of the tax cuts currently. They may have profited from Trump giving free money to industry - and not have industry pay health insurance quite yet, and moving back some environmental regulation, because their low level jobs could still exist in the US for a bit longer. (No investments in anything new really...)

And they will most likely not profit from the trade deals in the future (because low level jobs and people able to fill them india and mexico has enough of).

So they are just a ball of votes to be played with. They will take whatever they get as a result of the overall economy. No one ever does anything in their interest, because - economically its hard to do so (because you'd need genuin growth in new fields where workers dont have to have a higher education). But at least they can be happy "thorugh" experiencing "one of their own being in the white house".

Let me put it this way. Europe, or Canada have high tech level manufacturing and 'expensive' products, that you buy because you cant make them in your country. The people that make those, are not the ones sitting in that audience. So you basically cut (minimize some) economic ties with Europe/Canada. And you bring India and Mexico - fully - into the fold (free market access). And those people cheer...

How does that make their lives better? They dont own large patches of lands they can farm on. Their working conditions get poorer to be able to compete on indian and mexican standard. They get to watch while you raise indian and mexican living standards, and their lives only ever will improve maybe when all mexicans and indians reached their 'qualification levels' (think 'labor in china getting more expensive in the past 10 years').

But they are so happy.

People that are benefiting most from this are people that are manufacturing/producing stuff (mostly consumption goods) - not at world standard anymore, but better than india, and mexico - and that can still profit from that for about 10-20 years. So higher middle class, billionaires. Not people in that room.

And Bidens message will be what? Restoration? (Same as it ever was - I'm the better 'merican guy thats likable for an older democrafic, and people that liked Obama. What kind of a policy is that?

Both are candidates, that are not voted on because of policy - and thats blatenly obvious by now.

So who makes your policies? And what actually are you voting on?


----------



## notimp (Mar 6, 2020)

There is not one video, discussing this townhall event on youtube. To give you any context. Not one. Not even critically.

There are 10 videos on the president arriving in a military air vehicle, and about 25 supercuts (what you missed, the best, ...) and two videos on how hard it was to get/buy a ticket for the event, but not one video discussing that performance.

I'm now browsing the podcast circuit to find - something.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Here is the AP (Associated Press, non partisan, news wire) summery:



> Tickets to the town hall were distributed through the Eventbrite website and Fox confirmed questions were selected from people who submitted them via the website. The audience seemed overwhelmingly supportive of Trump, greeting the president with thunderous applause and “USA, USA” chants.





> During the town hall, Trump fielded other questions about immigration, health care, federal regulations and more. Asked if he cared about the national debt, which has grown under his tenure despite a chugging economy, Trump said he would focus on the issue in a second term and would like to refinance the debt. He shifted blamed to Democratic President Barack Obama.





> Told that he can’t reduce the debt without cutting entitlement programs, like Social Security, Trump said, “We will be cutting.” It was not immediately clear whether he was referring to the mandatory spending programs, discretionary federal spending or both.



src: https://apnews.com/c03cd0c8f2a41ad0300092fff48ee4f4


----------



## notimp (Mar 6, 2020)

One more thing, not only did Trump say he wants to "refinance national debt" in the next term (*sound of me dying*), he said, that there was no harm in him having raised the national debt by 4.7 trillion USD, because interest is so low currently (it is, but it will not be three years from now (demographics)).

So this means, he gives free money to mostly billionaires. Says it doesnt matter if he increases national debt by any amount really. And then wants to eliminate the national debt by "refinancing" it in a second term (make it vanish from the books).

Thats pretty much a bank robbery, and the corresponding exit strategy laid out?

How to defraud america and the rest of the world in three easy steps in only eight years.

Jesus...


----------



## notimp (Mar 7, 2020)

On border closings:
https://theintercept.com/2020/03/05/coronavirus-trump-closing-borders/

Holy ... this is pure crazy.


----------



## FGFlann (Mar 7, 2020)

The first point, on the border question, is extremely easy. It's really just a matter of an unfair interpretation of the answer. Access to the US border _is_ closed to travellers from China and anyone having been in China within the last 14 days, except US citizens who will be quarantined upon arrival. I've had this conversation before and I think people often forget that the airport itself is a border to the country.


----------



## ThoD (Mar 7, 2020)

First off from the rules:


> When posting please refrain from double/triple/etc posting and from creating multiple topics about the same subject.



Anyways, are we seriously fucking doing this shit again? Just stop with this nonsense, Trump says dumb shit often and Americans are dumb, big fucking whoop, it's not like it matters at this point, no matter who is president of the US doesn't change the fact that the US is the butthole of the world at this point and one of the worst countries to live in.


----------



## notimp (Mar 7, 2020)

Thats more than that. Thats an entire townhall event, thats not reflected by your entire media system, where people cheer without thinking, your media outlets preselect questions, screen the people who are asking them (you have been a livelong democrat voter wasn't alluded to by the person who asked the question), and your media (FOX) plays confidence tricks on the audience instead of giving context.

This is the equivalent of a quackery spirit healing stadion even sponsored by your media.

Also - I wasnt clued in just how much stupid stuff Trump says at events that are part of your election process so people can filter out people like him. I'm not posting stuff like this just for the fun of it. I was generally bewildered. (This will not happen more than once.)

Also - I can not adhere to the 'dont double/tripple post' regulation, when contextualizing a story in multiple aspects, reflecting upon it, adding details later on. I want people to see that thats not part of the initial posting, but stuff that I looked at later.

If someone can convince me, why it is a good thing not to double or tripple post (without constantly bumping a story over more than two or three days), I might start editing all together in one insanely long posting always. (Then more people will say TLDR; *lol* - and that achives what?) I dont do this out of malice.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



FGFlann said:


> The first point, on the border question, is extremely easy. It's really just a matter of an unfair interpretation of the answer. Access to the US border _is_ closed to travellers from China and anyone having been in China within the last 14 days, except US citizens who will be quarantined upon arrival. I've had this conversation before and I think people often forget that the airport itself is a border to the country.


Its more than that.

Its a president that in that case seriously considered 'closing all borders' (seemingly) and then stated, that "he did close them" for his followers, which wasnt the case.

Why you don't close borders is, that you loose control over who enters/leaves your country (because people always will), so you cant put up checkpoints for temperature checking, or your system for quarantaining people that might be affected. You simply go blind. In addition to that you would help isolate parts of the world that would need medical assistance in the form of medical goods.

No country did that - because of very good reasons.

The interpretation that the president didnt seriously mean close ALL US borders is the more favorable one. The other interpretation is even more outrageous/insane.

Also the epicenter has shifted to South Korea now. And Iran, And Italy in Europe. So in the case of an epidemic, so glad people from china couldnt enter your country. Officially.

Infections in China: 80.000
Population of China 1.4 billion

factors out to 0.005% - also, China hat already quaranteened the most affected regions, so closing the border was PR, wasnt it?

Or do you want to make an argument, for why that (or even just barring all people from china access) would have been rational?


----------



## FGFlann (Mar 7, 2020)

The issue you took with the very first point wasn't the efficacy of border closure though, it was about its direct relation with China as if it were a hard land border.


notimp said:


> What do you want to do about the corona outbreak:
> "I closed down the borders to china."
> (There is no US border to china.)


It's really as simple as that. The border is closed to China and the borders are ports of entry. That's it. If I could be so bold, interpreting the statement as if it were a land border is _borderline_(geddit) dishonest, and comes off more as an attempt at point scoring.


----------



## notimp (Mar 7, 2020)

FGFlann said:


> The issue you took with the very first point wasn't the efficacy of border closure though


Might have been, because his statement verbatim was "we closed borders". Which has a very obvious meaning. And transports a very distinct message. And the US didn't do. And which isnt a way to combat an epidemic at all.

If he meant, that he maybe didn't approve any visa applications for people from affected regions, he maybe should have said that.


----------



## FGFlann (Mar 7, 2020)

notimp said:


> Might have been, because his statement verbatim was "we closed borders". Which has a very obvious meaning. And transports a very distinct message. And the US didn't do. And which isnt a way to combat an epidemic at all.


Closing the borders does not infer that a direct land border must be the issue. Closing borders has a broader meaning as I've said, an airport is a border.

The current guidelines for border crossing from China (and Iran) are as such:


> Foreign nationals who have visited China or Iran in the past 14 days may not enter the United States.


It's definitive even with its exception. Direct access to the border from China is currently forbidden.


----------



## notimp (Mar 7, 2020)

And how about indirect access? As in business travel via an international hub?

Yearly visits from China are about 3 Million people. Lets say for the argument we are dealing with a period of 4 months which would be 1 Million.

0.005%*1000000 = 50

So the president closed all borders for all chinese people for 50 infected dudes?

Also probably far less than 50, because china already quarantined the most affected regions. So it probability isnt the national average of 0.005%, but lower.

Lets say 25 dudes.

And thats the issue statistically. If you have a pandemic at your hands, that can be spread by just a bunch of people that travel a lot. You dont contain it by closing your borders to one country.

What he said is insane no matter what.

Also what you just posted doesnt qualify for the statement "we closed the borders". But he said that, didn't he?

If all that argument is about, is having to wash Trump from the idiocy of thinking that the US does have a direct border with China. Sure, if you give him all benefit of the doubt, he knew that. 

But then he in that town hall was very proud, that he was one of the people suggesting, that you should close all the borders! Which no one else thought of! But he was one of the first!

Sure - much better outcome.


----------



## FGFlann (Mar 7, 2020)

notimp said:


> And how about indirect access? As in business travel via an international hub?
> 
> Yearly visits from China are about 3 Million people. Lets say for the argument we are dealing with a period of 4 months which would be 1 Million.
> 
> ...


The problem we seem to be having here is that you are requiring precise language instead of a general statement. Despite the 14 day cooling off period for anyone having travelled or resided within China and Iran, the borders are closed to direct travel from China, that is a fact and nothing is going to change that.

I don't see how it's insane. Getting bogged down in a numbers debate isn't going to be productive. It's entirely arbitrary next to the very real ease of spreading the virus and its incubation period.

It's perfectly reasonable to restrict access from large affected areas especially when they are not particularly trustworthy or competent, but notoriously irrational actors like Iran. Having them be able to board a plane in a potentially infected state is a bad enough proposition for the people on it, let alone having them all then actually reach the border.


----------



## notimp (Mar 7, 2020)

> *Europe refuses to close borders as Italian coronavirus cases jump*
> Health ministers say closing frontiers would be 'disproportionate and ineffective' as Italy confirms 11th death.


src: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020...n-coronavirus-cases-jump-200225215600060.html

Now, which one of those do you think is the harder stance to represent in public?

No Trump really was one of the first who thought about it. And then didnt do it. And then went on TV to say that he did.



> "The coronavirus has reached Europe for the first time in a situation where we don't understand every chain of infection and they can't be connected directly to China.
> 
> "This means we have a new situation to deal with. I have said it could get worse before it gets better and this assessment still stands," he added.


If you close borders you go dark.

edit: So considering that Trump doesnt know what he is talking about, but probably isn't completely uninformed, what might be happening here.

In the townhall Trump was fixated on "all the polling numbers show us, that closing borders was primo". What polling numbers?

Maybe, possibly - "public perception of how the disease is controlled and how the situation is tackled" which is important, because you dont wan't economic impacts larger than needed, for what Trump would qualify as "11 people died". So you also manage public perception. Thats also why - according to Trump - "the Vice President works on this 20 hours a day, maybe more", which is also a lie, but a public serving one - that helps everyone keep calm.

We just have a problem, when a president goes into a townhall saying he has closed the borders, so that will fix the issue, and then have a spokesperson for the administration repeat that bullshit ("we almost have our country hermatically sealed"), and you have a media system that in no way... Ah, forget it.

No everythigs fine. Trump closed the borders. You are fine. Everything is fine. (Necessary lie.)


----------



## notimp (Mar 8, 2020)

What happens in Italy instead: Almost all of the provinces in northern italy are now being put under quarantine:






But the borders to austria, france, slovenia (the rest of the EU) stay open, to do temperature checks, and the rest.

Northern Italy is Italys industrial zone, and there have been speculations, that they became the epicenter in europe because of illegal (clothes, footware) manufacturing, where business owners would 'import' a workforce from china to then have them produce goods for low pay and under non standard working and living conditions (18 workhours a day).

Those facilities in the past have been run illegally.

Might be just a story - but its a plausible one.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/...workers-who-assemble-designer-bags-in-tuscany

There is a similar possible explanation for why iran became so affected in such a short time.


----------



## notimp (Mar 9, 2020)

If you prefer a different story on how Italy became the corona hotspot in europe:

German businessman did it.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2001468


----------



## notimp (Mar 28, 2020)

Trump now says, that the "border closing" which he asked for "very early" and "many people thought was very tough" - only was directed at "a region in China" (Wuhan?).

h**ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6Jd-e1vUoA

Which means, all the qualifier statements "did that very early" and "many people thought was very tough" are all lies as well. If thats what he claims to have instituted.

You cant tell for sure, because he is max vague ("a region in China").

edit:

Trump just said "approved for - the virus, as we call it" less than 5 minutes into that clip. You know like we call it the virus? Because it is - a virus?

You wouldnt understand Sean, its that expert lingo.


edit: AP factchecked - the entire thing is a lie:

AP FACT CHECK: Trump’s inaccurate boasts on China travel ban
https://apnews.com/0dc271ad7f7917374a5a0cfb49273783



> THE FACTS: His decision was far from solo nor was it made over opposition from health experts, as the White House coronavirus task force makes clear. His decision followed a consensus by his public health advisers that the restrictions should take place.
> 
> Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, who was coordinator of the task force at the time and announced the travel restrictions, said Trump made the decision in late January after accepting the “uniform recommendation of the career public health officials here at HHS.”



What a - excuse my french - f*cking *sshole.


----------



## notimp (Jun 23, 2020)

Trump is doing his version of 'draining the swamp' again.  (Firing state prosecutors, that investigate his lawyers, then trying to replace them with 'devotees'.)


We didnt have a 'Trump is kinda corrupt' thread yet, and I didnt want to create one, so I put it in the 'Trump followers sometimes are kinda stupid' thread.


----------



## notimp (Jun 29, 2020)

It gets better the longer it lasts.. 




Audience participation ftw.


----------



## notimp (Jul 8, 2020)

Trump shares 'white power' video on Twitter (now deleted):





https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1277204969561755649
and http://t.co/4Gg1iGOhyG
src: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/28/politics/trump-tweet-supporters-man-chants-white-power/index.html

Trump effectively bans foreign students from US colleges (6% of total students, often paying their fees in full, seriously damaging the US student grant system, and the countries international reputation):
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuart...s-to-force-foreign-students-others-out-of-us/

I wonder why the guy is so polarizing...


----------

