Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

There is an inherent bias in almost anything. I don't believe they're radically biased in way a Fox News would be but the nature of their staff, their readers and their outlook tilts it more liberal than the overall United States.

But it's possible to have that bias and still strive to be honest. The problem to me is the increasing hyper-partisan 'press' where they're more activists than journalists. Infowars, The Canary or most other things that fall under the umbrella of 'alternative media', basically people who report whatever they want so long as it furthers their own agenda. Truth literally doesn't matter. They wouldn't follow a story for a year to make sure they have the evidence before printing.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I get that you may not be interested in Trump's poor opinion rating but that doesn't mean it suddenly becomes a less valuable performance indicator.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Stock market reaching record levels surpassing 22K for the first time ever, nearly a million extra jobs since Jan 20th.

Which ever way you look at it, the economy in the US, is improving under a Trump Presidency. Think I will measure this as a performance indicator. Rather than rely on the liberal MSM.

I cannot be interested in something I don't believe. I just base my own opinions on the fact that Democrats have lost all Senate seat elections since Trumps inauguration. The last one having them spent tens of millions of dollars and the Republicans still beat them, must have stung having spent so much and still losing, sure Republican majorities shrank, but a win is still a win.

And to top it off you now got Democrats switching allegiances and becoming a Republican.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Job growth has slowed then? Much like American wage growth. Plus the stock market went up 140% under Obama admittedly for obvious reasons. I think approval ratings matter when they're this bad this early in a presidency, normally it takes president's much longer to become hated.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Trump may be responsible for the country booming or it may be booming in spite of him, that's not the debate. Perceptions matter and the country feels that Trump is not performing well as a US president compared to his predecessors.
This website analyses all approval ratings which shows this.

---------- Post added at 08:40 ---------- Previous post was at 08:28 ----------

Great post. I think that's what's more worrying is the way that this has crossed into some of the mainstream media, mostly due to journalistic cutbacks. The Express has always been opinionated but there would be degree of verification of the stories it published. Nowadays, it is happy to publish anything that supports its position even if it's from an obscure "expert".

I really wonder if they will ever be able to find out!!! (Unless the people he leaked it to tell)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Leak investigations are just another distraction technique. The main thing is the content of what's been leaked.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Jim Justice was a registered Republican until February 2015 - he's just switched back.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I wonder for how long! :D

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Then according to that premis Macron is performing just as badly as Trump. His approval rating has dropped to 36%.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Er, you cannot not dictate what the debate is, just because it does not suit your agenda.

And the bit of your quote I have bolded... Why have you asked the entire country? :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 10:12 ---------- Previous post was at 10:10 ----------

Which is even more telling on the failing corrupt Democrats. :rolleyes:

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

If that's a valid poll then yes of course.

---------- Post added at 10:44 ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 ----------

To avoid any ambiguity, the definition of country being asked is the US not UK. Doubtless there are other indicators of success than approval ratings but it's seen as a key indicator which shouldn't be discarded because it's an inconvenient truth.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Er US, is the USA. :dunce:

What part of I don't accept nor do I trust opinion polls, do you not understand ?

Polls can be and have been wrong in recent times and completely off the mark.

They can also be manipulated to suit the pathetic liberal media. :rolleyes:

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Thanks, lol, sorry I should have said UK not USA my bad. Have now corrected.
Some polls can be close, some can be wrong. There's been so many over a long period of time as that site has analysed that we can't simply explain this away in the way that you do. Being generous, your approach might explain a single poll but not hundreds.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I'm confused as to why you have brought the UK in this debate. I've not brought them up, nor was discussing them?

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Maybe a misunderstanding between us. You said "Why have you asked the entire country?" so I wanted to clarify which country the polls were asking.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Well, since we are discussing the U.S President, I thought when I mentioned country, it was obvious which country I was referring to. ;)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Oops, New York Times at it again with Fake News. This time upsetting Vice President Mike Pence, suggesting he is going to run against Trump in 2020 U.S Election.

Mike Pence has issued a statement saying the NYT article is 'Disgraceful and offensive and the allegations are categorically false.'

https://twitter.com/VP

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

No. They didn't say he was running against Trump, they said he was getting ready to run if Trump did not. People can just read for themselves: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/05/u...sse-pence.html

Anyway is this another of NYTimes 'fake news' articles before it's confirmed? Like Flynn talking to the Russian ambassador? Or Corney's Memos? Between Trump and the NYTimes only one of them keeps getting found out for lying.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I just saw Pence's tweet and reacted to it, I don't read the liberal gutter press, NYT if I can help it. I certainly didn't read this shoddy story. They are clearly still wrong with the article either way, given Pence's tweet.

I avoid their crap all the time. Even more so now with their actions with the Manchester Arena Photos and helping to leak our intelligence, they have no ethics. A gutter press organisation, that made it personal by publishing those photos of my city, when it was in it's moment of need.

Btw, I've noticed you keep referring to James Comey, as Corney, it is Comey not Corney. Although I prefer Corny for him actually for the 'corny' investigations he undertook.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Or Pence is covering himself. The object of a story denying it is not proof it's wrong. Politicians deny stuff all the time.

I agree they shouldn't have published the photos but their reporting record is very good. We need more news organisations like the NYTimes as opposed to the alternative media we seem to get now. People who research and break stories.

My bad.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Just so it's clear, I'm no fan of these 'Alternative facts' sites, I think majority of the time and their headlines are just 'click bait'.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Spot on. We need more organisations with robust finances like The New York Times that hold presidents of all parties to account rather than poorly-resourced click bait titles or overtly biased media like the Washington Examiner, RT and Fox News that prefer to peddle a line at the expense of journalistic values.
My worry is how pretty objective titles like the New York Times can thrive in the future as the world gets more partisan and people just want to hear echo chambers of their political party confirming their views and prejudices.
We're fortunate in the UK to have authoritative titles like The Times, The Telegraph, The Financial Times and The Guardian that although have their own editorial viewpoints, have the resources and integrity to investigate matters. We also have strong regulations on the impartiality of TV news reporting. I don't think they stopped the BBC from being more like the Brexit Broadcasting Corporation in Spring/Summer 2016 but they are a good idea.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Plee=nty of reports from staffers denying it before Pence issued a statement.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...administration

http://www.newsweek.com/mike-pence-2...n-trump-646994

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...-insists-will/

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...shful-thinking

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I can only see one staffer - his press secretary.

I don't even think it's that outrageous a suggestion that the VP is plotting a path to the nomination in the event the President doesn't run. Trump winning may have been a shock to political assumptions but not the extent it's killed off political ambition.

The interesting part, which is backed by quotes from Republicans happy to be named, is that there is a buzz and movement on nominees for 2020 at all.



---------- Post added at 22:12 ---------- Previous post was at 22:11 ----------

The Telegraph and The Guardian have gone down the pan. Too many opinion articles and click-bait as opposed to news. Both have fired so many reporters. The Times and the FT are good.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

The trouble with The Times and FT is its behind a paywall and thus not many cannot read it.:(

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

That's how they can afford to pay journalists and avoid the temptation to have click-bait. Typically there are fewer new stories in The Times on any given day but what they do have is more in-depth or revealing. Certainty better than the AP copy printed in the Guardian or Telegraph accompanied by the trolling opinion piece about how outrageous x is (x being conservatives or liberals depending on the paper).

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Retweeted by Trump - enjoy.

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonal...723329/video/1

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Would've been better if he'd turned up the awesomeness and Retweeted kick that soccer ball

http://metro.co.uk/2014/06/09/hilari...tbull-4754902/

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I thought it was Hillary that was supposed to start WWIII :)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Yes, it would have started over 8 months ago, with Russia, as soon as she wanted to introduce her very optimistic no fly zone over Syria.

Thank goodness she lost the election. We avoided a serious military confrontation there, that we would have got dragged in to.

Russia was already preparing for war and told it's own citizens to be ready and we would be there, if she had won.

Even the Green Presidential candidate Jill Stein, who is no fan of Trump, suggested Hillary was a warmonger. Stein said about Donald Trump was that she found Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy to be “scarier” than his.

But anyway, looks around at current events, where has WW3 started ?

Because I must have missed it. :rolleyes:

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

It hasn't (last time I checked) but the Doomsday clock has just recently moved to 2 1/2 minutes to 12, and hasn't been worse since 1953.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-38760792

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

To put the Doomsday clock into perspective, from 2012 it stood a 5 mins to midnight until 2015 when it moved forward 2mins. A full 2mins chqange pre-Trump.

This year it has been moved an unprecidented 30secs.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

With Hillary as President, there would not have even been any kind of clock...

I would like to ask people what they would do with Kim Jong-Fatun, who says he they will have capability to reach Hawaii or even Alaska...

This has escalated over the course of the last few decades... Kim's father was no different, only he did not have nuclear missiles to play with.

....Repeated Diplomacy avenues have failed...
....Repeated Sanctions have failed....

Evidence suggests they now have the Nuclear capability.... what is the World to do, not just Donald J. Trump?

We are in a constant stalemate with the Korean peninsula as China is reluctant to do stuff because they do not want a failed state on their doorstep and would not want a new democratic regime that was allied with the U.S.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

True, but the change gets more significant the closer you get, there's not a lot of wriggle room. We're in Cuban missile crisis territory as far as the clock is concerned.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Not sure that's entirely true - the ships, missiles and warheads on the way to Cuba were Russian. Nobody is supporting NK to the same extent although it's clearly a tricky situation with the proximity of China.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Had the previous US administration done more sooner to kerb nuclear proliferation we would still have wiggle room.

The present posturing by NK is a direct result of this.

How would you handle NK?

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I think we should send a delegation of senior CND members over there to negotiate and see how they get on...

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

If you can get agreement from NK for them to enter the country.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Might go OK if they take lots of cheese. ;)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

If you know the FT headline, you can Google it and read three article free a day this way. Just look at the headline on FT.com, cut and paste it into Google, find the article and read it. :)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Or cut/paste the URL into a private browsing session, like Chrome incognito.

Re: North Korea
 

On this - a very funny tweet pwning someone on this subject.

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/at...9&d=1502437243

Re: North Korea
 

Correction, given Trumps firing nature. He was a US Weapons policy specialist ... Pretty dumb move to post against the US President when he was probably blustering in that tweet, in a public show of might.

Re: North Korea
 

All the twit's Tweets are blusters. As long as he keep tweeting rather than actually doing then we might be safe.

Re: North Korea
 

It's just a distraction from the Russia issue.

Re: North Korea
 

That's excellent :tu:

Re: North Korea
 

He's self-employed, and a University Adjunct Professor in California, so probably hasn't affected his employment status...

Re: North Korea
 

Ahh California, explains it all... :rolleyes:

Re: North Korea
 

Not really a great rebuttal...What does California have to do with his expertise?

Re: North Korea
 

Yes, the sixth largest economy in the world - not a bad place to be...

(but he actually lives in the Greater Chicago Area).;

btw, is 'blustering' a new synonym for 'lying'?

Re: North Korea
 

It does ? I dont follow :confused:

Re: North Korea
 

But he lives near Chicago, in the Mid-West.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Not his expertise, his 'political stance', you know California is heavy leaning on the devil party, i.e Democrats.

---------- Post added at 17:24 ---------- Previous post was at 17:18 ----------

Why don't you ask the Clintons, or Corbyn, they're very good in this area. :rolleyes:

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/at...0&d=1502468780

I'm asking you about Trump, but nice try at deflection...

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

FFS Hugh, I know it really pisses you off, but Trump won the Presidency and he won a legitimate election, there has been NO evidence of Russian collusion, despite your silly meme and over a years worth of investigation after investigation. I could not give a crap if he tells lies, he is not the only political leader who ever has or ever will be. He won, she lost (and I will keep saying it, thank goodness!)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I'm sure that'd be easy. KJU is clearly a rational leader who's open to dialogue and will be keen to listen to the likes of Bruce Kent and Caroline Lucas who speak such a lot of sense... :rolleyes:

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Yes, send them over there with a sackful of leaflets for a campaign of peace and goodwill. With luck they'll be locked up for years. :D

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

But 'evil' Clinton did get nearly 3 million more votes than he did - don't shoot the messenger just saying ! Says more about their crap electoral system (ours isn't much better).

There seems to be loads of evidence of Russian intervention, even Trump now reluctantly admits that, hence the sanctions.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Trump won more States, which is what matters, I have explained this tired old argument many times over. Can't have the Presidency decided by California and New York. That's why Electoral college exists.

That's a slight twisting of the facts there Mr K, but that's nothing new.

Yes the FBI say there is evidence, would actually help if the FBI were able to access the DNC servers that were said to be compromised, but you would have to be a really dumb hacker to leave traces of origin laying around.

But while Russia is said to have hacked, the issue I'm on about is there is no evidence of collusion.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

You saw straight through my plan... :D

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

One person, one vote, it isn't a radical interpretation of democracy.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

You guys are on form today! Three hole-in-ones!

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Just stick to mocking brexit, you clearly don't get the Geography of the U.S or just being deliberately obtuse.

---------- Post added at 19:44 ---------- Previous post was at 19:42 ----------

Way over par more like.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

He won the election - that's a matter of fact, and whilst I don't think he is able to do the job, he was elected under the system, and I accept the result - so your assertion is incorrect.

There is lots of evidence of Russian interference in the election (nice diversion by using collusion rather than interference) - the US Intelligence Community are of one voice in stating that there has been Russian interference.

About collusion - let's let the Special Counsel investigate that, shall we?

You still haven't answered my question - did Trump lie when he said the Nuclear Arsenal was far stronger and more powerful than ever before?

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I have already give an opinion on what I thought of that tweet, looked like strategic posturing to me. It is true one of his first orders was to defense to undertake a NPR. But like I said, he distorted the facts to likely discourage Kimmy boy from doing something silly as a deterrent but along comes a pedantic liberal, whom has other plans.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Doesn't every incoming administration order a defence review? It's a running joke here that each government tears up what went before and orders another one.

I would rather Trump leave foreign policy to the state department rather than his Twitter feed. At the moment it's like a bar fight between Trump and Kim Jong-un where they keep goading each other into more and more hyperbolic statements. America would win a war against North Korea without Trump's tweets, unless Kim Jong-un really is completely gone he must have known this long before.

The danger is that Seoul is well within range of NK's conventional missiles and if North Korea went down they could take a lot of people with them. This is more important than Trump's ego and getting one over the liberals. Trump wanted this job, he should get to it rather than peacock around on the internet.

The worry is nothing can be done. It's not like Iran who were more receptive to the prospect of stopping their nuclear program.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

So, did Trump lie, yes or no? You're not a politician so can you give us a straightforward answer?

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Not in the U.K, the USA or for that matter many, if not most " democratic " states.

One man, one vote, very rarely delivers a majority government.

---------- Post added at 00:35 ---------- Previous post was at 00:30 ----------

Not a black and white issue, question or subject. Also I don't how you know, or indeed expect Mick to know, the capability of the USA nuclear arsenal.

---------- Post added at 00:37 ---------- Previous post was at 00:35 ----------

Don't really think that Mick is on trial here.

Be sensible, if you can. I won't hold my breath.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Hugh did expect the University Professor specialising in US nuclear weapons to know though. Also the logic of it being pretty difficult to greatly increase your nuclear arsenal in just six months.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

No one is on trial, I've just asked a reasonable question.
What you do with your breath is of no interest to me.

---------- Post added at 08:18 ---------- Previous post was at 08:11 ----------

The question wasn't what the capability is which is a harder question.#strawman. The question was -has it increased under Trump yes or no?

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

The actually rhetoric of Russia meddling was done in a way to make people think that they had hacked the voting results to give Trump the win, which was not the case.
All the major countries interfere with elections of other countries, especially America. Usually it's information war, leaks and flooding news, blogs and places with stories which benefit the side they want to win. Usually it's very subtle, other times not so.


The DNC hack was blamed on Russians but now it appears it was actually an insider with a USB stick, even though the CIA and whoever said they had High Confidence it was the Russians. The Guccifer/Guccifer 2 account was more likely to be Russian, even though they deny it being the case.



At a recent hacking convention, the usual voting machines were hacked once again by hackers, one of them even over wifi with no physical contact. Although there is no evidence of this happening during the election, I wouldn't put it past the NSA to have worked with the manufacturers and helped get overseas contracts to sell the voting machines ;)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

There were two nuclear ballistic missile systems being developed in the late nineties early noughties that were ahead of the then current stockpile and if they were near completion or had been completed but not implemented they would technically improve the capability. Trouble is as is so often the case with Trump he makes these statements with no actual evidence of substance to the statement leaving it open to interpretation another hang over from his business days that like most of his approaches doesn't translate well in the political world. I don't think he's yet understanding that he is in a whole new world with it's own culture and rules that doesn't just bend because that's what you tell it too.

He's still acting like a businessman who can say and do what he wants with at worst a drop in company value rather then someone acclimatising to his new roll where he has to back up his statements and comments and that there is more scrutiny then ever before. In the past his antics were easily written off as eccentric behaviour or just silliness and i think he got comfortable with that and is continuing it now when it's not appropriate.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Well the Donald has admitted racism and the far right nutters are a bad thing at last. Better late than never, even if it came from an autocue and not from the heart. However the damage from his delay and insincerity has been done.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Agreed. There's yet another vacancy though as Trump's turnaround seems to have been motivated by the resignation of Merck chief executive Ken Frazier who tweeted that he had decided to resign from Donald Trump’s American Manufacturing Council “as a matter of personal conscience."

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

He had to be insincere or else he'd be lumping his dad in with them. I have to admit a certain amount of sympathy for the origional protests, which as I understand it revolved around the proposed removal of a statue of Robert E Lee

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40973209

Presumably she won't be whining about it if some right wing nut job posts the same thing about her... :rolleyes:

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Her pathetic excuse is laughable.

She regrets her posting but says the anger remains against him because of his hate. Stupid woman. I hate the Clintons, Obama, but I would never stoop to wishing them dead!

Think she has been taking insanity lessons from Rosie O'Donnell. :rolleyes:

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Always fun when people find out you can't threaten to kill the President.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

In other news, Independent is reporting in last half or hour or so that the President is considering his next firing....

.....Steve Bannon...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7900911.html

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Rumour no more....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40980994

Bye bye Bannon.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

It's hard to have any sympathy for anyone in Trump's close circle who he soon fires. They're all equally detestable racist and biggoted backstabbers. Do you think Trump could fire himself by accident or tweet? It's possible....

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I'd heard that Rupert Murdoch wanted him out but I thought that as Bannon had survived this long he would be ok.
I guess it follows the Trump philosophy of causing another distraction when things go against him. (In this case his poor handling of events in Charlottesville.)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Start the Oomph Loompa music! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg9EuFmo-VU

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Whilst I'm no Clinton fan, she did accurately warn of his extreme side. https://www.indy100.com/article/hill..._campaign=i100

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I can't believe Trump's tweets tonight. In one post he says

and then a short while afterwards posts this!

He's supposed to be the rudder FFS!

Apologies to The Donald, my bad the second quote was actually a tweet from 2014 retweeted by someone else.

I'm off to bed!

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I'm sure 'the Donald' will sleep easier now he knows he has your apologies ;)

Maybe he and the Texas oil barons will take climate change a bit more seriously now they know it might affect their profits/families and that being rich won't protect them. Too late of course, I fear we might be past the point of being able to do anything.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I read a largely US bass players forum. The views of President Trump there are interesting.

A couple of the articles posted from the last couple of pages of their politics thread, pasted here with minimal comment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.2f7fb9fe6695

https://static.currentaffairs.org/20...il-this-man-is

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-advise...because-655709 <<< Gives away the timing of the pardon a tad.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...hemming-241392

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-adv...091246640.html << Yikes

http://fortune.com/2017/08/26/trump-...dvisors-resign

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2017/08/22.jpg

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I read capacity could fit up to 19,000 in the Phoenix Convention Centre.

Thousands were turned away and were still outside queuing to get in as the rally was wrapping up.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/...sts/594732001/

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Yes. During the speech he said this :
This is false. That first rally was at the venue the fire department referred to. The Trump tweet may also be an old one. Don't know.

I would hope that's what was being referred to though stirring is probably more likely given the timing.

I've no idea why some people muddy the waters. Trump lies clearly and blatantly quite often enough, that rally speech was a stream of them, to allow him to be picked up on without inaccurate memes.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Bush Jr was damaged by his handling of Katrina. Trump's handling of this disaster in Houston will be equally telling I feel. He will be judged ..

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I look at this in another way. Trumps critics, (and he has many) would argue that with his ego and need for large crowds of support, there is no way he would select a venue that has less than a 5,000 people capacity.

---------- Post added at 11:17 ---------- Previous post was at 11:03 ----------

Governor of Texas has issued praise towards Trump. Trump was very quick to declare the hurricane a disaster, which in turn releases federal funding and additional emergency resources. Trump has also announced that he is also visiting Texas tomorrow to assess damage himself.

President Bush Jr. viewed the damage left by Katrina from a window on Air Force One and allowed the Press to take a photo of him doing it. It was a PR disaster for him, as it gave the impression he was 'disconnected and distant' from the damage far below him.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I am not sure of the point of these tweets by Trump yesterday, when he should be focusing on one of the biggest natural disasters to hit the USA

This was just after the Mexican Government had offered to help with supplies and personnel, just as they did after Katrina.

Promoting a book by one of his supporters on a day like yesterday?

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Did you miss the bit about the praise from the Governor of Texas for the Presidents response ?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/...-meets-tweets/

I saw in a news clip the Texas Governor says Trump has said in a phone call, "Whatever you need, you've got."

And as I said above, the President is visiting area tomorrow.

So, I'm confused Hugh, what precisely do you want the President to focus on, that he already hasn't? :confused:

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

He should appoint a Minister for Precipitation to stop the rain.

Having successfully downgraded the hurricane to a tropical storm, it's time to delegate the simpler stuff. :rofl:

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Judged to have done a good job or at least better than Bush handled Katrina, although it's hard to see how he could've handled it worse admittedly. There's plenty to criticise the Donald for without looking for stuff in the midst of a disaster.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

But why attack the Mexican Government when they have just offered to help with the floods, and why pimp a book during a catastrophe?

Neither of those things are relevant to the ongoing disaster, so why not stay focused on that?

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I cannot understand what more his opponents want him to do.

He signed a disaster proclamation (possibly quicker than any other President) as soon as the Governor of Texas appraised him of the situation and need.

This released vital funds and support from Federal agencies to both the state and counties within.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Maybe by not pulling out of the Paris Climate Change Accord? The US isn't immune from the affects of climate change, time 'Trump & chums' realised that.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Trump offered to renegotiate it's terms Macron and Merkel said no way, btw who put these two in charge ?

As for Paris Accord, he did not agree other countries like China were still permitted to partake in heavily polluting activities, way in to the agreement and USA cannot do the same, why should China be allowed to continue to do as it pleases?

This is why he pulled out of the Accord because he felt the terms were unfair on the US and not to mention about 20+ Republican Senators actually urged him to pull out of the agreement.