President Trump 2.0

[Stephen]

The supreme leader just announce a new battleships class with plans to have 20-25 eventually.

The name for this new class of ship..... yep, you guessed it. The 'Trump class'

Is no one going to stop him sticking his name on everything in sight?

That class name may well quietly disappear when he's no longer in power.

A single ship named after him is perfectly possible, many are named after former presidents.

[Anonymouse]

He's on about Greenland again. What part of 'up yours, Trump', which he got from Greenland, doesn't he get?
And is it coincidence that he's proposing building 20-25 "Trump-class" battleships? What, one wonders, is he going to do with them?
I'd say 'conquer Greenland', but they still won't be finished by 2028 (seriously, it takes years to build a battleship), by which time he will - he should - be out of office. Unless he is planning on getting around/ignoring the 22nd Amendment.

Heinlein saw it coming. This is how Nehemiah Scudder started - he was elected in 2012...and in 2016 there was no election. So Heinlein was only out by 12 years, Scudder - oh, sorry, Trump - having been elected in 2024. Not bad considering "If This Goes On -" was published in 1940.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Anonymouse

He's on about Greenland again. What part of 'up yours, Trump', which he got from Greenland, doesn't he get?
And is it coincidence that he's proposing building 20-25 "Trump-class" battleships? What, one wonders, is he going to do with them?
I'd say 'conquer Greenland', but they still won't be finished by 2028 (seriously, it takes years to build a battleship), by which time he will - he should - be out of office. Unless he is planning on getting around/ignoring the 22nd Amendment.

Heinlein saw it coming. This is how Nehemiah Scudder started - he was elected in 2012...and in 2016 there was no election. So Heinlein was only out by 12 years, Scudder - oh, sorry, Trump - having been elected in 2024. Not bad considering "If This Goes On -" was published in 1940.

it's a story to take peoples minds off his association with Epstein

https://wapo.st/3MOHwnj

The Supreme Court said Tuesday it would not allow President Donald Trump to deploy the National Guard in the Chicago area for now, a significant setback for his campaign to push troops into cities across the country over the objections of local and state leaders.

The president’s ability to federalize the National Guard likely only applies in “exceptional” circumstances, the court’s unsigned order said.

Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch dissented from the court’s unsigned order. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh filed a separate concurrence.

The Chicago case is the first time the Supreme Court has weighed in on one of Trump’s attempted deployments of National Guard forces. While temporary, the order could have far-reaching effects by repudiating Trump’s claim of virtually unchecked authority to mobilize and deploy troops he says are necessary to fight crime and protect immigration enforcement officers.

The order could affect how lower courts rule in other cases where local and state officials have sued to block Trump’s deployments, such as in Portland, Oregon. It may have less immediate effect on the National Guard deployment in D.C. because of the federal government’s unique role in overseeing the nation’s capital.

Most people just stop after "Merry Christmas"…

[Stephen]

That is a whole lot of projection right there.

[vincerooney]

Originally Posted by Damien

I would like to remind everyone reading this that Trump is doing a good job; I've always been a fan.

whats the measurable being used to qualify for "doing a good job"? I'm not sure if you're being serious or not.

Whilst its not the full on sh*t show people said it would be (same as his first term) i wouldnt say its a "good job"?

Whilst he has fulfilled his promises on border crackdowns and enabled tarrifs and stopped environmental laws which he promised there is slower economic growth, cost of living is till too high (tarrifs contributing to this) plus a lot of federal workforce disruptions.

I'm intrigued by 2026 because after the midterms the trump era is going to slow begin to fade (unless he tries to do a Xi Jinping and remove term limits) and its going to be very intriguing to see how the republican party survives a post MAGA era or will it eat itself alive with one of the trump sons running or will JD Vance be the heir apparently. I can see JD moving away from Trumps position if president.

the republican party will struggle to move past the MAGA era as they've all been upstaged by MAGA politics for 10 plus years now and a lot of republicand have gone full on MAGA in order to preserve their positions and keep the money rolling in....it'll be a bit difficult to entangle them now.

But the democrats may well shoot themselves in the face by picking the wrong candidates with the wrong messages.

Newsom would do well I think.

Harris would not do well (again) as she has zero likeability like hilary. I think harris would have made a great president mind. Pete Buttigieg would be destroyed in an election.

We have to accept that women running for president in the USA isnt there yet as a viable option. Coupled that with a woman of colour and its doubly not. USA is still not there yet in my eyes. Yes Obama was elected but that was because the republicans were so unpopular after Bush. Obama had such a strong personality it got a lot of swing voters. Popularity is huge in the USA more than in the UK its why Trump with zero political experience got elected twice.

After november 2026 it'll be interesting to see how trump reacts with the attention moving away from him....expect fireworks! he doesnt like not having the attention!

Newsom Vs JD Vance is my pick. Newsom would probably pick AOC as running mate in the hope that 8 years later the USA may be ready for a female president. I personally dont think they will...