My sense is that Trump's supporters do not care what he has done in the past - they will support him whatever he does and says. He will make his previous support of Putin seem like a great strategy. The Dems need to hammer on his support for Putin, his unwillingness to support Ukraine, and his immediate reaction to the invasion - i.e., Putin is a genius.
I never saw this "Trump support for Putin", Trump has a technique I characterize as "lay it on thick, and carry a big stick", which I like better than the Obama/Biden technique of establishing Red Lines doing nothing. Trump said some nice things about Kim Jong Un, that didn't mean he supported him. You may not like it, but Putin started this war on Obama's watch, and escalated into a full scale war on Biden's, Trump must have been doing something right.
The problem with this analysis is "where was the big stick"? Putin may have started this war under Obama but he continued it throughout the Trump term with zero consequences and lots of praise. He also suffered no consequences for his behaviour in Syria, which prefigured some of the horrors we're seeing in Mariupol etc... If Trump had won some concessions from Putin I might be prepared to believe it was a ploy, but he didn't, as far as I can tell he didn't even ask. So it seems much more likely he believed what he said.
To clarify, I don't believe Trump's diplomacy kept Putin from expanding his invasion of Ukraine, I just don't think it was "support of Putin". I think Putin held of for a number of reasons one of which was Trumps energy policy and perceived resolve (as compared to Biden). He attacked now for his own reasons but Biden helped by driving up the price of oil and projecting weakness in Iran and Afghanistan and in the run up to the invasion. The increase in price of oil gave Putin (he must have thought) the capability to sustain the invasion, and Biden's statement implying that a limited territorial grab wouldn't be resisted led him to believe we wouldn't do anything. Similar statements were made by US officials prior to the Korean War and the Invasion of Kuwait. On the bright side Biden's failure to lead seams to have caused the Europeans to step up and take the lead, something Trump couldn't do and I never expected.
I think Putin's read on Trump was simple: "He (Trump) is an authoritarian at heart and likes and supports, implicitly if not always tacitly, authoritarians (Kim, Xi, Orban, Erdogan, Modi, me). I do not need to worry about U.S. support for Ukraine's burgeoning democracy or Ukraine becoming a member of NATO as long as Trump is president."
Sort of the reverse of the old saw that "Democracy's never make each other"? My guess is that Putin thinks that, deep down, everybody is out to get him and some are just more dangerous than others.
Thank God for Biden, now we have uncontrolled inflation and a full scale war in Europe, and that only took 14 months. I can't wait to see what he has in store for us during the rest of his term, interesting times indeed.
I have to agree with Stevrng, and the general theme of Sam's article. Denying a fact doesn't make the denial true, any more than contorting facts to back your own argument (eg, Sergei Lavrov: 'We are not attacking Ukraine' and Kremlin: 'We are not bombing civilian targets, the Ukrainian nationalists [whatever they are] are doing that'). These methods just makes the denier look foolish or manipulative, yet this is what many GOP supporters are doing (in fairness, it's happening elsewhere in our societies too). Peter, you are practically doing the same by directly blaming inflation in the US and war in Europe on Biden. There is no causal relationship here. Do you think high gas prices are Biden's fault? If I were to tell you sales of frozen peas are rising, and so are divorce rates, would you say that eating frozen peas causes divorce? In built gullibility, optimism bias or just a basic lack of analysis is having a dangerous influence. Don't be part of it.
I'm not sure how the majority of your post relates to mine, so I will just defend my post. During the the Biden administration US inflation (based on the CPI) has increased from 1.4% to 10%, it hasn't been this high since 1982 and has never excellerated this fast. Deficit spending was high under Obama and Trump, but they didn't have worry about inflation. Deficit spending is expanding even faster under Biden even as inflation surges. Under Trump oil and gas production increased at an amazing rate (remember Obama said "we can't drill our way out of this") and the Keystone pipeline (which would have brought in more oil from Canada, at a lower price, than we lose from the Russian sanctions) was under construction and would have been complete by now. Increasing oil and natural gas prices affect the price of everything that is transported or made from them such as fertilizer, plastic and industrial chemicals. As for the war, we will never know why Putin paused during the Trump Administration, but Biden did several things that increased risk. He botched the Afghan withdrawal in a way that made him appear weak and its hard to believe anyone else including Trump could have done worse. His policies helped increase the price of oil, which gave Putin the resources to attempt his invasion, and his statement during the Russian build up, that there might not be a major reaction to a "minor incursion", is akin to US statements prior to the Korean and Gulf War I which caused North Korea and Saddam to believe there would be no or limited US response those invasions.
He's a bit old to start a career as a dictator (75) and under our constitution he can only serve one more term as President. That's why I won't vote for him in the primary election and hope he endorses someone else. The age is the real kicker because, after the mess Biden has made, its going to be a long time before we elect another septuagenarian.
I think age might stop Biden running in 2024 regardless of anything else. I'm not sure I can see Kamala replacing him but I also can't see any other obvious candidates.
I don't expect Biden to run again due to age. Regardless of Biden's demonstrated abilities at the time, opposition information warriors (Fox, right-wing infotainment sources) will convince enough US voters that Biden isn't cognitively capable of performing. The same opposition warriors will continue demonizing Kamala, who has no viable chance of being elected POTUS. The Democratic nominee must be a responsible and serious minded 'near the center' person to have sufficient appeal (at least to rational US voters, which are in short supply). Like they did in 2020, the Democratic party must place its priority on selecting a nominee with a viable chance of getting elected instead of the party's social-cause champion. Democracy matters. Rules based systems matter. Checks & balances matter. International alliances in support of democracy matter. The US must elect a POTUS who supports democracy, and not Trump or a Trump-like substitute.
At this time I can't name a potential Democrat nominee with sufficient appeal to get elected.
A delight to read, thank you Sam.
My sense is that Trump's supporters do not care what he has done in the past - they will support him whatever he does and says. He will make his previous support of Putin seem like a great strategy. The Dems need to hammer on his support for Putin, his unwillingness to support Ukraine, and his immediate reaction to the invasion - i.e., Putin is a genius.
I never saw this "Trump support for Putin", Trump has a technique I characterize as "lay it on thick, and carry a big stick", which I like better than the Obama/Biden technique of establishing Red Lines doing nothing. Trump said some nice things about Kim Jong Un, that didn't mean he supported him. You may not like it, but Putin started this war on Obama's watch, and escalated into a full scale war on Biden's, Trump must have been doing something right.
The problem with this analysis is "where was the big stick"? Putin may have started this war under Obama but he continued it throughout the Trump term with zero consequences and lots of praise. He also suffered no consequences for his behaviour in Syria, which prefigured some of the horrors we're seeing in Mariupol etc... If Trump had won some concessions from Putin I might be prepared to believe it was a ploy, but he didn't, as far as I can tell he didn't even ask. So it seems much more likely he believed what he said.
To clarify, I don't believe Trump's diplomacy kept Putin from expanding his invasion of Ukraine, I just don't think it was "support of Putin". I think Putin held of for a number of reasons one of which was Trumps energy policy and perceived resolve (as compared to Biden). He attacked now for his own reasons but Biden helped by driving up the price of oil and projecting weakness in Iran and Afghanistan and in the run up to the invasion. The increase in price of oil gave Putin (he must have thought) the capability to sustain the invasion, and Biden's statement implying that a limited territorial grab wouldn't be resisted led him to believe we wouldn't do anything. Similar statements were made by US officials prior to the Korean War and the Invasion of Kuwait. On the bright side Biden's failure to lead seams to have caused the Europeans to step up and take the lead, something Trump couldn't do and I never expected.
I think Putin's read on Trump was simple: "He (Trump) is an authoritarian at heart and likes and supports, implicitly if not always tacitly, authoritarians (Kim, Xi, Orban, Erdogan, Modi, me). I do not need to worry about U.S. support for Ukraine's burgeoning democracy or Ukraine becoming a member of NATO as long as Trump is president."
Sort of the reverse of the old saw that "Democracy's never make each other"? My guess is that Putin thinks that, deep down, everybody is out to get him and some are just more dangerous than others.
Whoops, "...never make war on each other".
Not to mention what can happen if he runs an loses. We all know what that entails.
The stupidity of Trump voters continues to amaze me.
Thank God for Biden, now we have uncontrolled inflation and a full scale war in Europe, and that only took 14 months. I can't wait to see what he has in store for us during the rest of his term, interesting times indeed.
I have to agree with Stevrng, and the general theme of Sam's article. Denying a fact doesn't make the denial true, any more than contorting facts to back your own argument (eg, Sergei Lavrov: 'We are not attacking Ukraine' and Kremlin: 'We are not bombing civilian targets, the Ukrainian nationalists [whatever they are] are doing that'). These methods just makes the denier look foolish or manipulative, yet this is what many GOP supporters are doing (in fairness, it's happening elsewhere in our societies too). Peter, you are practically doing the same by directly blaming inflation in the US and war in Europe on Biden. There is no causal relationship here. Do you think high gas prices are Biden's fault? If I were to tell you sales of frozen peas are rising, and so are divorce rates, would you say that eating frozen peas causes divorce? In built gullibility, optimism bias or just a basic lack of analysis is having a dangerous influence. Don't be part of it.
I'm not sure how the majority of your post relates to mine, so I will just defend my post. During the the Biden administration US inflation (based on the CPI) has increased from 1.4% to 10%, it hasn't been this high since 1982 and has never excellerated this fast. Deficit spending was high under Obama and Trump, but they didn't have worry about inflation. Deficit spending is expanding even faster under Biden even as inflation surges. Under Trump oil and gas production increased at an amazing rate (remember Obama said "we can't drill our way out of this") and the Keystone pipeline (which would have brought in more oil from Canada, at a lower price, than we lose from the Russian sanctions) was under construction and would have been complete by now. Increasing oil and natural gas prices affect the price of everything that is transported or made from them such as fertilizer, plastic and industrial chemicals. As for the war, we will never know why Putin paused during the Trump Administration, but Biden did several things that increased risk. He botched the Afghan withdrawal in a way that made him appear weak and its hard to believe anyone else including Trump could have done worse. His policies helped increase the price of oil, which gave Putin the resources to attempt his invasion, and his statement during the Russian build up, that there might not be a major reaction to a "minor incursion", is akin to US statements prior to the Korean and Gulf War I which caused North Korea and Saddam to believe there would be no or limited US response those invasions.
Trump wants to be a dictator lol me Putin. As far as I am concerned that disqualify him..
He's a bit old to start a career as a dictator (75) and under our constitution he can only serve one more term as President. That's why I won't vote for him in the primary election and hope he endorses someone else. The age is the real kicker because, after the mess Biden has made, its going to be a long time before we elect another septuagenarian.
Maybe but will Hunter Biden's antics stop Biden running in 2024 (if he makes it that long)? Will it be Kamala vs De Santis?
I think age might stop Biden running in 2024 regardless of anything else. I'm not sure I can see Kamala replacing him but I also can't see any other obvious candidates.
I agree, Sam.
I don't expect Biden to run again due to age. Regardless of Biden's demonstrated abilities at the time, opposition information warriors (Fox, right-wing infotainment sources) will convince enough US voters that Biden isn't cognitively capable of performing. The same opposition warriors will continue demonizing Kamala, who has no viable chance of being elected POTUS. The Democratic nominee must be a responsible and serious minded 'near the center' person to have sufficient appeal (at least to rational US voters, which are in short supply). Like they did in 2020, the Democratic party must place its priority on selecting a nominee with a viable chance of getting elected instead of the party's social-cause champion. Democracy matters. Rules based systems matter. Checks & balances matter. International alliances in support of democracy matter. The US must elect a POTUS who supports democracy, and not Trump or a Trump-like substitute.
At this time I can't name a potential Democrat nominee with sufficient appeal to get elected.
That's my worry - who else is out there?