3 ms·

My point is more -- Why this President? It would never been acceptable at any point in prior history. Jimmy Carter famously had to sell his family's peanut fa

My point is more -- Why this President? It would never been acceptable at any point in prior history. Jimmy Carter famously had to sell his family's peanut farm to avoid any perception of a conflict of interest. In the same election that Trump won, it was a huge campaign issue that people seeking influence donated to The Clinton Foundation -- a Foundation that the Clinton's did not, and could not financially benefit from. Yet it's okay that unelected Mar-a-Lago members that are currently putting money in the President's pocket can run a hundred billion dollar government organization from the shadows and steer its funds?[1] What changed in the American psyche? Why did we collectively assent to let this President break all of the norms that constrained previous administrations? [1] - https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/26/mar-a-lago-trump-investigation-va-contracts-1015803 https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/26/mar-a-lago-trump-i...

mikekchar 8y ago
My honest opinion: previous Presidents (mostly) willingly followed the rules. This President thought, "I wonder what would happen to me if I didn't follow the rules". And the answer seems to be "Nothing". If anything's changed, I think it's a kind of "democratisation" of opinion. For example, the Washington Post was essentially able, though investigative reporting, to impeach a President. I don't think the same thing would happen now because the idea that "something must be done" used to come from those same media outlets. There was a more focused opinion driven by a few players. Now opinion can be swayed by anyone with a Twitter account (or access to Facebook data, it seems). Several people opined that Trump would not make it through his first term without getting impeached and I think he's shown that he has the ability to dilute public opinion. There have been several points in his first term where I think a President would have been devastated by public opinion had they tried the same thing in the past. He's had relatively no trouble navigating the issues. I think there is just no way to unify the chaos that is public opinion these days. And I will say, although I'm not a fan of Trump's policies (or actions), he's pretty darn good at surfing that chaos -- and stirring the pot so that the chaos continues. If you want to put a different kind of President in power in the next election you're going to have to pick someone who can diffuse that chaos and create a clear, powerful and unified message that the average person is going to identify with. I suspect it will be incredibly difficult.
- TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
  someone who can diffuse that chaos and create a clear, powerful and unified message that the average person is going to identify with. I suspect it will be incredibly difficult. When that person does come, I fear they are going to be magnitudes of order more dangerous than Trump.
  - germinalphrase 8y ago
    Why and in what way?
lurquer 8y ago
Jimmy Carter did not "sell his family's peanut farm." His mother and brother managed it. In fact, ol' Billy Carter got in a bunch of trouble using it as a sort of slush fund when he was hanging out with the Libyans.... but, I suspect that is long before your time.... Nobody sells off nothing merely to take a 4-year gig. At most, they simply let other family members take over the business.
- mikeyouse 8y ago
  You're right, I had the history wrong -- he put the ownership into blind trust from which his brother was embezzling. In either case, a peanut farm was important enough to avoid impropriety but somehow all these businesses actively putting money into the President's pocket are kosher? What would people have said if all of the sudden the Iranians started buying tons of peanuts exclusively from Carter's farm?
  - lurquer 8y ago
    You did have the history wrong. What's more interesting is WHY you believed 'fake news' about Jimmy Carter selling off his family farm. I can't think of ANY President who 'sold off' anything. Kennedy certainly didn't. Neither Bush did. (Indeed, you may wish to compare the frequency of Trump at Mar-a-lago vs. Bush Sr. at Kennebunkport...) Reagan had Rancho del Cielo -- his several hundred acre ranch at which he spent so much time that it was referred to as the "Western Whitehouse." Obama went from $0 to a multimillionaire. The Clintons went from a $0 to several hundred million. (As far as the Clintons... well, if you think the Clinton's didn't benefit from the Clinton Foundation, I guess you've drunk the Kool-Aid... You oughta take some time to see how many millions of dollars in speaking fees, travel, and accommodations the Foundation paid to the three Clintons.) The Bush's were already incredibly wealthy, but probably quadrupled their net worth through their semi-private 'Carlyle Group' investment fund. Your animosity towards Trump leads you to attack the one area where he's head and shoulders above the others: he's going to leave office with a lower net worth.
    - mikeyouse 8y ago

mikekchar 8y ago

My honest opinion: previous Presidents (mostly) willingly followed the rules. This President thought, "I wonder what would happen to me if I didn't follow the rules". And the answer seems to be "Nothing". If anything's changed, I think it's a kind of "democratisation" of opinion. For example, the Washington Post was essentially able, though investigative reporting, to impeach a President. I don't think the same thing would happen now because the idea that "something must be done" used to come from those same media outlets. There was a more focused opinion driven by a few players. Now opinion can be swayed by anyone with a Twitter account (or access to Facebook data, it seems). Several people opined that Trump would not make it through his first term without getting impeached and I think he's shown that he has the ability to dilute public opinion. There have been several points in his first term where I think a President would have been devastated by public opinion had they tried the same thing in the past. He's had relatively no trouble navigating the issues. I think there is just no way to unify the chaos that is public opinion these days. And I will say, although I'm not a fan of Trump's policies (or actions), he's pretty darn good at surfing that chaos -- and stirring the pot so that the chaos continues. If you want to put a different kind of President in power in the next election you're going to have to pick someone who can diffuse that chaos and create a clear, powerful and unified message that the average person is going to identify with. I suspect it will be incredibly difficult.

TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
someone who can diffuse that chaos and create a clear, powerful and unified message that the average person is going to identify with. I suspect it will be incredibly difficult. When that person does come, I fear they are going to be magnitudes of order more dangerous than Trump.
- germinalphrase 8y ago
  Why and in what way?

lurquer 8y ago

Jimmy Carter did not "sell his family's peanut farm." His mother and brother managed it. In fact, ol' Billy Carter got in a bunch of trouble using it as a sort of slush fund when he was hanging out with the Libyans.... but, I suspect that is long before your time.... Nobody sells off nothing merely to take a 4-year gig. At most, they simply let other family members take over the business.

mikeyouse 8y ago
You're right, I had the history wrong -- he put the ownership into blind trust from which his brother was embezzling. In either case, a peanut farm was important enough to avoid impropriety but somehow all these businesses actively putting money into the President's pocket are kosher? What would people have said if all of the sudden the Iranians started buying tons of peanuts exclusively from Carter's farm?
- lurquer 8y ago
  You did have the history wrong. What's more interesting is WHY you believed 'fake news' about Jimmy Carter selling off his family farm. I can't think of ANY President who 'sold off' anything. Kennedy certainly didn't. Neither Bush did. (Indeed, you may wish to compare the frequency of Trump at Mar-a-lago vs. Bush Sr. at Kennebunkport...) Reagan had Rancho del Cielo -- his several hundred acre ranch at which he spent so much time that it was referred to as the "Western Whitehouse." Obama went from $0 to a multimillionaire. The Clintons went from a $0 to several hundred million. (As far as the Clintons... well, if you think the Clinton's didn't benefit from the Clinton Foundation, I guess you've drunk the Kool-Aid... You oughta take some time to see how many millions of dollars in speaking fees, travel, and accommodations the Foundation paid to the three Clintons.) The Bush's were already incredibly wealthy, but probably quadrupled their net worth through their semi-private 'Carlyle Group' investment fund. Your animosity towards Trump leads you to attack the one area where he's head and shoulders above the others: he's going to leave office with a lower net worth.
  - mikeyouse 8y ago