Trump is dominating as POTUS.

[Commodus]

Maybe yes, maybe no. Yes, it's a long shot, but I'm not going to declare the patient dead until he actually dies....and I definitely will not relish Trump's failure should that be the outcome.

We shouldn't relish it... it's just expected that Trump would find a way to screw things up. The only semi-surprising thing is that it's unraveling now versus at the actual talks. Trump is incompetence personified.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

We shouldn't relish it... it's just expected that Trump would find a way to screw things up. The only semi-surprising thing is that it's unraveling now versus at the actual talks. Trump is incompetence personified.

The chance for success is very, very low....anybody who knows history understands this going in. But the probability of hitting a home run is zero if you don't step up to the plate and take a swing. Hoping for the best is what we all should be doing imo.

 

[interchange]

Trump is about 1 pt. (Rasmussen) to 5 pts. (Gallup) below Obama's approval rating at this point in their respective terms depending on the poll. I find this absolutely amazing in light of the incessant barrage of unhinged media bias directed at this administration. For example, check out the front page of today's edition of the Daily News. Trump being within 1-5 pts. of Obama is mind boggling considering these kind of horseshit smears have become effectively normative in MSM.

Regardless of how anyone sees the level of bias in other sources, it is plainly obvious that the most biased sources that are actually a major source of news media for Americans are biased in favor of Trump (e.g. Fox news). Clickbait and tabloid format sources like the NY Daily News really shouldn't inform anyone's impression of media bias.

That I think is why Trump sits where he does in polling. A large section of Republicans are living in an echo chamber that constantly tells them that no one else can be trusted. Slanted and suggestive negative reporting only reinforces their choice of media and favorable impression of Trump.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It really looks like Kim is doing the carrot and stick routine. Dangle something he knows Trump really wants, a historic win that would outlive his Presidency, in front of him making him think it is something within his grasp, then yank it away and demand that he get something before we ever discuss the terms for the carrot.

My guess is that Kim has no intentions of ending his weapons program, but suspected that Trump was getting close ordering a surgical strike on NK's facilities. So, he dangles the carrot in front of Trump knowing that Trump's ego will make him think he is about to win, but in reality Kim is close to finishing their weapons project and just needs a bit more time to finish up, at which point they can claim to the world that they are a nuclear power and then no one will dare attack them.

Kim has ended part of his nuclear program in his quest for higher yields and so blew up his testing facilities, which isn't great for him. He can build new bombs but there's going to be a substantial risk in fielding an untested nuke, like them not working. Still, it allows for a kind of MAD strategy. But Kim wants more from his program than that. He likes to extort to replace a dysfunctional "economy" AKA a joke.

If Kim thinks that fielding nukes is going to get him anything but killed I believe he's wrong. There are potential means to remove Kim difficult or impossible to trace back to any nation. I know of general approaches but I have no ties to those working on such things, but yeah, 10 or 15 years down the road? Kim who? Oh he died of natural causes.

 

[zinfamous]

I think the meeting will still happen. Kim meeting with POTUS is more important for him than anything else. Complaining about joint exercises is a predictable annual holiday. They always continue on, as normally, as it will this time.

Kim can't afford to lose the opportunity to talk with POTUS and, of course, they will get to keep their nukes. No way in hell that isn't happening.

 

[HomerJS]

If the world gets peace for the Korean peninsula...what sane person gives a flying f*ck about whether or not Trump gets the Nobel prize for helping make that happen?

Trump

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Trump

Yeah, and you.

 

[fskimospy]

Rasmussen was one of the top 3 most accurate pollsters for the 2016 election. I'm no expert, but I personally think they're relatively credible...yet fskimospy gets his panties in a bunch every time I cite them. I believe Gallup is highly credible as well...yet fskimospy feels compelled to make a huge issue regarding the 2 pt difference between the Gallup poll and the averaged poll numbers metric he cited and apparently prefers. He argues for the sake of arguing me thinks.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/19/these-pollsters-got-the-election-right-according-to-rcp/

Rasmussen was also among the least accurate pollsters in previous years. That's why they are rated among the most poorly of major pollsters by fivethirtyeight. Regardless it's not about if they are credible it's about if you're presenting an accurate picture. For example, had I said that Trump was between 8 and 13 points behind Obama would you view that as being equally reasonable? We both know you wouldn't.

 

[Thebobo]

Hypocrisy 101, watch the video in this article.

https://nowthisnews.com/videos/poli...tions-regarding-negotiations-with-north-korea

 

[Commodus]

The chance for success is very, very low....anybody who knows history understands this going in. But the probability of hitting a home run is zero if you don't step up to the plate and take a swing. Hoping for the best is what we all should be doing imo.

The problem is that Trump doesn't know history, and a lot of the progress came in spite of Trump rather than because of him. Still hoping for the best, but I wouldn't be surprised if we're back to square one before long.

 

[HomerJS]

The problem is that Trump doesn't know history, and a lot of the progress came in spite of Trump rather than because of him. Still hoping for the best, but I wouldn't be surprised if we're back to square one before long.

History is one of those details Trump doesn't want to be bothered with. He's basically a lazy motherfucker and wants to shortcut his way to results.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Rasmussen was also among the least accurate pollsters in previous years. That's why they are rated among the most poorly of major pollsters by fivethirtyeight. Regardless it's not about if they are credible it's about if you're presenting an accurate picture. For example, had I said that Trump was between 8 and 13 points behind Obama would you view that as being equally reasonable? We both know you wouldn't.

Yet you completely ignore that fact that I cited the Gallup poll as well which is only 2 pts different than the fivethirtyeight composite. You talk of being reasonable....but I'm not seeing it here. Instead I see you down in the weeds wanting to argue minutia.

 

[Thebobo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zllLgWfNlX0

 

[breag]

Easy to release prisoners for $1.8 BILLION. Tired of the looney left and their forever tears.

... and the rest of us are tired of ignorant idiots that don't bother to actually look anything up.

Early in 1979 the shah of Iran paid the US $400 million for weapons.
Later in 1979 he was deposed and the US froze the weapons shipments - and kept the $400 million.
Additionally $12 BILLION of Iranian assets in the US were frozen.
In 1981, after the hostages were released, the US repaid $3 billion.
In 2015 a tribunal (one Reagan agreed to in 81) was expected to find that the US needed to settle with Iran for at least an additional $4 billion.
The Obama administration settled with Iran for $1.7 billion.
$400 million + 5.2% interest compounded for 28 years = $1.7 billion.
The other $9 billion in frozen assets (which would be $38.2 BILLION after interest) considered settled.

So actually a *damned good deal.
http://fortune.com/2016/08/05/money-america-iran/

 

[interchange]

Kim has ended part of his nuclear program in his quest for higher yields and so blew up his testing facilities, which isn't great for him. He can build new bombs but there's going to be a substantial risk in fielding an untested nuke, like them not working. Still, it allows for a kind of MAD strategy. But Kim wants more from his program than that. He likes to extort to replace a dysfunctional "economy" AKA a joke.

If Kim thinks that fielding nukes is going to get him anything but killed I believe he's wrong. There are potential means to remove Kim difficult or impossible to trace back to any nation. I know of general approaches but I have no ties to those working on such things, but yeah, 10 or 15 years down the road? Kim who? Oh he died of natural causes.

Kim has enough nuclear power to remain in control. They're not going to give up what they already have but maybe as you describe are willing to abandon a program which he himself has already put on life support that he might already abandon anyway. I think the real question for us is in his capacity to deliver nuclear weapons rather than his possession of them, how many, and how big a yield they are. But it seems like Trump would go into the meeting and demand complete denuclearization. On two sides that's scary. One is that this would be a non-starter for Kim and is already threatening to lead to increasing tensions without the summit occurring. Another is, if agreed to, Trump would likely willingly withdrawal all US military presence (and I think quickly) and leave Kim with a significant conventional weapon arsenal pointed at a depleted Seoul. This, of course, is assuming we have the power to actually ensure denuclearization would actually happen.

 

[fskimospy]

You completely ignore that fact that I cited the Gallup poll as well which is only 2 pts different than the fivethirtyeight composite. You talk of being reasonable....but I'm not seeing it here. Instead I see you down in the weeds over minutia.

'You attack me for citing a poll 85% below the polling average but completely ignore the fact that I also included a poll only 30% lower than the polling average!'

 

[brycejones]

Yet you completely ignore that fact that I cited the Gallup poll as well which is only 2 pts different than the fivethirtyeight composite. You talk of being reasonable....but I'm not seeing it here. Instead I see you down in the weeds wanting to argue minutia.

Is this another attempt to argue that less than 50% is a majority? You suck at math.

 

[brycejones]

... and the rest of us are tired of ignorant idiots that don't bother to actually look anything up.

Early in 1979 the shah of Iran paid the US $400 million for weapons.
Later in 1979 he was deposed and the US froze the weapons shipments - and kept the $400 million.
Additionally $12 BILLION of Iranian assets in the US were frozen.
In 1981, after the hostages were released, the US repaid $3 billion.
In 2015 a tribunal (one Reagan agreed to in 81) was expected to find that the US needed to settle with Iran for at least an additional $4 billion.
The Obama administration settled with Iran for $1.7 billion.
$400 million + 5.2% interest compounded for 28 years = $1.7 billion.
The other $9 billion in frozen assets (which would be $38.2 BILLION after interest) considered settled.

So actually a *damned good deal.
http://fortune.com/2016/08/05/money-america-iran/

Solid first post.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Kim has enough nuclear power to remain in control. They're not going to give up what they already have but maybe as you describe are willing to abandon a program which he himself has already put on life support that he might already abandon anyway. I think the real question for us is in his capacity to deliver nuclear weapons rather than his possession of them, how many, and how big a yield they are. But it seems like Trump would go into the meeting and demand complete denuclearization. On two sides that's scary. One is that this would be a non-starter for Kim and is already threatening to lead to increasing tensions without the summit occurring. Another is, if agreed to, Trump would likely willingly withdrawal all US military presence (and I think quickly) and leave Kim with a significant conventional weapon arsenal pointed at a depleted Seoul. This, of course, is assuming we have the power to actually ensure denuclearization would actually happen.

The only way this situation improves if Kim and his line end and others less paranoid will listen to Western input, well other than a military solution which wouldn't be good. We could end Kim by the end of the week, maybe two at most, but then what? We would have an unstable situation with lives nukes and a nation that declared war on North Korea. That would be an outstandingly bad situation.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Is this another attempt to argue that less than 50% is a majority? You suck at math.

This is pretty solid.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html

 

[interchange]

The only way this situation improves if Kim and his line end and others less paranoid will listen to Western input, well other than a military solution which wouldn't be good. We could end Kim by the end of the week, maybe two at most, but then what? We would have an unstable situation with lives nukes and a nation that declared war on North Korea. That would be an outstandingly bad situation.

Well I'm certainly worried that military action would cause him to loose his arsenal even though he'd definitely lose the war. China and South Korea would be extremely pissed at a minimum. I kinda doubt his lineage ending naturally would lead to a regime change that would be materially different. I think the path out for them is reunification, and I think any kind of continual dialogue with SK et al. would be extremely critical even if no movement actually occurs. There have been stories I've read about the black market Western media making its way to NK citizens. I doubt they'd ever be empowered enough to overthrow the regime, but a background awareness that the propaganda they are soaking in isn't the absolute truth will go a long way to allowing successful movement toward integration.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

'You attack me for citing a poll 85% below the polling average but completely ignore the fact that I also included a poll only 30% lower than the polling average!'

I cited the first two poll results I found on the subject...both of which came from well known pollsters. Why are you getting yourself so worked up over this?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Well I'm certainly worried that military action would cause him to loose his arsenal even though he'd definitely lose the war. China and South Korea would be extremely pissed at a minimum. I kinda doubt his lineage ending naturally would lead to a regime change that would be materially different. I think the path out for them is reunification, and I think any kind of continual dialogue with SK et al. would be extremely critical even if no movement actually occurs. There have been stories I've read about the black market Western media making its way to NK citizens. I doubt they'd ever be empowered enough to overthrow the regime, but a background awareness that the propaganda they are soaking in isn't the absolute truth will go a long way to allowing successful movement toward integration.

In the case of a military attack certain things would have to happen first as a top priority and that is to take out command and communication centers. By command, I mean Kim especially but others as well. Communication in a modern army is in some ways easier to defeat than the system of hardwire connections those in NK are so fond of. It would be a tough nut to crack with failure to launch being an absolute priority.

Regarding Kim's family we have generals who may not love us, but they have to understand that China is who they must answer to. China and the NK military would quickly reach an understanding which does not include Kim level delusions.

Nothing is proof against adverse outcomes and I am not suggesting we take a path towards war, merely assessing possibilities based on the situation as I can know it.

 

[dank69]

... and the rest of us are tired of ignorant idiots that don't bother to actually look anything up.

Early in 1979 the shah of Iran paid the US $400 million for weapons.
Later in 1979 he was deposed and the US froze the weapons shipments - and kept the $400 million.
Additionally $12 BILLION of Iranian assets in the US were frozen.
In 1981, after the hostages were released, the US repaid $3 billion.
In 2015 a tribunal (one Reagan agreed to in 81) was expected to find that the US needed to settle with Iran for at least an additional $4 billion.
The Obama administration settled with Iran for $1.7 billion.
$400 million + 5.2% interest compounded for 28 years = $1.7 billion.
The other $9 billion in frozen assets (which would be $38.2 BILLION after interest) considered settled.

So actually a *damned good deal.
http://fortune.com/2016/08/05/money-america-iran/

Worst deal ever.

 

[zinfamous]

... and the rest of us are tired of ignorant idiots that don't bother to actually look anything up.

Early in 1979 the shah of Iran paid the US $400 million for weapons.
Later in 1979 he was deposed and the US froze the weapons shipments - and kept the $400 million.
Additionally $12 BILLION of Iranian assets in the US were frozen.
In 1981, after the hostages were released, the US repaid $3 billion.
In 2015 a tribunal (one Reagan agreed to in 81) was expected to find that the US needed to settle with Iran for at least an additional $4 billion.
The Obama administration settled with Iran for $1.7 billion.
$400 million + 5.2% interest compounded for 28 years = $1.7 billion.
The other $9 billion in frozen assets (which would be $38.2 BILLION after interest) considered settled.

So actually a *damned good deal.
http://fortune.com/2016/08/05/money-america-iran/

Head shot on the first post.

well done, sir.