Slashdot Mirror


The Public Is Growing Tired of Trump's Tweets, Says Voter Survey (arstechnica.com)

President Donald Trump is the tweeting president. His @realDonaldTrump handle has 31.8 million followers and "35K" tweets. While the president claims to use Twitter to "get the honest and unfiltered message out," many Americans aren't so fond of his favored form of communication. According to a new voter poll (PDF), the public is growing tired of Trump's tweets. Ars Technica reports: A Morning Consult, Politico survey published Wednesday found that 69 percent of voters who took the online survey said they thought Trump tweets too much. That's up from 56 percent from December, months before Trump took office. The survey said that 82 percent of Democrats polled thought Trump tweets too much, up from 75 percent in December. Republicans came in at 53 percent saying the president used Twitter too often, an 11-percent increase from December. Overall, 57 percent of voters who took the survey said Trump's tweets are hurting his presidency. Another 53 percent said his Twitter use undermines U.S. standing in the world. The poll found that 51 percent of all voters said Trump's tweets imperiled national security. What do you think of Trump's tweets? Do you think they are getting old, or do you find them particularly useful?

285 of 489 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe but... by burtosis · · Score: 5, Funny

    100% of late night comedians think he tweets just the right amount or not enough.

    1. Re:Maybe but... by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      100% of Saturday Night Live writers want Trump to increase the number of late night tweets, and would prefer it if he tweeted every waking moment of his presidency.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Maybe but... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually, they're mostly pissed off, because no matter how outrageous a scenario they dream up, Trump keeps topping them.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    3. Re:Maybe but... by burtosis · · Score: 1

      Actually, they're mostly pissed off, because no matter how outrageous a scenario they dream up, Trump keeps topping them.

      I think you are referring to house of cards.

    4. Re:Maybe but... by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the death of satire is always hard on the working comedian.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    5. Re:Maybe but... by msauve · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not that he tweets too much, it's what he tweets. Twitter could be the modern fireside chat, except Trump has no sense of history, no communications skills, and no philosophical foundation for his political beliefs. He's more likely to have read John le Carre than John Locke.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    6. Re:Maybe but... by retchdog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      and he's still not particularly likely to have read le Carre.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    7. Re:Maybe but... by msauve · · Score: 1

      He skips the big words.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    8. Re: Maybe but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Who actually tweets besides millenials, botnets, journalists and Trump? Most people are at work and don't see this crap anyway. Please get back to work.

    9. Re:Maybe but... by Boronx · · Score: 1

      He clearly hasn't.

    10. Re:Maybe but... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Nope. Never seen it. I;m at the point where tv, the internet, pretty much everything "virtual" is a poor value in return for time invested.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    11. Re: Maybe but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Millennial here.

      Between my career and my family, I don't have time for tweeting.

    12. Re: Maybe but... by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 2

      I wonder who reads Trump's tweets at all, other than the mainstream media, who is really obsessed with him and should just go ahead and have sex with him.

      BTW millennial here as well. I sometimes use Twitter to participate in Amex promotions (i.e. $50 off $200 at breath l Newegg if you tweet their hashtag) but that's pretty much it.

    13. Re: Maybe but... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      If you're an American pro sports fan, Twitter is the go-to place to hear news first.

      Usually it's coming from sports writers; but I still remember Marshawn Lynch announcing his retirement by tweeting a picture of a pair of sneakers hanging by their laces during the Super Bowl...

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    14. Re: Maybe but... by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The media has always been interested in whatever the current sitting president has to say. Even the most boring president ever becomes a news story just by saying something in public. So of course, if you have a twitterphiliac in office the press is going to be looking at them all.

      Now, someone in the white house administration says she doesn't want the media to obsess over the tweets. Trump on the other hand does indeed want the press and the public to to read every single tweet, it's the reason he tweets. He's not tweeting something private like "Honey, I'll be home late tonight", he's tweeting stuff he wants you to see.

      "Mom! It's private! Don't look at my twitter account!"

    15. Re:Maybe but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      > no communications skills

      The dude literally bullshitted his way to the presidency. He might not have a real foundation for his believes, but his communication and persuasion skills are top notch.

    16. Re:Maybe but... by eril · · Score: 2

      Nope. Never seen it. I;m at the point where tv, the internet, pretty much everything "virtual" is a poor value in return for time invested.

      ...says the guy reading and posting on Slashdot. Also, you come across like this guy:

      http://www.theonion.com/articl...

    17. Re:Maybe but... by argStyopa · · Score: 2

      "He's more likely to have read John le Carre than John Locke."
      And this is the sort of snide bullshit that illustrates why he resonates with voters, but the intelligentsia despises him.

      I've read both le Carre and Locke, and I'd agree, le Carre is a FUCKTON more readable.

      And frankly, I doubt Mr Trump reads. Much of anything. Again, putting him in the same camp as 90% of Americans.

      --
      -Styopa
    18. Re: Maybe but... by lgw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The news media has been interested in every president, but it hasn't been this obsessed with a president since JFK, and perhaps not ever. CNN and MSNBC are, from what I can tell, 24/7 Trump coverage for the past 6 months. It's bizarre.

      Trumps tweets are equally bizarre in that they're honest, as far as I can tell. Honest in a "yes, honey, that dress does make you look fat because you're fat" kind of way (socially dysfunctional, but honest). An honest politician is so outside my experience that it's almost hallucinatory.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    19. Re:Maybe but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is what good communicators do. You have to because most people can't understand those big words you like so much.

      If you want a president that uses big words and logic, take the vote away from everyone except white landowners. There has been a clear trend towards anti-intellectualism in place since the scum of the earth and the women (who think with their big dumb hearts) were given the vote.

    20. Re: Maybe but... by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, they're also obsessing as Trump is the most bizarre president too. He coul be more honest with himself, in the sense that he needs to realize that he's not the super genius that he thinks he is and that it's not always a good idea to say out loud whatever random thought crossed his mind at the moment.

      Or as the saying goes, better to be quiet and let people think you're a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

    21. Re:Maybe but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Personally, I'm more tired of the way the media covers EVERY SINGLE LITTLE LAST TWEET as if each one announces an Arab/Israeli Peace Deal. We get it, he doesn't fit the exacting perfect image every president before him portrayed. A few times, they got caught; like when bush called that reporter "a major league ass-hole", or when Obama said "What I was suggesting-you’re absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith".

      The only difference is that this president doesn't seem to care about trying to portray himself one way or the other. Say all you want about Trump, but one thing is for certain, he doesn't shy away from who he really is.

    22. Re:Maybe but... by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      In 140 characters he's not going to do anything better than a sound bite. I only follow for the fun. It's entertaining to watch him yank the chain on all the haters that follow him. Everytime he tweets, no matter what he says, it's an immediate hate fest as they all chime in to profane, curse and hate on him. Then there are the sycophants that chant their agreement. There's no real communication though.

    23. Re: Maybe but... by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      The media has always been interested in whatever the current sitting president has to say. Even the most boring president ever becomes a news story just by saying something in public.

      For the most part, yes, but if you ever use Google news, pretty much the entire top of the news feed is something involving Trump, and it's incredibly fucking annoying. It wasn't this way for Obama (except for the first two months after inauguration where people like Peggy the Moocher were having a moment of euphoria, and Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher made a video talking about how themselves and a bunch of other celebrities really wanted to have sex with Obama.)

    24. Re:Maybe but... by tbannist · · Score: 1

      He skips the big words.

      And the medium-sized words, and most of the small words...

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    25. Re:Maybe but... by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      I think they're useful too, seeing each new tweet reconfirms that the country is still being run by a killer clown. It's when they stop being comedy material that we know it's someone like Bannon or Sessions running things. So it's the canary in the coalmine, as long as the crazy continues we're... well, not safe, but in less danger than we could be.

    26. Re: Maybe but... by lgw · · Score: 2

      Oh, absolutely. He's pretty much the opposite of what one expects a politician to be. I'm still not sure that's a bad thing, because politicians are on the whole so very bad.

      But, c'mon CNN, there are other things happening in the world, some of them quite important.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    27. Re: Maybe but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      While Trump dumb tweets like a maniac, the rest of the republicans sell parts of your country to the highest bidder and destroy the last shred of a social security system. And when you impeach Trump, you get Pence. The US is really fucked. Sorry.

    28. Re:Maybe but... by Xest · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yep, engaging in an online flame war with the Mayor of London for trying to reassure Londoners right after a terrorist attack really won us Brits over too, top notch communicator you have there. When we'd heard about how 48 people had been butchered, 8 of which were killed the first thing we thought was "You know what? It'd be great to hear Donald Trump's view on this, especially if he blames the Mayor of London and start slagging him off", so we're glad that he focus on a multi-day flame war, rather than just shut the fuck up or offer something nice, but obviously his mother failed as a parent and never taught him the adage that if you have nothing nice to say, then don't say anything at all.

      I'm engaging in British sarcasm here if you didn't get that. He's probably the worst communicator of any world leader I've ever seen because his comments are ill thought through, often barely literate, and usually just objectively wrong. He's basically on par with the rhetoric filled drivel that spills out of fat Kim's mouth over in North Korea.

      All hail King Covfefe, king of the uncommunicators.

    29. Re:Maybe but... by clickety6 · · Score: 1

      I doubt he's even read "Janet and John", let alone any other books connected to Johns...

      --
      ----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
    30. Re:Maybe but... by schleimkeim · · Score: 2

      and would prefer it if he tweeted every waking moment of his presidency

      I'm pretty sure he already does.

    31. Re:Maybe but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can rage all you want, you Brits are getting slaughtered. Welcome to the world of properly worded political correctness and Genocide.

    32. Re: Maybe but... by Lennie · · Score: 1

      Agreed.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    33. Re: Maybe but... by Lennie · · Score: 1

      trump is 70 years old and not a great, euh, learner, I doubt he'll change his way.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    34. Re:Maybe but... by Lennie · · Score: 1

      Reality always can always be bizarre than fiction. Fiction has to make sense otherwise people will say: this makes no sense and stop looking.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    35. Re:Maybe but... by Lennie · · Score: 2

      He only reads the words he can fit in his hands.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    36. Re:Maybe but... by Lennie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People were and still are desperate and wanted something else than the establishment. With a lot of help from other people in his campaign he didn't mess up enough. And these people who voted for him clearly didn't believe someone would lie this much. Or most lilkely were desperate enough to have selective hearing. When trump said one thing one moment and an other an other moment they would say: ohh, he doesn't mean that about the second thing, because they like the first. That's not very rational.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    37. Re:Maybe but... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'm more tired of the way the media covers EVERY SINGLE LITTLE LAST TWEET as if each one announces an Arab/Israeli Peace Deal.

      "The President of the Universe holds no real power. His sole purpose is to take attention away from where the power truly exists."

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    38. Re:Maybe but... by houghi · · Score: 1

      I think that Kim's comunication skills are much better that that of the Orange One (Not talking about the King of The Netherlands here)

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    39. Re:Maybe but... by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It still is better to shut up and let people think you're a stuck-up asshole than to open your mouth and remove any shade of doubt.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    40. Re:Maybe but... by gtall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Worse than either of them would be Pence. Pence could rally the Republicans in Congress to do serious damage whereas el Presidente Tweetie is too busy inhaling nitrous oxide in the hopes of inflating his ego just a bit more. And the end of a Pence presidency, he'd lead a Republican congress in prayer sessions to take away the last shred of freedom in the U.S.

    41. Re:Maybe but... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      A German caricaturist knew that half a year ago.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    42. Re: Maybe but... by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Ok. You're a millennial or you have a family and a career. You can't have both.

      Stop breaking the stereotype we've cultivated so hard!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    43. Re: Maybe but... by gtall · · Score: 2

      Well, the news media is interested in selling ads. The stupider the tweets from el Presidente Tweetie the better for them as more people will view whatever the ads are promoting. Saying they are obsessed with el Presidente Tweetie is a misdirection, they are obsessed with turning ad profits.

    44. Re: Maybe but... by gtall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trump honest with himself? Do you realize how odd that sounds? He's shown he's incapable of distinguishing what he wants to believe from what is true. The concept of being honest with himself simply doesn't apply for people like him.

    45. Re:Maybe but... by gtall · · Score: 1

      " his communication and persuasion skills are top notch" in that special sense that Championship Wrestling is popular and considered a sport.

    46. Re:Maybe but... by sudon't · · Score: 1

      I just mark all of Trump's tweets as spam.

      Really? Trump is one of the most interesting things on Twitter, IMO. In fact, I could never really get interested in Twitter until the Donald decided to run for office for real this time. One-hundred-forty characters isn’t enough to complete any useful thought, but it’s perfect for snarky one-liners and pithy responses to his none-too-bright followers. As others have pointed out, it’s comedy gold, and since you can’t really parody Trump, it’s best to go right to the source.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    47. Re:Maybe but... by sudon't · · Score: 1

      Actually, they're mostly pissed off, because no matter how outrageous a scenario they dream up, Trump keeps topping them.

      I think you are referring to house of cards.

      It’s true, you really can’t parody Trump, because there’s no way of exaggerating the stuff he says. Trump makes Frank Underwood look pretty good. People have referred to the Russian scandal as “Stupid Watergate”, but you might also call the Trump administration “Stupid House of Cards”.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    48. Re:Maybe but... by Maritz · · Score: 1

      and would prefer it if he tweeted every waking moment of his presidency.

      So far, so good.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    49. Re:Maybe but... by Maritz · · Score: 5, Funny

      Say all you want about Trump, but one thing is for certain, he doesn't shy away from who he really is.

      Trump has no fucking clue who he really is. All he knows is that he's the fucking greatest.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    50. Re:Maybe but... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Shouldn't you try to get the best leader possible, rather than one who is extremely average? The average person probably wouldn't be a very good POTUS, like they wouldn't make a great rocket scientist or brain surgeon because, as Trump has discovered, those jobs are hard. Who knew, as he did actually say.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    51. Re:Maybe but... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      And yet I don't spend all that much time any more. Just a few minutes here and there - I don't even use my mod points, which seem to come more and more often.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    52. Re:Maybe but... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Only on the internet :-) And less every week because real life is becoming far more interesting than "virtual reality".

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    53. Re:Maybe but... by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Unless le Carre writes books about a dog called "Ben" with waterproof chewable pages, I doubt if Trump has read any.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    54. Re:Maybe but... by Maritz · · Score: 2

      This is what good communicators do. You have to because most people can't understand those big words you like so much.

      If you want a president that uses big words and logic, take the vote away from everyone except white landowners. There has been a clear trend towards anti-intellectualism in place since the scum of the earth and the women (who think with their big dumb hearts) were given the vote.

      Impressive distance covered here. All the way from "decent observation" to "I'm a cunt"

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    55. Re:Maybe but... by Maritz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can rage all you want, you Brits are getting slaughtered. Welcome to the world of properly worded political correctness and Genocide.

      Bla bla, more people choke on fucking pen caps. Golf clap for the perpetually fearful such as you. Terrorists only exist because people who are cowed by them like you exist.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    56. Re:Maybe but... by Maritz · · Score: 2

      I think that Kim's comunication skills are much better that that of the Orange One (Not talking about the King of The Netherlands here)

      I'm willing to bet that Kim Jong Un knows 'bigly' isn't a word.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    57. Re:Maybe but... by Maritz · · Score: 1, Insightful

      He resonates with your voters because your voters are fucking idiotic mouth breathers.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    58. Re: Maybe but... by w3woody · · Score: 1

      Well, sure--and moreover, Trump is driving the conversation with his tweets. In a real way, as much as most journalists and media outlets oppose the current administration (just look at WaPo's "Democracy Dies In Darkness" added when Trump won), they are now indirectly working for Trump thanks to his tweets.

    59. Re: Maybe but... by Ogive17 · · Score: 1

      I have a few friends and colleagues who follow Trump on twitter, not because they support him but because they enjoy a laugh at his expense.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    60. Re:Maybe but... by Vince+Ferg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But the thing is if people really wanted something like that there was another choice, Bernie Sanders was basically the equivalent of trump in the sense of turning everything upside down but without the 100 scandal stories that followed him or the money. I almost feel as if the majority of people in this nation really believe that if someone has money that means they were very successful and to be that successful they must be really really smart! The American people really make no sense to me and I am 1 of them who still to this day wonder how people in this nation pick the candidates they pick because if they actually took 15 minutes to look at his life, and career, OR even listening to any number of the campaign speeches he made over the year of campaigning they should have seen clear as day this guy is a fucking nightmare who has never and will never care for the people he claims to care for. And here we are...

    61. Re:Maybe but... by Flea+of+Pain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The President of the Universe holds no real power. His sole purpose is to take attention away from where the power truly exists."

      I used to agree, then I saw how many people he screwed with his 'Muslim ban', the industries he has thrown for a loop with his tweets, the pulling out of climate accords basically unilaterally, and I'm now amazed at how much power you put in the hands of one man.

      --
      Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
    62. Re:Maybe but... by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      We get it, he doesn't fit the exacting perfect image every president before him portrayed.

      Exacting perfect image? At this point I'll settle for adequate or passable.

      The only difference is that this president doesn't seem to care about trying to portray himself one way or the other. Say all you want about Trump, but one thing is for certain, he doesn't shy away from who he really is.

      The President clearly cares about portraying himself as powerful, strong and a winner. But you're right, he doesn't shy away from who he really is. Even when it's in is own best interest to do so.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    63. Re: Maybe but... by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      The US is really fucked. Sorry.

      Yeah, most of us are sorry too.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    64. Re: Maybe but... by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      Trumps tweets are equally bizarre in that they're honest, as far as I can tell. Honest in a "yes, honey, that dress does make you look fat because you're fat" kind of way (socially dysfunctional, but honest). An honest politician is so outside my experience that it's almost hallucinatory.

      They're honest from his point of view. But that doesn't mean they're correct, or factual. After all, it's not a lie if you believe it.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    65. Re:Maybe but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why is communism, nazism, fascism, and so on seen as a bigger problem than islam? Few people would vote for a nazi or a fascist, but a muslim is OK? Islam is a major political threat to everything the west has build up the last few hundred years.

    66. Re: Maybe but... by tehcyder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Trumps tweets are equally bizarre in that they're honest, as far as I can tell. Honest in a "yes, honey, that dress does make you look fat because you're fat" kind of way (socially dysfunctional, but honest).

      They're more like saying "that dress does make you look fat" to a stick thin model because you have body image issues yourself.

      They don't agree with reality, but no doubt accurately reflect what's in Trump's own mind.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    67. Re:Maybe but... by Tesen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Worse than either of them would be Pence. Pence could rally the Republicans in Congress to do serious damage whereas el Presidente Tweetie is too busy inhaling nitrous oxide in the hopes of inflating his ego just a bit more. And the end of a Pence presidency, he'd lead a Republican congress in prayer sessions to take away the last shred of freedom in the U.S.

      No, they are already doing serious damage. The Financial Choice Act is one act they are going to try and sneak through the house during the Comey testimony today. Trump is the perfect distraction for them to push crap through. If anything Trump is going to help them sneak stuff through, now whether they are re-elected is a different story, but if they sneak through the garbage they want to then the people that are paying them off to push this garbage will make sure they are rewarded.

    68. Re:Maybe but... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Bullshitting is not the same as communicating, except to self-glorified second hand car salesmen like Trump.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    69. Re:Maybe but... by kilfarsnar · · Score: 2

      "He's more likely to have read John le Carre than John Locke." And this is the sort of snide bullshit that illustrates why he resonates with voters, but the intelligentsia despises him.

      I've heard this before, that people voted for Trump because they felt slighted and disrespected. If that's true, it really doesn't speak well of those voters. They feel disrespected, so they vote in an obvious moron and charlatan? What, do they think they're sticking it to the man? Do they think making such a foolish and petulant choice will somehow gain them more respect? And those of us who could see who he really was are supposed to somehow feel bad about that?

      People can certainly be arrogant and condescending, and I'm not going to defend that. But the proper reaction to such behavior is not to say, "You think I'm stupid? I'll show you stupid!"

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    70. Re:Maybe but... by tehcyder · · Score: 2

      "He's more likely to have read John le Carre than John Locke." And this is the sort of snide bullshit that illustrates why he resonates with voters, but the intelligentsia despises him.

      I've read both le Carre and Locke, and I'd agree, le Carre is a FUCKTON more readable.

      And frankly, I doubt Mr Trump reads. Much of anything. Again, putting him in the same camp as 90% of Americans.

      Call me old fashioned, but I want my head of state to be more intelligent than 90% of the population. If you can just have any Joe Below-Average doing the job, you might as well have a random annual lottery for the post.

      Here in the UK, we've had some appalling, unpleasant and useless leaders in the past fifty years, but as far as I remember none of them were actually thick like Trump.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    71. Re:Maybe but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't you try to get the best leader possible, rather than one who is extremely average?

      No, you shouldn't.

      Democracy isn't about choosing what is "best", something that no two person can truly agree on. It's about giving almost everyone a voice in choosing. That way even if the choice wasn't the "best", a majority would accept the decision

      (The "everyone" and "majority" in this case being states, not individual people)

    72. Re:Maybe but... by Outta_the_way_peck! · · Score: 1

      Well, at least 60 million of them properly dispersed in the right states.

    73. Re:Maybe but... by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      You've never heard of nihilism? I liken the Trump votes very much to a form of it:

      - it's *all* corrupt; the other available candidate (Hilary) was the worst possible example
      - no matter which side wins, I have no real say in what happens. It's generally going to suck for me. What can I do to harm the system itself as much as possible?
      - we've heard the ever-increasing mantra from the left, in our schools (which are dominated by liberal teachers) and finally the last 8 years president that 'anything white men do is bad'. Here's a candidate that's white, male, and not the slightest bit apologetic for those unfortunate characteristics.

      cf the Gracchi in Rome. The story is almost exactly the same (minus the identity politics,but that's a quibble).

      It's not at all "let me show you how stupid I am" so much as "you don't need me? you don't want me? if you think everything white men have done is so terrible, let's wreck it."

      I heard almost that exact statement in one of the brutally leftist Gender and Womens Sexuality Studies class at the U of MN - the teacher, an ardent left wing feminist was maundering on and on about how the unfair world was built "by and for hetero white men".
      The (amusing, but a little scary) muttered response amongst some of the white males in class (who had been more or less compelled to be there by social-engineering distribution requirements for a liberal arts degree) was "Fine, let's burn it all to the ground and start over. When shit hits the fan, you're not going to run to a Lesbian Studies professor in dreadlocks to rebuild society, are you?"

      --
      -Styopa
    74. Re:Maybe but... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'm more tired of the way the media covers EVERY SINGLE LITTLE LAST TWEET as if each one announces an Arab/Israeli Peace Deal. We get it, he doesn't fit the exacting perfect image every president before him portrayed. A few times, they got caught; like when bush called that reporter "a major league ass-hole", or when Obama said "What I was suggesting-you’re absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith".

      The only difference is that this president doesn't seem to care about trying to portray himself one way or the other. Say all you want about Trump, but one thing is for certain, he doesn't shy away from who he really is.

      One of the things some supporters of his were complaining about was that they want him to tweet about the positive things he does, like the economy, or jobs and so on. Guess what: he does! Half his tweets are about the day's events: Going to Cincinnati to talk Obamacare, nominating Wray as FBI head, VA Accountability act (him urging the House to sign it), meeting w/ Congressional Republicans, Signing the ATC bill... And then there are his retweets from his officials - VP Pence, HHS Tom Price, Sean Spicer, and so on. That's not what makes the news, and hardly the stuff the public is talking about.

      Yeah, there are people who don't like him tweeting about which Travel Ban should have been passed, or what Comey did or didn't say, or Sadiq Khan, or Qatar. I do agree that he should be on the same page as his officials: not undercutting their messages, or at least bringing them into the same page as him. Yeah, there are times when a good-cop, bad-cop exercise is needed, like in the case of Qatar. However, it is worth pointing out that those are not the only things he tweets about, and he's also right that if he left the messaging up to CNN, NBC, MSNBC, and even FNC (see Sheppard Smith, for example, and Lib talking heads such as Richard Fowler, Marie Harf, et al), he'd be nowhere. So he should continue to tweet, but also do what he can to ensure that his government sends a clear & consistent message (except when it shouldn't).

    75. Re:Maybe but... by gnick · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'm more tired of the way the media covers EVERY SINGLE LITTLE LAST TWEET as if each one announces an Arab/Israeli Peace Deal.

      The majority of DJT's Tweets are not covered by the MSM. Most seem to be whining about being treated unfairly by the FAKE NEWS, gloating about the election win, or just generally berating people he doesn't like. The ones that get covered are (mostly) the ones that could have major implications for the US or the world or are particularly inappropriate. Unfortunately, he generates a shit-ton of those. I'm not one to make a mountain out of covfefe, but "This is a TRAVEL BAN!" or "Obama wiretapped my phones!" have real implications. Insulting London's mayor after the recent tragedy is just a beacon of bad diplomacy. Some of his Tweets are treated as news because they quite often ARE news.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    76. Re: Maybe but... by gnick · · Score: 2

      It wasn't this way for Obama...

      Obama wasn't as hungry for headlines as DJT. Or as publically colorful. Part of why he's in the news so much is that he WANTS to be. Ratings are like crack for that man. Besides being an unfiltered look into his brain, I believe that he makes his Tweets intentionally inflammatory because he can't live without attention.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    77. Re: Maybe but... by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Oh, absolutely. He's pretty much the opposite of what one expects a politician to be. I'm still not sure that's a bad thing, because politicians are on the whole so very bad.

      We're watching the American version of King Ralph play out in real life.

    78. Re:Maybe but... by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Yep, engaging in an online flame war with the Mayor of London for trying to reassure Londoners right after a terrorist attack really won us Brits over too, top notch communicator you have there.

      Part of communicating is identifying your audience. You didn't really think that flame war was about talking to the Brits, did you? Dude, he was putting on a show for the people that actually have the power to make him President.

      He understands who he is really communicating with. Which is why he is President, and not Jeb Bush.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    79. Re:Maybe but... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      yes. More people does from all sorts of things. I heard the met were considering installing concrete barriers on roads. Naturally cyclists are complaining because they're dangerous. the moronic reply is "we have more important things to worry about"

      No we fucking don't. More cyclists die per year in London than terrorists kill, even this year never mind all the others.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    80. Re:Maybe but... by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      No. We should vote for the lizard. So that the wrong lizard doesn't win.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    81. Re:Maybe but... by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Maybe he thinks it is better that he gets to choose his sound bites, vs what the MSM does with an entire speech.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    82. Re: Maybe but... by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      We can always demand that the entire Administration be removed, put the Speaker of the House in charge temporarily, and have a Special Election for POTUS. Basically we reboot the country. It would be totally unprecedented, it would totally suck, but it might be what we have to do to save America.

    83. Re:Maybe but... by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      pulling out of climate accords basically unilaterally

      Seems like the appropriate way to pull out of an accord you were forced into unilaterally.

    84. Re:Maybe but... by Oligonicella · · Score: 1
      So you don't see a difference between chocking on a pen cap by being stupid and having someone slit your throat?

      Terrorists only exist because people who are cowed by them like you exist.

      Baldfaced bullshit.

    85. Re: Maybe but... by gnick · · Score: 2

      But, c'mon CNN, there are other things happening in the world, some of them quite important.

      I'm not sure CNN wants to spend as much time on DJT's Tweets as it does, but many of them are interesting to the public for whatever reason, so they get covered. If Obama had made a habit of issuing inappropriate Tweets every week, I'm confident that CNN would have covered those too. On top of that, I believe that DJT wants them covered and crafts them accordingly. The man feeds off of ratings and needs constant attention to survive. He's happy when his Tweets get covered even if it's negative.

      A lot of the time, it's making a mountain out of covfefe. Other times, it's real news with real implications. E.g. "Obama tapped my phones!"

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    86. Re:Maybe but... by orgelspieler · · Score: 1

      Makes me think of the King of the Hansa, in the Saga of Seven Suns. Although I only made it through the first three or four books. There we have a kid who was trained from an early age how to act kingly and inspire his citizens, while hiding the fact that the Chairman holds all the power. He tries to subversively wrest power from those who he feels do not have his people's best interest in mind.

      Trump is like the opposite of that. Here we have a grown man acting like a kid, with no idea how to inspire his citizens (except a small group), while publicizing the fact that the Congress holds less power than they think they do. He tries to subvert his own power by not filling key positions. He may or may not have the people's best interest in mind. About the only thing they have in common is taking attention away from others with more actual power.

    87. Re: Maybe but... by lgw · · Score: 1

      Well, sure, that's true of everyone, all the time. Everyone's beliefs are mostly wrong, and if you're an expert in some field then, sure, there some narrow domain in which your beliefs are only somewhat wrong, but that's as good as it gets.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    88. Re:Maybe but... by orgelspieler · · Score: 1

      Terrorist would be a lot less scary if we called them something else. Instead of "radical Islamic terrorist," we should start calling them "fake Muslim coward pigfuckers" or maybe "murder dicks" or "stinky loser pants" or "failed reality stars."

    89. Re:Maybe but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Terrorists want to kill you. They'd also like you to be afraid, sure - but their primary goal is to stand over your corpse and laugh.

      Cowards, like you, that are more afraid of feeling bad than of being killed, can get what you deserve. But you also want to help those terrorists kill others, by preventing them from protecting themselves. And that makes you both a coward AND an asshole.

      Because god forbid that other people live when you feel bad! They must die for your feelzzzzzz!

    90. Re: Maybe but... by nyri · · Score: 1

      Tells all you need to know about current /. crowd that claiming "Trump has no communication skills" gets +5 Insightful. Sad.

    91. Re: Maybe but... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      And never mind that Trump got the vast majority of the press during the campaign for the same reason. If you wanted to know anything about the other Republicans in the primary you had to check out Fox News. Trump should be thanking the media for working so diligently for his campaign.

    92. Re:Maybe but... by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      Boy that article hasn't aged well. I don't have one and don't know many that do. Why would someone brag about not owning something stupid and ancient? Some kind of retro anti hipster? Guess what, granpda, I don't own a typewriter, a victrola, or a frickin steam powered log splitter.

      I watch tons of shows though, I use this new fangled computer thingy.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    93. Re:Maybe but... by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      FOX loves to read them on air and comment on them. The outrage is hysterical.

    94. Re:Maybe but... by yuriklastalov · · Score: 1

      They aren't fake Muslims you dumb bigoted fuck.

      Just because they don't adhere to whatever naive standards for "Real Muslims" you've dreamed up in your Left wing fantasy land doesn't mean they aren't exactly what they say they are.

      Face it, the brutal shit coming out of the Middle East is perpetrated by MUSLIMS. I'm sorry that your narrative relies on convincing people that "Real Muslims(tm) Wouldn't Do That" and that reality stubbornly puts that hopelessly naive narrative to lie every single day. So, so sorry.

    95. Re:Maybe but... by yuriklastalov · · Score: 1

      Except once Bernie turned things upside down all our change would fall out of our pockets and into whatever massive boondoggles he managed to ram through Congress. Once he really hit the elites where it hurts (assuming he ever did), he'd be withering behind the Mainstream Media Hate Machine just like Trump is now. They'd tear him to pieces. Communist this, the Scourge of Socialism that. Smearing lefties is pretty easy when they've got such immensely awful shit in their ideological closet.

      Look at Corbyn in the UK, with all the pictures of him at Communist rallies and praising Dictators, murderers, and terrorists. I guarantee Bernie has some moments like that in his past, all these lefty types do. Either they believe that shit whole heartedly or get stuck agreeing with some radical nut job to save face. Either way, they're on record saying "Communism iz gud, mmmkay" along with whatever other pathetic drivel they've spouted over the years.

      Once people find out what "Left wing" really means they'll run away from it in droves. Right now, people have this misplaced notion that the "Socialists" are just radical Liberals when nothing could be farther from the truth. They may hide their Communist leanings behind "Social Democrat" or "Democratic Socialist" but they're commies through and through and want nothing more than to destroy Western Civilization in its entirety. Good luck with those commies, Liberals. They gonna kill you first.

    96. Re:Maybe but... by Xest · · Score: 1

      If your population looks up to a president that spends his time engaging in Twitter flame wars then all hope is lost for your country.

      Thankfully I think you're wrong, I think the majority of Americans also think it's a piss poor waste of the president's time and a piss poor failure at effective communication.

      This is precisely why his approval rating is going down, not up.

    97. Re:Maybe but... by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't you try to get the best leader possible, rather than one who is extremely average?

      No, you shouldn't.

      Democracy isn't about choosing what is "best", something that no two person can truly agree on. It's about giving almost everyone a voice in choosing. That way even if the choice wasn't the "best", a majority would accept the decision

      Everyone has a choice, that wasn't what Animojo was arguing for. It would just be nice if my fellow citizens would make SMARTER choices. I don't want an average leader, my qualification for the guy in the White House is not "someone I could sit down and have a beer with," for God's sake. I want my President to be a lot BETTER than me, so that's what I look for.

    98. Re:Maybe but... by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      I've heard this before, that people voted for Trump because they felt slighted and disrespected. If that's true, it really doesn't speak well of those voters. They feel disrespected, so they vote in an obvious moron and charlatan? What, do they think they're sticking it to the man?

      They hate and despise "the man" as typified by the Washington establishment, and they don't really see anyone else as possibly being worse than what they had. So they voted for the guy who promised to "drain the swamp."

    99. Re:Maybe but... by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      I've been calling this cynicism laziness, but you put it a lot better than I ever had. Good work.

    100. Re:Maybe but... by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      So a very small minority is allowed to dictate what a majority believes, regardless of the protests of the majority? That's good to know, thanks.

    101. Re:Maybe but... by Flea+of+Pain · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter that the 'muslim ban' never went into affect. People were stranded at airports across the world, people have stopped travelling to or from the U.S. because they don't know if/when it will be enacted and if/when they will be allowed home or if they will be detained. I am from Canada, and almost all high schools in my province have stopped taking trips (for band, sports tournaments, etc.) to the United States because it is not unusual to have an immigrant in a class and no school can afford to make all the arrangements for travel just to be turned away at the border. We don't KNOW we will get turned away, but with Trump's announcements and attempts at travel restrictions that's not a risk we can take.

      While the stock market in the US is doing pretty well, the fact that a single message from Trump can tank a business' stock AND THAT IT HAS HAPPENED, would be really worrying to me if I were in an industry dealing with the U.S.

      It shouldn't matter about enforcement of the climate accord, it is about the principal of the matter. The U.S. could have stayed on the accord even if it wasn't being enforced, or better yet, they could have opted out by making their own which had enforcement built in if that is the issue. Instead, Trump has pulled out while pledging to use more of one of the most polluting sources of energy there is, coal. It's not about backing out as much as it is about Trump sending a loud and clear message to the world that the U.S. will pollute as much as they want, wherever they want, and damn the future generations that need to deal with their mess.

      --
      Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
  2. They're very useful by vadim_t · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He does great at sabotaging his own schemes. It's really great that he lacks a filter.

    I would love to be a fly on the wall on his lawyers' office. It's got to have a thick covering of hair of all over the floor.

    1. Re:They're very useful by E-Rock · · Score: 2

      His public statements (including tweets) are being used against him in the travel ban court proceedings. They're being used to show what they really intending and undercutting their legal arguments.
      http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/legal-experts-trump-travel-ban-twitter-hurting-47855873

      While not a tweet, he's also screwed himself on the Comey firing when his press office rolled out a bullshit story about how he was fired on the advice of the attorney general's office, but then told a reporter that he was going to fire him anyway because of the Russia investigation.

    2. Re:They're very useful by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Which of his own schemes has he sabotaged?

      A few examples:

      1. Trump fired the FBI director for reasons that appeared to be tantamount to obstruction of justice. His staff defended his actions, and said the reasons for Comey's firing had nothing to do with the Russia probe. Then Trump tweeted that he did indeed fire Comey for the exact reasons that his staff had denied.

      2. Trump outed an Israeli intelligence asset in Assad's inner circle by blabbing to the Russians about it. Several of his staff said they were in the meeting at the time, and no such information had been discussed. Trump then cut them off at the knees by saying that he did indeed blab to the Russians during the meeting, and that he had a right to do so (and legally, the president probably does have the right to betray an ally).

      In these tweets he admitted to actions that were at the least stupid, and possibly criminal, but were also incredibly disloyal to subordinates that went out on a limb to lie to the American people in an attempt to defend him.

    3. Re:They're very useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, they are trying to use them against him but it makes no difference. The ABC report is highly unobjective and almost purely speculation. In reality its a big nothing that nobody cares about and has 0% chance of causing him any real legal issues.

      Firtly and correctly not a tweet. So now your grasping at straws. Additionally he hasn't screwed himself in the slightest. He is allowed to fire someone on the advice of the AG office AND still have had plans to fire Comey at a later date. This isnt the twilight zone, both of those scenarios are not mutually exclusive, both of those scenarios are not even unlikely. There is no legal or political fall out from this. Comeys statement today has been a big fat nothing and actually confirms that trump was telling the truth about the non investigation. Outside of the small minority of brain washed libtards these are all good outcomes for Trump.

    4. Re:They're very useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > His public statements (including tweets) are being used against him in the travel ban court proceedings.

      That will go to the Supreme Court, and it will be settled that you can be a yahoo who says a bunch of shit and still ban whomever the fuck you want, as long as you are a yahoo who says a bunch of shit *and is also president*. I wouldn't say "being used against him" is really happening- I think that's just a leftwing belief point, not real news.

    5. Re:They're very useful by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 1

      Are you a Trump supporter or are you making fun of Trump supporters?

    6. Re:They're very useful by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      The fact that people are going "out on a limb to lie to the American people" doesn't seem to bother you

      Actually, it does bother me that our president surrounds himself with people that lack honesty and integrity. Meanwhile, Comey was fired for refusing to lie.

    7. Re:They're very useful by stabiesoft · · Score: 1

      Except you are just plain wrong. I just saw a story that said 5 high power law firms declined to represent Trump as prez. Why, because he can't keep his big fat mouth shut. Lawyers don't like it when they say STFU and you ignore their advice. So what he ended up with was his divorce lawyer. Wonder how well a divorce lawyer is going to navigate impeachment proceedings? I mean how much different could it be?

    8. Re:They're very useful by grcumb · · Score: 2

      In these tweets he admitted to actions that were at the least stupid, and possibly criminal, but were also incredibly disloyal to subordinates that went out on a limb to lie to the American people in an attempt to defend him.

      Since when is the top man of ANY hierarchical organization required to behave in accordance with his subordinates' supposed wishes?? Trump is the President of the United States. He is the chief executive of everyone in this country.

      You're missing the point. His staff were lying to cover his ass, because to say that he pressured the director of the FBI to lay off a case, and then fired him when he wouldn't—for any reason whatsoever—puts him at risk of being prosecuted for obstruction of justice. Then Donald Trump undid all of their efforts by saying that he did exactly that.

      And you may say Donald Trump is the top man in the hierarchy—even if pretty much every student of government ever would argue about checks and balances and how tripartate government (legislative, executive and judicial) are coequal, and for damn good reason—but if we grant that he is the Chief Executive in the business sense of the word, he is still not above the law. No one is.

      Obstruction of justice is a serious offense no matter who does it. The gravity of the crime gets worse, not better, as you rise in the hierarchy. His staff were culpable for lying in his defence. He is wide open to prosecution for his statements.

      And a legal nit for those who want to rebut this with the argument that he has the authority to give instructions to anyone in government, any time. Yes, he has the legal right to do so, but that doesn't mean that obstruction of justice didn't occur. Motive, the question of who benefits, and whether he was successful or not in actually obstructing the course of justice are all immaterial to a court of law to the determination of whether someone is guilty of obstruction or not. If you tried to gum up the works to keep a case from moving forward, you're guilty. Even if you used legal means to do so.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    9. Re:They're very useful by Galactic+Dominator · · Score: 1

      Over-active suspicions, credulity with conspiracy theories, delusions and paranoia are all early warning signs of dementia.

      --
      brandelf -t FreeBSD /brain
    10. Re:They're very useful by jeti · · Score: 2

      The spy was placed with ISIS, not Assad.

    11. Re:They're very useful by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      Trump did the morally right thing to do, and for that I respect him as a leader even more.

      The morally right thing to do would have been to fire the liars. Trump didn't do that. He fired Comey ... for refusing to lie.

    12. Re:They're very useful by tbannist · · Score: 1

      If your subordinates are lying their asses off, even if it is supposedly to your benefit, it is wrong. As a good leader, you should man up and set the record straight with the truth. Even if it supposedly might put you at some imaginary risk of being prosecuted in court.

      Trump ordered them to lie, then after ordering them to lie for his benefit, he undid the benefit by forgetting that he was supposed to tell the same lie.

      How stupid do you have to be to not understand that Trump knew they were lying for his benefit and could have stopped them at any time? Do you understand nothing at all about how the president's staff works?

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    13. Re: They're very useful by KGIII · · Score: 1

      West Wing isn't actually a documentary.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    14. Re:They're very useful by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      3. Most recently the latest court case on trumps travel ban hinged on wording and that it was a counter terrorism measure and not a travel ban.
      Trump's tweet mid court case: "People, the lawyers and the courts can call it whatever they want, but I am calling it what we need and what it is, a TRAVEL BAN!"

      I'm sure his entire administration wishes there was a 72 hour moratorium on tweeting anytime they are trying to deal with his fallout. If "He who represents himself has a fool as a lawyer", what do you call someone who pays very expensive lawyers and then contradicts them and corrects them mid case?

    15. Re:They're very useful by sudon't · · Score: 1

      He does great at sabotaging his own schemes. It's really great that he lacks a filter.

      I would love to be a fly on the wall on his lawyers' office. It's got to have a thick covering of hair of all over the floor.

      Yeah, except he’s having a hard time finding representation lately.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    16. Re:They're very useful by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't say "being used against him" is really happening- I think that's just a leftwing belief point, not real news.

      How about can and will be used against him?

      http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/336337-lawyer-challenging-travel-ban-we-dont-need-the-help-from-trump-but-will-take

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    17. Re:They're very useful by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      Are you a Trump supporter or are you making fun of Trump supporters?

      Poe's Law gets more true every day.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    18. Re:They're very useful by AmazingRuss · · Score: 1

      Hillary isn't president, and never will be. Hillary is gone. Obama is gone, too, so you should let go of your Obama trauma.

      They are irrelevant, and you are using them as a distraction to cover for the shitshow in chief.

      It ain't working.

    19. Re:They're very useful by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      Who killed Seth Rich? There is some serious Obstruction of Justice going on, but it ain't the one you're freaking out about.

      Come on, man. Even Fox News isn't fucking that chicken anymore.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/business/media/fox-news-seth-rich.html

      Put down the Hannity; it's bad for ya.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    20. Re: They're very useful by tbannist · · Score: 1

      West Wing isn't actually a documentary.

      No it's not, but the West Wing was well researched and they drew on the experience and history of actual political insiders to craft the setting and environment. But you don't need to be a fan of The West Wing (which I'm not) to understand how ignorant someone has to be to think that Trump's staff started making co-ordinated public statements without (at least) first clearing the story with the President. It's far more likely that Trump told them what to say, he may even have lied to them and told them that the reason given was the actual reason, only to undermine his own people when he couldn't stick to the story.

      Frankly, I'm not even sure if Trump understands why firing Comey (because he didn't stop an investigation that Trump asked him to drop) could be a problem. It's entirely possible he told his staff to lie about it because that was what his advisers told him to do, but that Trump himself never actually understand why they were lying about it. So, when the interview came around he threw in his little comment simply because he never understood why they were lying about it in the first place. Increasingly, it really does seem like Trump is showing the early signs of dementia...

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    21. Re: They're very useful by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Trivially related: Have you listened to the Comey testimony? I caught it in the car, as NPR was doing a special on it. I came home and listened to the rest of it.

      It turns out, that's not actually why Trump fired him.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    22. Re:They're very useful by Gussington · · Score: 1

      As a good leader, you should man up and set the record straight with the truth. Even if it supposedly might put you at some imaginary risk of being prosecuted in court.

      Like releasing you tax returns? Your version of logic is pathetic.

  3. Survey? Please! by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    What do the Twitter stats say?

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  4. The tweets are useful and helpful by QuietLagoon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I am getting to know better the person who is in the Oval Office. I feel as if he is talking directly to me, instead of being filtered by some media outlet.

    1. Re:The tweets are useful and helpful by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      "Donald, pleaes go home, I'm trying to sleep."

    2. Re:The tweets are useful and helpful by lucm · · Score: 1

      I suggest you go watch some videos of antifa, berkeley censorship riots, or the evergreen college fiasco.

      Those people are not angry. They're just trying to get their own viral video. It's best to just ignore them.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
  5. Questionable by kqc7011 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is a Politico poll, a known opponent of Trump. So one must see the questions, how they were presented and what the audience makeup was. Before giving any validity to the polling data.

    --
    Passionately Indifferent
    1. Re:Questionable by RyoShin · · Score: 5, Informative

      Okie dokie, here ya go. Table POL17 starting page 164, I included select "conservative" breakdowns to give a better idea of potential bias.
      Do you think President Donald Trump uses Twitter
      Demographic | Too much | Not enough | About the right amount | Don’t Know / No Opinion | Total N
      Registered Voters | 69%(1372) | 4%(79) | 15%(308) | 12%(241) |1999
      PID: Rep (no lean) | 53%(361) | 6%(38) | 30%(205) | 11%(77) | 681
      Ideo: Conservative (5-7) | 57%(394) | 4%(25) | 28%(194) | 11%(75) | 689
      2016 Vote: Republican Donald Trump | 51%(400) | 6%(50) | 30%(240) | 13%(101) | 791
      Strongly Approve | 39%(161) | 8%(35) | 42%(176) | 10%(43) | 415
      Somewhat Approve | 58%(267) | 4%(18) | 20%(94) | 18%(84) | 462

      BONUS! Table POL18, starting page 167.
      And, do you think President Donald Trump’s use of Twitter is (POL18)
      Demographic | A good thing | A bad thing | Don’t Know / No Opinion | Total N
      Registered Voters | 23%(456) | 59%(1172) | 19%(372) | 1999

      I leave the breakdowns as an exercise for the reader. (This formatting brought to you by the characters /.)

    2. Re:Questionable by mr100percent · · Score: 1, Informative

      Politico is actually quite pro-Republican, so your ad hominem argument is false.

    3. Re:Questionable by Nehmo · · Score: 1

      This is a Politico poll, a known opponent of Trump. So one must see the questions, how they were presented and what the audience makeup was. Before giving any validity to the polling data.

      How can you say that about Politico? They said Trump had a 2% chance of winning, and you see they were right! The result was that 2%.

      --
      (||) Nehmo (||)
    4. Re:Questionable by SirSlud · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure that anything that doesn't kiss Trumps feet is simply deemed a known opponent of Trump. Often in a revisionist way, such as with rupublican-friendly Politico here.

      If Trump had said anything bad about him self, your post would have started, "This is Trump, a known opponent of Trump."

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    5. Re:Questionable by oh-dark-thirty · · Score: 1

      Holy crap, you're right...he IS his own worst enemy.

    6. Re:Questionable by lucm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This poll has the same bias as the ones that made all the mainstream medias look like idiots on election night. People tell the poller what they think they want to hear. If everything people hear on TV and read in the newspaper is "Trump and his tweets", they're not going to defend him when they get polled about it, no matter what they think.

      All you can tell from these results is what people answered, not what they think.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    7. Re: Questionable by KGIII · · Score: 2

      Polls don't tell you what people think. They tell you which of the limited answers they feel comfortable choosing.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    8. Re:Questionable by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      You got Democrat and Republican backwards. Politico has a very long history of going out of their way to defend democrats from anything and everything, they were even started by ex-WAPO people. It's a beltway organization aka stacked with people who have progressive beliefs. If you want pro-republican you need to start with the daily caller.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    9. Re: Questionable by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Politico hosted one of the Republican debates. It's popular among Republicans. Daily Caller is much further to the right. You're trying to attack the messenger.

    10. Re: Questionable by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Going by that reasoning, NYT is the same. When people know it's not.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    11. Re:Questionable by nealric · · Score: 1

      The polls were accurate nationally. The EC didn't go the way the media expected because the state-level polls were lower quality than the national ones. This polling about Trump is being done on a national basis by the same outlets that called the popular vote within the stated margin of error.

    12. Re:Questionable by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      This is a Politico poll, a known opponent of Trump.

      I think you misspelled proponent. Politico is one of the most right-wing leaning media that isn't intentionally fake news.

    13. Re:Questionable by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      That last line is the main failing of all social science.

    14. Re:Questionable by Gussington · · Score: 1

      This poll has the same bias as the ones that made all the mainstream medias look like idiots on election night.

      The poll data was actually reflected in the results within the margin of error. The polls weren't wrong, the people who produce TV shows and newspapers for ratings simply interpreted them incorrectly.
      The lesson from this is don't believe the headlines, go to the source.

  6. Non Compos Mentis by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I find President Trump's tweets particularly useful.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Non Compos Mentis by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      As are the hysterical responses from the democrats, and the press. Trump has accomplished the closest thing to world domination as we'll ever see. Every single thing is becoming an editorial about him.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:Non Compos Mentis by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Trump has accomplished the closest thing to world domination as we'll ever see.

      If that were true, I'm pretty sure we'd have seen his travel ban implemented and at least one piece of landmark legislation passed. So far, he's basically accomplished the same thing a four-car pileup on the Interstate accomplishes. Everything slows down while people gape, but in the end the wreckage gets towed away and everything goes on as if it never happened.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Non Compos Mentis by Nehmo · · Score: 1

      I'm all in favor of political office holders Tweeting or using some other instant means to express their views. If you don't approve of the message, they you can oppose the position. Why should anybody care if Trump tweets?

      --
      (||) Nehmo (||)
    4. Re:Non Compos Mentis by Nehmo · · Score: 1

      As are the hysterical responses from the democrats, and the press. Trump has accomplished the closest thing to world domination as we'll ever see. Every single thing is becoming an editorial about him.

      I know. This becomes yet another time I have to defend this borderline-crazy guy.

      --
      (||) Nehmo (||)
    5. Re:Non Compos Mentis by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I'm all in favor of political office holders Tweeting or using some other instant means to express their views. If you don't approve of the message, they you can oppose the position. Why should anybody care if Trump tweets?

      I'm with you. I prefer transparency. All political office holders should be able to tweet as much as they want. And they should release their tax returns.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    6. Re:Non Compos Mentis by Nehmo · · Score: 1

      I have several suggestions for requirements for the office of President. Yes, releasing the tax returns should be mandatory. But it's not going to happen with Trump. And I don't know how a law could be crafted to do the job.

      OTOH, we already know what Trump's returns say. They say what Hillary said they would "probably" say. (Of course, she has IRS connections that could view them.) They say Trump is not as rich as he claims, and he didn't pay much in taxes.

      --
      (||) Nehmo (||)
    7. Re:Non Compos Mentis by Boronx · · Score: 2

      Probably because he also represents the nation.

    8. Re:Non Compos Mentis by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      He has people gaping. He has a bigger more fanatical audience than the Osbournes and the Kardashians. He is dominating world attention. That's all that matters. He hardly cares about travel bans and legislation. Those are simple brain farts to feed the media frenzy. And nobody can deny it's working beautifully. The ratings are through the roof.

      If there is a sad part of this story, it's the lack of credible opposition, from anywhere, least of all the voters. People stick with the devil they know and now they get to live with it.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    9. Re:Non Compos Mentis by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      He is dominating world attention. That's all that matters.

      He clearly craves more than just attention. He craves...needs...approval.

      That's why my biggest worry is that he will do the one thing that will have all elected officials and the US media showing approval: killing tens of thousands of people overseas. That's the only sure-fire winner for him.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  7. Useful by whoever57 · · Score: 2

    What do you think of Trump's tweets? Do you think they are getting old, or do you find them particularly useful?

    Definitely useful. He continues to sabotage his own plans by revealing his true motives and incompetence.

    The other week, the "Word of the day" in Words with Friends was "Covfefe".

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  8. Very useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    #Covfefe

    1. Re:Very useful by Nehmo · · Score: 1

      #Covfefe

      At least that shows the Tweets aren't edited by someone else.

      --
      (||) Nehmo (||)
  9. Trump would be a fool to trust a poll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Trump shouldn't trust this, or any other poll. We just saw how rigged they were in the election. Plus, this one was some "online survey", so there's no telling who spammed it full of crap this time. Lefty trolls? Righty trolls? Bots?

  10. Just proves democrats aren't that smart by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trump keeps making a fool of himself. Why would anyone opposed to his agenda want to muzzle him? Even with both feet in his mouth, he keeps proving that his mental faculties are questionable, that he doesn't understand how the real world works. and that Republicans nominated and elected the worst-qualified president in history.

    The Saudis are now laughing at how easily he was manipulated.

    Even William Henry Harrison, the 9th president, had a better first 100 days in office, and he died after one month.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Trump keeps making a fool of himself. Why would anyone opposed to his agenda want to muzzle him?

      At this point, everybody who is going to figure out that he is a fool has figured that out. So, in that respect his Twitter account is useless. At the same time, he is currently using it to fan the flames in the ME, which
      is all bad. Taking his Twitter away would force him to clear a higher bar to shoot his mouth off.

    2. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Just proves democrats aren't that smart
      Trump keeps making a fool of himself. Why would anyone opposed to his agenda want to muzzle him?

      It seems more likely that this question was not framed in a "political game of war" context. Only the most partisan individuals consider everything using an "us versus them" mentality.

      When everyone's only goal is to "win," we all lose.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    3. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      I dont think its the dems, I think its the rep's and the fact they have to wake up every single morning and explain some form of mind boggling rant

      IE: here's testimony of the POTUS trying to buy off the FBI director, and feeling vendicated at the fact that he wasn't under investigation, which we all know from like what? day one

      BUT HE IS VINDICATED!!!!!! meanwhile strong arming the FBI director, firing him, and replacing him with a crony. is completely off the radar

    4. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      Hypothetical scenario: If an Internet troll guessed the password to Trump's Twitter account and started posting bizarre tweets from it, would anyone notice?

      Extra credit: If Trump himself were to notice the hack and cry foul about it, would anyone believe him?

      Final thought: Perhaps this has already happened?

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    5. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by lucm · · Score: 1, Informative

      He doesn't make a fool of himself. The fact that you're repeating it over and over doesn't make it true.

      In those 100 days you're vomitting on, he's already put in motion many things that benefit America, such as walking away from the TPP. Just that, right there, will help the American economy more than 8 years of Obama.

      What the country needs is not diversity programs and federal laws about islamophobia and more dabbling into foreign policy that so far has led to the creation of ISIS, Al Qaeda and the religious government in Tehran (among others). What the country needs is jobs and highways that don't fall apart; so why don't you precious ones stop getting your panties in a bunch because you lost your elections and help the rest of us make America great again?

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    6. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Because they know that the world doesn't end at the borders of the US, and that the rest of the world doesn't care if he's GOP or DEM. We care that he's a US American, that he is president and that you elected him.

      YOU are Trump, to us at least.

      And the Dems know that they will have to clean up the trash he will leave behind when he goes, they know what cleaning up after monkey boy was like and they know that this will even be worse.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      When one side has been playing that game for a decade, now is not the time to interrupt them when they're digging their own grave. The only way to get this pathological partisanship out of the system is with fire - let it burn its' proponents but good.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    8. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Hypothetical scenario: If an Internet troll guessed the password to Trump's Twitter account and started posting bizarre tweets from it, would anyone notice?

      Extra credit: If Trump himself were to notice the hack and cry foul about it, would anyone believe him?

      Final thought: Perhaps this has already happened?

      Nah, I think if Trump's twitter was hacked, we'd have seen an improvement in quality by now.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    9. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Just to clarify, I'm one of the 96% of the world who are looking at Trump from another country - certainly didn't vote for him, or any candidate, despite all the noise he's making about millions of fraudulent voters that other Republicans are saying never happened.

      The Americans have been walking towards this debacle ever since they voted for Reagan. This is the logical end-game, and hopefully it will hurt them enough to learn a lesson or two - in particular, don't vote for someone stupider than you so that you can feel superior to your opponents. Look behind the rhetoric, and the curtain. Follow the money. Fix campaign financing to only allow humans to donate, and set small limits. Make corporate donations a criminal offense because you know it's companies buying laws.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    10. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by Toad-san · · Score: 1

      This.

    11. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by PJ6 · · Score: 1

      Trump keeps making a fool of himself. Why would anyone opposed to his agenda want to muzzle him? Even with both feet in his mouth, he keeps proving that his mental faculties are questionable, that he doesn't understand how the real world works. and that Republicans nominated and elected the worst-qualified president in history.

      The Saudis are now laughing at how easily he was manipulated.

      Even William Henry Harrison, the 9th president, had a better first 100 days in office, and he died after one month.

      Sorry, but how does being tired of Trump's tweets automatically make you any of the following?

      1. a democrat
      2. want to muzzle anybody
      3. not that smart

      Why does everything have to be partisan politics?

    12. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      No. The last President was the worst qualified. He was just a grass roots guy, propped up by the left, never voted unless it was a slam dunk, almost never was even in the Senate. He was never in business, never answered to anyone, just an agitator and someone that hates America. His last actions as President shows that very well, especially his insisting on the Israeli vote at the last minute that he went way out of his way to make sure happened.

      This guy is doing what he thinks is right and unfortunately isn't listening to his hired help. First thing I'd do is change the password to that twitter account so he can't put something out there by mistake. Set it up for two factor to my phone. Anything he wants to say - let us hear it first. Have someone competent type it in.

      Next thing is to fire his press staff. They suck. They're hold overs.

      Speaking he's doing way better than he was. In Europe a few times I even thought he might even be a real politician, then he'd screw it up. Maybe just maybe by the time he leaves office he'll actually know how to talk.

      Guess it's hard to change a 70 year old man's way.

      At least there seems to be hope now.

    13. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by lucm · · Score: 1

      Still he's not as "business-like" as I would have expected. The money they spend for his trips to Florida and the security of his wife is just ridiculous. I understand he's been used to a kind of lifestyle but he should have left that behind when he signed up for the job.

      It would be amazing to have a cheap President that pulls out the chainsaw and cut federal expenses, starting with his own, like Sarkozy did in France (he even asked the lady in charge of cost-cutting to cut her own expenses). Someone who would truly be there for the good of the country, and who wouldn't transform Air Force One in a personal vacation travel service (like Trump or Obama) and who wouldn't transform the White House in Airbnb (like during the Clinton administration, when 800+ donors stayed overnight in the Lincoln bedroom in 3 years).

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    14. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by lucm · · Score: 1

      You don't understand how business with China works. First, they never consider themselves bound by agreements or contracts; they only honor them as long as it suits them, and expect the other party to do the same. Ask anyone who has done trading with them and who got their containers turned back in Shanghai because suddenly the agreed upon price was no longer pleasing them.

      They will work something out and thanks to Trump it won't be a bend-over deal.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    15. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by lucm · · Score: 1

      My guess is you understand the Paris accords just about as well as Trump, meaning not at all...

      When someone disagrees with you, it doesn't mean they don't understand the topic, it just means they don't agree with you. Hopefully one day you will grow up and realize that.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    16. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      Well, the US as a whole DOES look like an idiot. Remember Pottery Barn - "You broke it, you buy it." It was the US as a whole that gave rise to the conditions that got Trump elected. Now maybe you'll have the gumption to clean house and get rid of the ignorance that allows people like Trump to flourish, starting with the growing financial inequality, the willingness to spread ignorance and fake news for profit without holding people to account, moving towards a public healthcare system that lets all citizens feel that "we have your back" instead of being disenfranchised, reining in the insane education bubble and the even worse education debt bubble, the christian extremists, the gun nuts, etc.

      But since it's guaranteed that won't happen, China will increasingly be THE world power.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    17. Re:Just proves democrats aren't that smart by PJ6 · · Score: 1

      One might be tempted to think these Democrat responders care more about the international standing of their country than than the political advantage of their party. And one would most likely be wrong. Instead they are likely responding "too much" as a simple anti-Trump knee-jerk rather than considering how much damage his tweets are doing to his administration and the Republican party in general. That would be "not that smart."

      Wow, really? I think-that-person-is-thinking-that-way-so-they're-dumb.

      Sounds like you're the one doing the knee-jerk there.

      Why don't you post with your real account so you can be modded the troll that you are.

  11. Good to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Slashdot has joined the growing legion of #fakenews

  12. I think they are great! by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They have been particularly good at exposing how petty, dimwitted, bigoted and foolish he is, not just as a president but as a person. I think it's important for people to understand just kind of a person they vote for, even if it's after the fact.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:I think they are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They have been particularly good at exposing how petty, dimwitted, bigoted and foolish he is, not just as a president but as a person. I think it's important for people to understand just kind of a person they vote for, even if it's after the fact.

      The ugly truth about him has been as obvious as can be for decades.

      Its not important for his voters to finally understand what they voted for. If anything, his tweets confirm that he is exactly what they wanted.

      What is important is for the rest of us to understand that those people are a lost cause. They are damage that civilized society must learn to route around.

    2. Re:I think they are great! by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Are you trying to say that half of america is a lost cause? It's most likely this kind of stupid and simplistic collectivist kind of thought that put trump where he is.
      Anyone with half a brain would have crushed him by simply listening to the country and well giving concrete plans to solve the issues the population are actually worried about, instead of just hunting green frogs over the internet and guessworking what people wanted by their stereotypes like Hillary did.

  13. Re:That was fast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Attacking the data is attacking the argument you nincompoop. Also, that isn't what he did, he suggested that the methodology might have been biased and wanted to examine it, which is exactly what a rational person would do.

    IAAS (I am a scientist).

  14. Re:That was fast by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    Yeah, because polls are just so accurate these days.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  15. A valid comparison by ckatko · · Score: 1, Insightful

    would be the public's tiredness of traditional media channels. Because less tweets could mean many things. The public could be less engaged in media OVERALL due to the constant barrage of negativity and fear-mongering.

    Why do his tweets even exist? Have you ever asked that question? Because there's a need. People want to know what he's saying and thinking directly... without the insane amount of misquoting and mischaractorization the media keeps doing.

    There was a time when a President could just make a damn conference. But the media both chops up his words, AND, runs 24/7 negative coverage of him. So the only way for people to hear him at a PACE that keeps up with the 24/7 press, is simple tweets.

    It's not rocket science people. The guy won the election. That means there are over a hundred million people in the USA who want him there and want to hear what he has to say. It's too bad too. Because we all know the progressive thing is to hope our country completely collapses so we can "prove him those racists wrong."

    Imagine if we had this kind of wall-to-wall negative coverage of Obama (You know, the first president to use a drones to kill an American citizen? So progressive!) you could be certain people would be defending him under "They just hate him because he's black!" mantra. But because he's a "FUCKING WHITE MALE" he's literally the devil, and there are no wrongs when the intent is righteous. Even insinuating his son if AUTISTIC, which even if you hate the man, is super fucked up to "armchair diagnose" someones CHILD and use a serious disability like a convenient political tactic. One guy somewhere said Obama's daughter was said to dress "slutty" and the WORLD STOPPED. How dare they slut shame her! But an 11-year old boy is being called AUTISTIC ON NATIONAL NEWS and you don't think that's going to fuck him over when he shows up to school the next day?

    That's why people read his tweets. Because "the media" is a den of scum with no morals, no level they won't stoop to. (Even outing a gay manager in Google is "news"?!) People are sick of slants and angles. They want to hear what the president thinks, and they're going to the direct source instead of letting a bunch of armchair warriors slice it up to push an agenda.

    Now, you can HATE trump all you want. Have at it. I hate plenty of stuff about him. (FCC? Global Warming? Net Neutrality? COAAAL?!?!?!) So understand that me EXPLAINING something does not mean I'm ENDORSING it. It's sad-as-hell that I even have to throw that disclaimer in, but here we are.

    1. Re:A valid comparison by rahvin112 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Imagine if we had this kind of wall-to-wall negative coverage of Obama

      I have no problem imagining it, I witnessed it. According to Fox News and every conservative media outlet he was the worst president in history and every single thing he did was the worst and most awful thing ever including things like trying to improve nutrition in schools.

      That alone make the entire rest of your comment not even worth reading.Obama was treated worse than an president in history by the press, did you see him complaining as vociferously and stupidly as Trump does? You didn't because he's a fucking adult, not a man baby.

    2. Re:A valid comparison by numbers1x · · Score: 1

      I'd suggest reviewing 2016 U.S. election and U.S. population numbers minus everything you cite above as unfair to #45. He still comes up short in addressing the fundamentals of U.S. demographics.

      Of 241 million eligible U.S. voters, 112 million (47%) did not vote D or R at all. 66 million (28.5%) voted for HRC, and 63 million (27%) voted for DJT.

      Put another way, DJT failed to win 73% of the U.S. political audience vs. HRC failing to win 71.5% of the U.S. political audience. You'd never guess it to look at the current dramafest over who won and who lost.

      The president of the U.S. is president of all 320 million Americans. The 63 million who voted for #45 represent approximately 20% of the country ... vs the 21% who voted for HRC.

      In short, we the people were not amused. Nor were we bowled over by either candidate.

      Trump should put down the covfefe, put on his presidential pants, and learn how to play well with others, starting his own (R) majority in Congress and moving on to the 90+ million registered voters who didn't vote for either candidate, and the 22 million more beyond the who didn't even bother to register.

    3. Re:A valid comparison by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Obama was treated worse than an president in history by the press,

      Carter and Clinton both had it worse than Obama. Far worse. No one breathlessly accused Obama of running drugs through Hawaii, or having his close aids murdered.

    4. Re:A valid comparison by epine · · Score: 1

      It's not rocket science people. The guy won the election. That means there are over a hundred million people in the USA who want him there and want to hear what he has to say.

      I've probably seen more actual footage of Trump on the stump than any other politician alive.

      He said it loud, and he said it often.

      Furthermore, people vote to give the candidate the opportunity to run the country (often holding their noses while doing so). It's a prospective act.

      So, yes, back on election day, 100 million Americans wanted to audition Trump as president more than Hillary, in an election widely depicted as a nose-gripping low bar.

      What do you think was printed on the ballot?

      [x] entertain me
      [_] Crooked Hillary

      No, I don't think that was the actual ballot.

    5. Re:A valid comparison by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 1

      Imagine if we had this kind of wall-to-wall negative coverage of Obama

      I have no problem imagining it, I witnessed it. According to Fox News and every conservative media outlet he was the worst president in history and every single thing he did was the worst and most awful thing ever including things like trying to improve nutrition in schools.

      I've got conservative friends who back up what you're saying. I've heard the "Obama was the worst president in history" line more times than I care to count. They all watch Fox News by the way. I pressed one for details and basically it turned out he was just repeating what Sean Hannity said without any specifics. The other one admitted to me that he personally benefited from Obamacare and it really did lower his insurance costs (he owns a small business) but can't really point to anything specific either other than the idea that Obama "apologized for everything" and relations with all of our allies went to hell under Obama. Of course that's not really true, but people still think it.

  16. Re:That was fast by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am quite willing to attack the data as biased garbage designed to generate the desired result.

    IAAFP ( Iam a former pollster).

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  17. Totally agree by PatientZero · · Score: 2

    In the same way that an STD test saying you have syphilis is useful. :p

    --
    Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
    I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
  18. Could not care less by willoughby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    However, I am fed up with the foaming-at-the-mouth, frantic, OMG! reaction of the US news media to every tweet. Let President Trump Tweet away and shut down the news coverage of every tweet & I'd be happy.

    1. Re:Could not care less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      However, I am fed up with the foaming-at-the-mouth, frantic, OMG! reaction of the US news media to every tweet.

      Why? They are official statements. The foaming-at-the-mouth, frantic, OMG! reaction is because of how incredibly misinformed and dangerous most of his official statements are.

      I figure you must not live in the U.S. to be fed-up with that reaction. For the rest of us, it's incredibly concerning. (Well, the rest of us, except for Okian Warrior, because that glib son of a bitch has been drowning in his own smug before the election.)

    2. Re:Could not care less by lucm · · Score: 1

      The foaming-at-the-mouth, frantic, OMG! reaction is because of how incredibly misinformed and dangerous most of his official statements are.

      Why don't you post 3 of those dangerous statements, verbatim, so we can all see what truly lies behind your hysterical accusations?

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    3. Re:Could not care less by lucm · · Score: 1

      Since you will refuse to acknowledge basic reality, you will not benefit from a listing of any tweet.

      Okay, so as expected, you can't quote any "misinformed and dangerous" tweets. Thanks for playing.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
  19. Wrong by bistromath007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People are getting tired of media coverage of Trump's tweets. Only insane nobody blue checks are paying attention to his actual tweets.

    1. Re:Wrong by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      What? Not more?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  20. They're very useful - agreed. by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He does great at sabotaging his own schemes. It's really great that he lacks a filter.

    I would love to be a fly on the wall on his lawyers' office. It's got to have a thick covering of hair of all over the floor.

    And while everyone is running around with their hair on fire over "covfefe" and his other tweets, he's been quietly getting his agenda done.

    For an example, Jeff Sessions rolled back the Obama-era drug sentencing guidelines, resulting in the harshest possible sentences for drug offenders... which went almost unnoticed by the MSM.

    Trump withdrew from the Paris accord, and Covfefe was the more searched term than Paris Climate Agreement.

    Your side thinks he sabotages his schemes by these tweets.

    The rest of us know (and Trump himself knows) that the tweets are meaningless and valueless in and of themselves, but they distract the MSM from what is really going on, and in a way that makes the left look like gibbering imbeciles.

    He's been doing this since about *a year* prior to the election, and your side hasn't caught on even yet!

    1. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      Your side thinks he sabotages his schemes by these tweets.

      You mean District Court Judges?

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    2. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You think Trumps tweets make *the left* look like "gibbering imbeciles????"

    3. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by Boronx · · Score: 1

      Yes, Trump and Okian are not on the side of Federal judges.

    4. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, the left's reactions to the tweets is what exposes them as gibbering imbeciles.

    5. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by hondo77 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And while everyone is running around with their hair on fire over "covfefe" and his other tweets, he's been quietly getting his agenda done.

      What agenda is that? All he's managed to do is undo some of Obama's executive actions. Healthcare? Nada. Border wall? Nope. Travel ban? Nuh uh.

      And what's this "quietly" thing? Trump doesn't do anything quietly. He can't even go to the bathroom in the middle of the night without tweeting something nonsensical (e.g. covfefe).

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    6. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by SirSlud · · Score: 3, Informative

      which went almost unnoticed by the MSM.

      Depends which MSM you're talking about. Everyone but Fox covered it, which is pretty much what you'd expect.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    7. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      No one had their hair on fire over covfefe. Everyone was laughing their asses off instead. Even Trump treated it like a joke with the later tweet. Everyone knew it was a joke, except for Sean Spicer who was trying to defend the original tweet ("The president and a small group of people know exactly what he meant"). Now that was comedy gold.

    8. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Jeff Sessions rolled back the Obama-era drug sentencing guidelines, resulting in the harshest possible sentences for drug offenders... which went almost unnoticed by the MSM.

      Yep, almost no media outlet noticed.

    9. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by quantaman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The rest of us know (and Trump himself knows) that the tweets are meaningless and valueless in and of themselves, but they distract the MSM from what is really going on, and in a way that makes the left look like gibbering imbeciles.

      He's been doing this since about *a year* prior to the election, and your side hasn't caught on even yet!

      Has Trump tweeted as a distraction? Definitely, there's some evidence that he was deliberately doing outrageous things to grab media attention during the primary.

      But for the most part Trump is usually Tweeting nonsense and usually involved in policy actions that are really bad news, that the two often coincide isn't by design, it's just math.

      But this image of Trump as some brilliant schemer who plays the fool is nonsense.

      There's a model of Trump that does a really good job of explaining pretty much everything he's done.

      1) He's a pure bullshitter, you talk to him and he'll tell you everything you want to hear, regardless of its connection to reality.

      2) He has an extremely short attention span. He doesn't know the first thing about major policy issues because he can't dedicate sufficient attention to understand them. This also makes him impulsive because he can't resist the instant gratification of saying (or tweeting) something stupid. (This may not apply to real estate or certain aspects of business that do genuinely interest him, but I don't have sufficient information for that.)

      3) He has no ideals. His only reason for running for President was to do well in the primary (and then the general election). He probably doesn't have a single policy he wouldn't flip if you surrounded him with the right set of advisors. And because he doesn't have ideals he evaluates people through extremely shortsighted personal measures, like choosing personal loyalty over competence and adherence to duty.

      4) He is at least partially aware of 1-3, and he's extremely insecure about it.

      That really is about all there is to Trump and it was pretty obvious from the start.

      The relevance of the Tweets is they show his current train of thought, and because of his impulsiveness that train of though can turn into policy.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    10. Re: They're very useful - agreed. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Ideally, checks and balances exist both ways. The executive is meant to check the judicial, as much as the reverse is true.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    11. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Your comments would be more relevant if his tweets were nonsensical and off topic, but they aren't. They are actively self-destructive to things currently going on in his administration.

      e.g. Trump make travel ban, courts strike it down. Trump makes second travel ban, courts strike it down. Court case starts where Trumps side's well paid lawyers spends a lot of time arguing how it is not a travel ban to get what Trump wanted through the system. Trump tweets that lawyers are circlejerking and that people should call it what it is: "a travel ban".

      This is just one example of many where his administration has actively fought fires he himself has lit, only for Trump to come up from behind and pour a gallon of fuel over it to help it keep burning.

      The fact that covfefe is more searched than the climate agreement is not evidence of anything to the contrary. It's just evidence that people are disheartened with bullshit and find relief in clinging on to the endless comedy that comes out of his administration. Laughing as a coping mechanism. I wish George Doubelwya had a twitter addiction. I still look through my calendar of Bushism and laugh despite the damage he did to the world.

    12. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by jandersen · · Score: 1

      Trump withdrew from the Paris accord, and Covfefe was the more searched term than Paris Climate Agreement.

      Really? However, it was front page news everywhere I looked, as were (and still are) the many, critical comments from state and industry leaders globally. China, among others, greeted it with something like "Really?!" and a big grin on their faces, because they are trying to become the world leaders in renewable energy and green technology, and the US has just abdicated from even trying.

      Your side thinks he sabotages his schemes by these tweets.

      The rest of us know (and Trump himself knows) that the tweets are meaningless and valueless in and of themselves, but they distract the MSM from what is really going on, and in a way that makes the left look like gibbering imbeciles.

      He's been doing this since about *a year* prior to the election, and your side hasn't caught on even yet!

      'Our side' being something like >90% of the world population, I take it? A lot of people voted for Trump in anger over what is clearly an increasingly unfair and unbalanced system; they don't like him, and they know he is a useless clown, but they want change. Same in UK with Brexit and paradoxically, with Jeremy Corbyn. People are tired of the same, old, hollow lies about how capitalism has to favour the rich only. With Trump and Brexit they are going to be deeply disappointed, no doubt, whereas with Corbyn, who knows? It remains to be seen, but at least he isn't such a glaringly obvious idiot, far removed from reality, as Trump.

      Some people seem to be able to keep up an illusion about their glorious leader, no matter what the evidence tells them - are you sure you're not one of them? Trump is not the solution to what is wrong with America and the world; how could a billionaire and the spoiled child of a rich father sort of the wrongs that he himself and his class of people are the results of? That's like treating starvation with fasting - or perhaps more accurately, curing obesity by overeating.

    13. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by gtall · · Score: 1

      Executive orders and actions are cheap, as Trump is showing with Obama's. Even with a Republican congress of dolts, he's still not got any legislative bills, which are what is really necessary to make lasting changes. Pulling out the Paris Agreement is small ball, it was voluntary anyhow and many cities and states are going to stay in. If anything, he's re-energized the green energy movement in the U.S. And it turns out the red states are already the biggest movers towards green energy, something about cost. Even Brownbackistan is a large wind energy generator. Texas produces more wind energy of all the states. The only thing holding them back now are transmission lines, and those are being planned.

      Sessions rolling back guidelines can only go so far. When the bill for an increase in federal prison appropriations comes up, Congress might just roll them back by simply not funding the increase. Many conservatives and liberals on the state level and in congress have been arguing for rollbacks in sentencing for a few years and states are starting to respond. The biggest reason: cost, them prisoners are expensive and it isn't stopping recidivism rates either.

      One rule of Trump: he destroys everything he touches, including his own initiatives.

    14. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by gsslay · · Score: 1

      The rest of us know (and Trump himself knows) that the tweets are meaningless and valueless in and of themselves

      I think you credit Trump with waaaay too much guile.

      Trump is an inflated blowhard. I wouldn't be surprised if he values his tweets, and the attention they garner, more than anything.

      Personally, I think his tweets have great value. They are a valuable insight into his thinking processes and make it clear for all to see what a vile man-child he is.

    15. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by sudon't · · Score: 1

      And while everyone is running around with their hair on fire over "covfefe" and his other tweets, he's been quietly getting his agenda done. For an example, Jeff Sessions rolled back the Obama-era drug sentencing guidelines, resulting in the harshest possible sentences for drug offenders... which went almost unnoticed by the MSM.

      Trump withdrew from the Paris accord, and Covfefe was the more searched term than Paris Climate Agreement.

      Your side thinks he sabotages his schemes by these tweets.

      The rest of us know (and Trump himself knows) that the tweets are meaningless and valueless in and of themselves, but they distract the MSM from what is really going on, and in a way that makes the left look like gibbering imbeciles.

      He's been doing this since about *a year* prior to the election, and your side hasn't caught on even yet!

      I don’t know what MSM you consume, if any, but the Sessions memorandum was covered extensively on NPR, and NPR spent days discussing the ramifications of the Paris pullout. I don’t know what Fox showed you, but the whole World was talking about it.

      You think the tweets are “meaningless", and that his habit of blowing his own cover stories isn’t having an effect? This notion of Trump as master manipulator is just ridiculous. Trust me, I entertained the thought myself, way back during the campaign. It really is difficult to imagine that a presidential candidate could be so stupid. If anything about this administration has become obvious, it’s that Trump is a dolt, not all that much brighter than his voters, and less so than his apologists, who must spend their days putting out his fires, only to see Donald carelessly toss another match on them. What most of us can plainly see is that Trump is in way over his head. You won’t be able to kid yourself forever.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    16. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      You think Trumps tweets make *the left* look like "gibbering imbeciles????"

      That's like when my GF asks my her dress makes her look fat. The dress has nothing to do with it.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    17. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Trump withdrew from the Paris accord, and Covfefe was the more searched term than Paris Climate Agreement [fortune.com].

      Maybe in the US, not the rest of the world. It was all over our "MSM" and the reaction to Trump was universally negative. The "covfefe" thing was just a bit of comic relief.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    18. Re: They're very useful - agreed. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Only the legistlature can check the Judiciary - not the executive. It's up to the Senate to impeach such rogue judges

    19. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Spicer treated it as a joke as well. Only he did a bad job delivering it by looking absolutely serious

    20. Re: They're very useful - agreed. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm using the nomenclature wrong? I'm not sure - but it's the executive who nominates and appoints them. To me, that's kinda the ultimate in checks and balances, while impeaching is post facto.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    21. Re: They're very useful - agreed. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      The executive may nominate them, but only the legislature can remove them. Just like a president can be impeached, so can judges.

    22. Re: They're very useful - agreed. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      But that's not this story here. The president laid out an executive order, and the judges concerned stayed it. Which is why it's now in the Supreme Court. If what the judges did was unconstitutional, then they need to be impeached, otherwise there will be judicial anarchy, like it's been since these rogues took the law into their own hands.

    23. Re: They're very useful - agreed. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Right. Wouldn't nomination and appointment be the penultimate checks and balances? More so at the larger scale, than at the individual level?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    24. Re:They're very useful - agreed. by Gussington · · Score: 1

      And while everyone is running around with their hair on fire over "covfefe" and his other tweets, he's been quietly getting his agenda done.

      Right, like building the wall, banning muslims, NAFTA, Chinese currency manipulation, Prosecuting Hillary, Israel Embassy, Obamacare. Yep he's getting it all done...

      For an example...

      That's all you got? Trump has spent more time tweeting and playing golf than doing actual work. Keep up the effort though, you're doing your country proud.

  21. They're awful by mr100percent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Trump's tweets are awful, they embarrass America, they embarrass himself, they are tremendously unprofessional and demean the office he occupies. Republicans used to fume that Obama "demeaned" the office by not wearing an acceptable suit in the White House, yet let this guy act like a buffoon and with awful language? Please.

    As much I love watching Trump self-destruct his own administration's policies with his tweets and his big mouth, demolish his own court cases because he can't help blurting things out on Twitter, and watching Sean Spicer and his staff try to twist themselves into logical knots trying to explain that Trump never makes mistakes or that those typos were just new words he invented intentionally, it's exhausting and at some point we have to stop him before he wrecks the office of president for good.

  22. Communicating with orange life forms by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1
  23. Yeah, I too tired of winning! by laserhead · · Score: 1

    #MAGA

    1. Re:Yeah, I too tired of winning! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Winning? What did you win? Got a new job? Did you find an affordable home? Or if you already have a home, did your mortgage get cheaper? Do you have more money now than you had in November, and do you have reason to believe that's due to anything that happened since?

      What the hell did you win?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  24. None at all by markdavis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >" What do you think of Trump's tweets? Do you think they are getting old, or do you find them particularly useful?"

    I don't have a Twitter account and don't read ANY tweets. Probably not the answer expected. Generally, I don't understand why people are attracted to that form of "communication".

    1. Re:None at all by lucm · · Score: 1

      Can't think of a worse platform of communication.

      what about the Yo app?

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    2. Re:None at all by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I don't have a Twitter account and don't read ANY tweets.

      So you also have no internet, newspaper, television, or radio where his tweets are frequently copied verbatim.

      I don't have Twitter either. That doesn't mean I haven't seen a lot of his tweets.

      I don't understand why people are attracted to that form of "communication".

      I highlighted a key part of your post. No one would sanely dismiss a "form of" communication. People add it to the mix of available communication systems, and there's a different message that comes through when you're character limited and can't ramble endlessly.

    3. Re:None at all by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >The MSM focus on it while avoiding the more serious stuff that's removing civil liberties, dragnet data programs by "security agencies", and arming enemies of the west

      Not sure what "MSM" is, but you just described exactly what was happening the last several administrations before "Mr. Orange", ***including Obama****. And what would you slang him as, "Mr Grey" because he is half Black and half White??

    4. Re:None at all by markdavis · · Score: 1

      Well, that shows you how much I know about Twitter :)

  25. They're golden ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... because they work against him.

    Reporters (and critics) who have been blocked are using Trump's own tweet to petition for equal access.

    Bloomberg reports that White House spokesman Sean Spicer confirmed in a press conference that Trump's tweets should be considered official statements.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  26. fake followers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Newsweek claims that half of those 31 million followers are fake accounts:
    http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-twitter-followers-fake-617873

  27. Nope by JBMcB · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't pay attention to them, nor news stories about them. Didn't pay any attention to Obama's tweets, either. I also don't pay attention to rumors, hearsay, and "sources report" stories, which seem to be roughly 75% of reports about Trump.

    I do pay attention to policy matters, and laws being enacted. A lot of it is bad. Some of it is good.

    And so it goes.

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
  28. Trump covfefe investigation expanded to new AF by WaffleMonster · · Score: 4, Funny

    [waffle@krusteaz ~]$ ping6 www.whitehouse.gov
    PING www.whitehouse.gov(2600:1406:13:28a::c0:fefe) 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 2600:1406:13:28a::c0:fefe: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=13.9 ms
    64 bytes from 2600:1406:13:28a::c0:fefe: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=12.8 ms
    64 bytes from 2600:1406:13:28a::c0:fefe: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=18.4 ms
    64 bytes from 2600:1406:13:28a::c0:fefe: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=12.3 ms
    64 bytes from 2600:1406:13:28a::c0:fefe: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=19.5 ms
    64 bytes from 2600:1406:13:28a::c0:fefe: icmp_seq=6 ttl=56 time=13.7 ms
    64 bytes from 2600:1406:13:28a::c0:fefe: icmp_seq=7 ttl=56 time=12.9 ms
    ^C
    --- www.whitehouse.gov ping statistics ---
    7 packets transmitted, 7 received, 0% packet loss, time 6007ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 12.398/13.618/19.594/2.710 ms

    1. Re:Trump covfefe investigation expanded to new AF by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      OMG, Someone else out there actually uses ipv6?

      Looking at your post... ahhhhhhhhhhh. That's akamai BTW and tells me right where that was done.

  29. Yup - district court judges by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 2

    Your side thinks he sabotages his schemes by these tweets.

    You mean District Court Judges?

    The tweets were used by the judges as justification to override his executive order - that's true.

    At the same time, that justification was roundly decried as being inappropriate material to make a judicial decision on.

    So sure, you could look at it as sabotaging his plans, but you could also look at it as cementing his case with the supreme court. It was highly likely that the District Court Judges would have overridden his orders anyway, but by using the tweets as justification it looks like partisan partiality.

    And in any event, the issue isn't decided yet, since it's going to the supreme court.

  30. What does it matter? by mi · · Score: 1

    has 31.8 million followers [...] What do you think of Trump's tweets?

    What does it mater, what I think of it? I, for one, don't even have a Twitter account...

    People annoyed by the tweets don't have to follow him. As long as such following is not mandatory (as subscription to "Pravda" once was in a galaxy far and far away), why is this question on Slashdot's front page?

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  31. Re:That was fast by RyoShin · · Score: 3, Informative

    What's more, the recent "polls are bad" meme comes from the run-up to the 2016 election when polls showed Clinton winning, and then obviously did not. Polls are, in general, an estimate of opinion, and in that regard they were correct: in the final weeks her numbers were only decent, suggesting it would be a solid win but not a landslide, and in the end she did win the popular vote by approx 3 million.

    What the pundits got wrong (which seemed a problem more with interpretation of polls than the polls themselves) was the distribution of that support, the actual likelihood of supporters to vote (vs. self-reported), or both, which is how Trump won the electoral vote (and, in the end, that's the only one that matters for choosing the President.)

  32. Maybe the public has grown tired of the reporting by PJ6 · · Score: 2

    of said tweets.

    I would be pleased as punch if I never had to listen to another story about a tweet from anyone, ever.

  33. Re:Drink Up Seattle by Boronx · · Score: 1

    Good god that sounds dangerous.

  34. The same people by Orgasmatron · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The same people who told you Trump had a 2% chance of winning now give you his approval polls. Proceed accordingly.

    https://i.redd.it/ujkzkpr6jf1z...

    --
    See that "Preview" button?
    1. Re:The same people by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Because polling opinions and distribution results in an electorol roll with a lot of variables are totally the same thing. There's no way someone could be good at one and not the other.

      You sound like my mother. "You spend all day on the computer playing games, can't you just hack into yahoo and get my email out?"

    2. Re:The same people by Orgasmatron · · Score: 2

      Actually, I think they are very good at both things, which are really the same thing. The general rule is that if you are reading a poll in the press, it was not designed to learn something, but to sell something. The accurate polls are the internal polls, the ones that the campaigns use to target their volunteers - the ones you never see the results from.

      So the people who carefully crafted polls that would show everyone that Trump had no chance to win in 2016 are now carefully crafting polls to push a wedge between his supporters and Republicans up for re-election in 2018. When that fails, they'll switch to polls showing that he has no chance of reelection in 2020.

      If you don't understand this process, you probably spent too much time letting the fake news tell you what you wanted to hear, and not enough time researching how polling is actually conducted in the real world. The good news is that it isn't too late. You can still, if you choose to do so, head over to your favorite search engine and read as much as you can stand to about how the sausage is made.

      Or you can start practicing now for your next crying video. You are going to be making a lot of them if you keep letting the fake news get your hopes up.

      --
      See that "Preview" button?
    3. Re:The same people by Gussington · · Score: 1

      The same people who told you Trump had a 2% chance of winning now give you his approval polls. Proceed accordingly.

      Which is why you need to read the actual poll data, and not the headline attached to it. Of course this requires a high school level education which not everyone has...

  35. At this point, I think he tweets.... by mark-t · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... because he's running the country like a reality tv show and trying to boost his own ratings.

    I can just hear him saying if he were asked to tone it down: "Why should I stop tweeting? Millions of people love my tweets, so they are really very popular. The people voted me in for president, and millions of people want to see what I'm going to tweet next, because you never know what I'll say or do next, and the people just love that about me! Are you sure your sources suggesting I tweet too often aren't fake news? Maybe I should tweet about that next."

  36. No shit by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    "The Public Is Growing Tired of Trump's Tweets, Says Voter Survey"

    Yeah, no shit. I was tired of them before they even started.

    I never dreamed I'd see the day when the president of the United States would spend his time tweeting away like a drunken teenage girl with a head injury. It's just embarrassing.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  37. Both, I think. by YukariHirai · · Score: 1

    On the one hand, his brain-dead bigoted drivel being vomited out so much got old well before he even ran for President. On the other hand, they are useful in that they A) provide a useful insight into his mentality, which helps in countering his shitty actions, and B) often undermines or outright contradicts is administration's efforts to get anything done, which helps a lot in countering his shitty actions.

  38. that's new? by ooloorie · · Score: 1

    The public was tired of Trump's tweets before he got elected. Trump got elected not because people liked him, but because they hated Hillary even more.

  39. Well... by lafingman0 · · Score: 1

    Then don't read them!

  40. I doubt it... by JediJorgie · · Score: 1

    This is much more likely ....

    https://www.realclearpolitics....

  41. Is it really him? by antdude · · Score: 1

    Is he really tweeting? Also, isn't this a security issue for the President?

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  42. Burst = distraction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Looking at his burst tweets are how I know there's something he doesn't want people to notice.

    So June 6th's seems to be a full on Twitter flurry. "Fake News of CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, washpost or nytimes, I would have had ZERO chance winning WH".
    Oh dear, this is a president and yet he sounds like a whiney little bitch.

    OK, so what was happening June 6th.

    Well nytimes has an opinion piece on Trump's attempts at dividing Americans and general lawlessness. But I suspect he's trying to draw attention away from California and China agreeing to tackle climate-change.

    Perhaps its the Qatar thing, that seems to be blowing up all fake Russiany propaganda with him as the main promoter. I guess well see if the US military base gets closed and Putin miraculously has another ally and another base in the middle east.

    You don't know what he's distracting from, you only know its not worthwhile looking at the words, since they often contradict previous quotes. It's more that he wants attention paid to him at that particular time.

  43. Strategy? by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can't believe people actually attribute strategy to this guy.

    You mean despite winning the election, being a multi-billionaire, being a successful TV star, having a gorgeous wife who's also smart, raising well-mannered kids, and having a cohesive, loving family?

    He got all of that without having any strategy - is that what you're saying?

    1. Re:Strategy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Winning the birth lotto can make up for an enormous amount of incompetence.

    2. Re:Strategy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't believe people actually attribute strategy to this guy.

      You mean despite winning the election, being a multi-billionaire, being a successful TV star, having a gorgeous wife who's also smart, raising well-mannered kids, and having a cohesive, loving family?

      He got all of that without having any strategy - is that what you're saying?

      Yes. He managed to get richer from his initial silver spoon in a rising NY real estate market that lifted all boats. (The Economist showed that he did much worse than average in that market, however.) Outside of that, his record is very spotty with three bankruptcies carefully isolated from his personal wealth. As to his "cohesive, loving family" I take it you are picturing the image of his third wife and writing off the others? Do you really think she has any interest beyond his money? She isn't even living with him any more...

    3. Re:Strategy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I can't believe people actually attribute strategy to this guy.

      You mean despite winning the election,

      Considering the strategy was "lots of people said they hate my opponent - I'm going to double down on the public bashing!" I'd say that's a very loose definition of strategy.

      being a multi-billionaire,

      Here he actually had a strategy. It was deplorable, but it was a strategy. Dupe as many big-time investors as possible, short-change everyone and anyone who works with you on any deal you can, and invest all the gains in lawyers to put people on the defensive with frivolous lawsuits and so that each time you go bankrupt you can isolate some of your holdings from being sold off. A man with that strategy is not someone I want in charge of anything affecting millions of people.

      being a successful TV star,

      In the grand scheme of TV stars? No, not really. And certainly not due to any strategy he came up with.

      having a gorgeous wife who's also smart,

      Being given a million dollars in your twenties to start investing and then chasing every hot piece of tail you can find until you marry another one in your 50s is a strategy? I guess so, and it's a popular one, but it's not exactly innovative.

      raising well-mannered kids,

      Pay enough for other people to raise then and they'd BETTER be well-mannered.

      and having a cohesive, loving family?

      What goes on behind closed doors may not be the same as the public image. But a loyal family, yes. How is that strategy. Are you saying that everyone who has a loyal or loving family made a conscious strategy decision to get that outcome?

      He got all of that without having any strategy - is that what you're saying?

      Yes. Having the head start he was given and focusing all his strategy around duplicitous methods of accumulating wealth, it's actually quite easy to accomplish the other things without any coherent strategy by just flailing about. Why do you find that so hard to believe?

    4. Re:Strategy? by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      I can't believe people actually attribute strategy to this guy.

      You mean despite winning the election, being a multi-billionaire, being a successful TV star, having a gorgeous wife who's also smart, raising well-mannered kids, and having a cohesive, loving family?

      He got all of that without having any strategy - is that what you're saying?

      Multi billionaire? I'll wait until I see his tax returns. Besides, it doesn't take much to be rich when you're born that way. You think he has a cohesive, loving family? Have you seen the way his wife looks at him? And yes, I'd say he got all that without having any strategy.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    5. Re:Strategy? by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      He had a strategy: "Daddy, can I please have $10 million?"

    6. Re:Strategy? by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      So the 150 million that he made last year mentioned in his leaked returns isn't proof enough? His NBC contract, his leaked 1995 returns? You want to know how his shit smelled this morning?

      150 million is pretty far from multi-billionaire. I know he's rich, no one is disputing that. The question is how rich, which he refuses to disclose. And no, I have no interest in how his shit smells, thanks.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    7. Re:Strategy? by Gussington · · Score: 1

      You mean despite winning the election, being a multi-billionaire, being a successful TV star, having a gorgeous wife who's also smart, raising well-mannered kids, and having a cohesive, loving family?

      Well apart from the other two families he used to have and left behind you mean?

  44. Let My President twaddle by mnemotronic · · Score: 3, Funny

    I say let Donnie tweet. He's fulfilling his destiny, plus doing the only stuff he's good at -- shameless self-aggrandizement, fanning the flames of hatred, intolerance and fear. and demonstrating an awesome ability to misdirect the limited attention of the American public. He is the reincarnation of PT Barnum.
    Is it harming his presidency? I don't know. Twitter has nothing to do with this -- it's Trump's own ability to shoot himself in the foot then cut off someone else's leg & keep on dancing. Is he damaging the office and image of the POTUS? Possibly. More than Bill Clinton did? Tough call. More will be revealed. Is he making America look like a bunch of feuding siblings? I would argue that non-conciliatory congressional cliques like the Freedom Caucus and Tea Partiers have already driven a wedge between Americans and demonstrated that hatred, intolerance, lack of compassion and disrespect is the American social contract of the future. The governed have take up these arms to attack friends, neighbors and family. Is Trump imperiling national security? Sure seems like it from here, But again, he's just doing what he's good at. Let him be. America will be great -- a great bonfire. Trumps just pouring on the gas.

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  45. Re:That was fast by lucm · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure that if Clinton had been elected but Trump had won the popular vote by 3 millions you wouldn't be talking about it.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  46. Re:That was fast by RyoShin · · Score: 1

    Too bad you're wrong, and it's also irrelevant to the accuracy of polls either way.

    I've been telling everyone who will put up with me for two minutes that our election system is woefully broken, not just the Electoral College but almost all elections in general. Some areas are lucky to have run-off voting (like the district down in Georgia). Maine only last year voted to implement preferential voting, and that still doesn't apply to the Presidential part of the ballot.

    If the results had been reversed I wouldn't be as displeased (I only voted for Clinton because I thought all the other choices were worse), but I would still recognize that one person is in office with 49% of a vote that is pigeon-holed by tribalism and want to see greater change in the voting process. With proper reform perhaps we might elect someone who has a solid majority backing of the country.

  47. Useful by nospam007 · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's a nice tool for his dementia doctors to judge how his brain slowly disintegrates.

  48. Re:That was fast by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure that if Clinton had been elected but Trump had won the popular vote by 3 millions you wouldn't be talking about it.

    Why wouldn't he? People have been discussing the accuracy and arguing the validity of polls since polls first started existing. This transcends red vs blue, and even transcends the absurdity of the candidates.

  49. Very useful by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    All of those Tweets are admissible as evidence in trials and Senate hearings.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  50. Re:Useful for the intended purpose only. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Seriously, in the last election you had the choice between a total buffoon who would fuck the country up, both intentionally and due to his bumbling, and a double-dealing slick weasel that made even Nixon look reputable and trustworthy.

    So if you're fucked either way, choose the one that makes you laugh at least.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  51. Re:AI - Tweeting by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    It's the evil toupee, I tell you.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  52. Re:I just cannot get passed the fact that by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    I'd rather have some sort of intelligence test to be allowed to vote. Nothing tricky. Like "what are we voting on today?".

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  53. Re:@GrassyKnoll by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    It might interest you that "Berliner" is a colloquial term for "cream filled donut" in some parts of Germany.

    So I guess the guy(s) in Dallas just wanted to get to the the creamy center of JFK. Well, I give it a partial success.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  54. Re:@CulinaryCulture (was: Rs:Re:@GrassyKnoll by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    DJT reminds me more of a Wiener.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  55. Did the survey respondents read his tweets? by w3woody · · Score: 1

    Did the survey limit itself to those who actually read Trump's tweets? Or was the survey a general poll of all voters?

    I ask because if most respondents don't read Trump's tweets, are they saying they dislike Trump's tweets? Or are they saying they dislike the current level of media coverage of Trump's tweets? After all, if the media wasn't obsessed with reporting Trump's tweets, we wouldn't be talking about them, would we?

  56. tiresome but useful in a way by kbdd · · Score: 1

    His tweets are useful as they provide an unfiltered view of his personality, which the more he tweets, the more appears as despicable, petty and narrow minded. In all other aspects, they are tiresome and generally unhelpful to the US or his own team, if there is such a thing.

  57. Correction by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

    The public is growing tired of the media's love affair with Trump's tweets. Because there is absolutely no reason for the public to ever see his tweets if they aren't following him or better yet have never had a twitter account. It's a voluntary opt-in service.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  58. Cue brainless partisan discourse by kelanos · · Score: 1

    "Polls" said: TRUMP CANNOT WIN its statistically proven

    Yes, let us keep taking stock of "polls" in a world where "polls" have no accountability.

    Meanwhile everyone is fighting each other while the wealthiest people are conspiring to enslave us as cattle - see economic manipulation, mass surveillance, corrupt academia, consolidated and corrupt media....you can finish the list for yourself

  59. Re:Useful for the intended purpose only. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    So if you're fucked either way, choose the one that makes you laugh at least.

    There is a crucial difference between laughing with someone and laughing at them.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  60. Public opinion of Trump's tweets irrelevant by Ranbot · · Score: 1

    As long as people/media pay attention the tweet creates the desired effect, regardless of people's opinion of the content or Trump. People don't like Kim Kardashian's tweets either, yet they keep coming because we keep listening one way or another.

  61. Re:Useful for the intended purpose only. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    For the one you laugh about maybe, but not for the one laughing.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  62. Not the majority.... by MercTech · · Score: 1

    I have this sneaky suspicion that the survey was wrongly worded. The majority of people have as much regard for Twitter as they do for shoe buttons.
    People aren't tired of Trump's tweets but are tired of media wonks trying to sell the idea they actually have relevance.

    --
    NRRPT/RCT
  63. Re:Hahahaha no by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    We already knew republicans aren't smart. This shows it's not limited to one party.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  64. Better things to do, no? by pz · · Score: 1

    I have to imagine that the leader of the free world has better things to do with his time than use the internet, at any point whatsoever.

    Whereas mere peons like you and me need to grovel through information on the web to discover something we're looking to find, POTUS says, "give me a 2 page memo on the Migratory Patterns of the European Swallow," and he has a top-notch report in his hands in an hour that is far better than anything you could find. Far more efficient to staff that sort of thing out.

    And if he has time to surf the web for fun, well, then I could use some help over in my lab, 'cause I'm short-staffed and maybe he could use his downtime to lend a hand? None of my people have time for Twitter. (And yes, I get the irony of me posting on Slashdot; do you get the hyperbole in my message?)

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  65. weak. by lucm · · Score: 1

    So when you make wild accusations without providing any evidence, you're interested in the truth, while when I question your baseless statements, I'm just cheerleading?

    If your shallow political views can't stand the test of heated discussion, maybe you should spend more time on Pinterest and less on Slashdot.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  66. partisanship indeed by lucm · · Score: 1

    Amazing that you cannot see that he is making a fool of your entire country ... that's what partisanship does for you I guess.

    He's not making a fool of the country. And anyways, who cares? You're gonna stop buying iPhones because of him? You're gonna stop using Google, watch Netflix or eat Corn flakes? What's the actual, measurable impact of that alleged foolishness?

    And he was perfectly within his rights for getting out of the Paris agreements; he's been elected in large parts on a platform of withdrawing from useless involvement in various international programs and from a disastrous foreign policy, so the administration can focus on the actual needs of the country.

    As for partisanship: maybe it's a case of kettle calling a pot black. Maybe it's the people who relentlessly say that he's making a fool of himself and/or the country that are blinded by their political views.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  67. Re:ebvwfbw's CV is AWESOME! by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    Don't waste your time. Even Trump has said that he likes his supporters to be semi-literate uneducated white trash, because he knows they are too stupid to realize when they are voting against their own interests. The see themselves in Trump - semi-literate, stupid, mentally deficient - and since he's all those things and more ...

    First-rate people surround themselves with first-rate people. Second-rate people surround themselves with third-rate people. You know from which pool Trump supporters belong to. Electing a guy for his "business acumen" who went bankrupt 6 (not 4) times, a low-brow racist thug ... they really are like their leader - stupid.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.