Support NeoGAF

[NetMapel]

I am not too familiar with American history given I'm not an American. So I am going with what this documentary is telling me and it is painting Wallace in a decent light so far. Therefore, it seems unthinkable to me that he was seconds away from becoming the VP and then POTUS but was shut out due to shady dealings. I mean, this is exactly the sort of things that's happening now and history is just repeating! I would have like to see what Wallace would do as POTUS. It seems like historians mostly agreed that he'd help the soviets rebuild and keep the agreements set by FDR. Imagine a future where maybe the soviets and US didn't end up in such bad terms because there'd be no Truman to try to screw over the soviets. This documentary is eye opening.

 

[sc0la]

Trump specifically saying he doesn't see why we should adhere to one china policy today, Doubling down on the Taiwan call.
Says he wants to use it as leverage on trade, South China Sea and North Korea.

 

[benjipwns]

The Democratic Party had come to FDR well before the convention to tell him no on Wallace. (He barely got him in 1940 despite being God-Emperor.)

What FDR did, was what FDR always did, tried to end run around everyone and get "the people" to "demand a vote" which would save Wallace. But FDR was on his deathbed essentially and the DNC wasn't going to allow it again (like when FDR was "drafted" in 1940.) FDR even attempted the "I won't run" gambit and it backfired because he was so obviously going to die soon and they knew he wouldn't actually back down to save Wallace.

FDR coddled the Soviets and it didn't help. Truman overcompensated as a result. Though Stalin certainly didn't help.

Soviet-US relations were under one argument their best during Reagan's term. (Much to Maggie Thatcher's consternation.)

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

I hope the media has some self-respect and covers the confirmation hearings of these wholly unqualified people in-depth.

My big fear is that we wait until the 21st to really go full force.

That's actually not the message of that film, but this isn't the place for that....

 

[Wilsongt]

I am curious how President Ass is going to respond to the next inevitable mass shooting? I mean, if a brown person does it, it's going to be considered terrorism. If a white person does it, it'll be classified under mental illness. What will his response be? We already see that he is opening up surplus military arms to the police. Will he continue to have them become increasingly more militarized? At this point, what is the point of a military? Just send all of the police to the eventual war that is going to happen. They're already acting like they are at war, anyway.

How will he console the bigly grief of those who will lose loved ones to a maniac who shouldn't have powerful firearms?

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 38m38 minutes ago

Just watched @NBCNightlyNews - So biased, inaccurate and bad, point after point. Just can't get much worse, although @CNN is right up there!

And he continues to attack the media.

 

[Mgoblue201]

I am not too familiar with American history given I'm not an American. So I am going with what this documentary is telling me and it is painting Wallace in a decent light so far. Therefore, it seems unthinkable to me that he was seconds away from becoming the VP and then POTUS but was shut out due to shady dealings. I mean, this is exactly the sort of things that's happening now and history is just repeating! I would have like to see what Wallace would do as POTUS. It seems like historians mostly agreed that he'd help the soviets rebuild and keep the agreements set by FDR. Imagine a future where maybe the soviets and US didn't end up in such bad terms because there'd be no Truman to try to screw over the soviets. This documentary is eye opening.

I'm not sure that Wallace would have made a difference, since the Cold War was probably inevitable. The historian Tony Judt argues that, first, the Truman Doctrine had almost no impact on the Soviet calculations after the war, nor did Truman want to interfere in the Soviet's own sphere of influence. Second, the Cold War was probably unavoidable anyway because of a combination of Stalin's paranoia, his ideological belief in an inevitable conflict between capitalism and communism, and the Soviet's need to keep an external enemy around to deflect blame from the failures of the communist regime. Third, Stalin had already taken a hard line against the United States by late 1945 or early 1946; he was merely biding his time because he anticipated a split between America and Britain that he could exploit for his own gain. Stalin didn't even make a good faith effort to accept Marshall Aid. Arguably, the US administration took a pretty soft stance toward the Soviet Union in the immediate aftermath of the war.

 

[thepotatoman]

I am not too familiar with American history given I'm not an American. So I am going with what this documentary is telling me and it is painting Wallace in a decent light so far. Therefore, it seems unthinkable to me that he was seconds away from becoming the VP and then POTUS but was shut out due to shady dealings. I mean, this is exactly the sort of things that's happening now and history is just repeating! I would have like to see what Wallace would do as POTUS. It seems like historians mostly agreed that he'd help the soviets rebuild and keep the agreements set by FDR. Imagine a future where maybe the soviets and US didn't end up in such bad terms because there'd be no Truman to try to screw over the soviets. This documentary is eye opening.

I'm an american that likes to believe I'm good at american history, but I don't know anything about Henry Wallace at all. Guess that's why it's called untold history.

Interesting to learn about it.

 

[Plinko]

John Bolton said the DNC hack may have been a "false flag" operation by Obama.

Our potential deputy SoS, ladies and gentlemen.

 

[Wilsongt]

John Bolton said the DNC hack may have been a "false flag" operation by Obama.

Our potential deputy SoS, ladies and gentlemen.

Just a distraction from the real American problem is economic anxiety and radical Islamic terrorism.

 

[benjipwns]

I'm not sure that Wallace would have made a difference, since the Cold War was probably inevitable. The historian Tony Judt argues that, first, the Truman Doctrine had almost no impact on the Soviet calculations after the war, nor did Truman want to interfere in the Soviet's own sphere of influence. Second, the Cold War was probably unavoidable anyway because of a combination of Stalin's paranoia, his ideological belief in an inevitable conflict between capitalism and communism, and the Soviet's need to keep an external enemy around to deflect blame from the failures of the communist regime. Third, Stalin had already taken a hard line against the United States by late 1945 or early 1946; he was merely biding his time because he anticipated a split between America and Britain that he could exploit for his own gain. Stalin didn't even make a good faith effort to accept Marshall Aid. Arguably, the US administration took a pretty soft stance toward the Soviet Union in the immediate aftermath of the war.

Yeah, Stalin had far more to do with the Cold War than FDR/Truman or anyone else in the West. He had a level of power none of the rest did and the postwar situation fits his paranoia to a t.

Even when the Soviets didn't act which baffled the West for years, it was likely because of Stalin's paranoia.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

John Bolton said the DNC hack may have been a "false flag" operation by Obama.

Our potential deputy SoS, ladies and gentlemen.

We can all feign surprise when they "uncover" Iran is actually working on nuclear weapons later!

 

[Plinko]

I guess I don't even see what a speck of reasoning would be there. He then went on to imply that people within the administration wanted to "affect the election."

Makes absolutely ZERO sense.

 

[B-Dubs]

I guess I don't even see what a speck of reasoning would be there.

The idea that this is a false flag by Obama literally makes 0 sense. What does he get out of it?

 

[watershed]

John Bolton said the DNC hack may have been a "false flag" operation by Obama.

Our potential deputy SoS, ladies and gentlemen.

I hate politics and I hate dems for letting this happen. We are truly post-truth now.

 

[Plinko]

The idea that this is a false flag by Obama literally makes 0 sense. What does he get out of it?

I mean, obviously no sense.

It is scary to me that every single far-right politician's game now is "Throw giant, ridiculous lie out to the public, idiots believe it, repeat."

I honestly can't see a way back from this cliff of post-truth we're at in this country. It is genuinely frightening.

 

[benjipwns]

I'm an american that likes to believe I'm good at american history, but I don't know anything about Henry Wallace at all. Guess that's why it's called untold history.

Interesting to learn about it.

Just read his Wiki page, he was a very interesting fellow, which made him a terrible political candidate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_A._Wallace

FDR often picked people by personal relationships rather than competence and stuff like that. (Which also led to him suddenly dumping people who decided to not like anymore.) He liked Wallace a lot for some reason, otherwise the guy would have just been a rich Republican in Iowa.

Opposition to him had existed well before 1944:

Boos echoed through the convention hall when Roosevelt's choice of Wallace was announced, and the delegates seemed on the verge of rebellion. It was only after Roosevelt threatened to decline the nomination and Eleanor Roosevelt delivered a conciliatory speech that they grudgingly yielded.[27] Wallace received the support of 626.3 votes (around 59% of the 1100 delegates) when nominated at the convention, compared to 329.6 votes for Speaker of the House William B. Bankhead of Alabama (who incidentally died only months after the 1940 Democratic National Convention).

The old guard Democratic Party bosses deeply distrusted Wallace as an apostate Republican and as a doe-eyed mystic who symbolized all that they found objectionable

 

[Retromelon]

I am curious how President Ass is going to respond to the next inevitable mass shooting? I mean, if a brown person does it, it's going to be considered terrorism. If a white person does it, it'll be classified under mental illness. What will his response be? We already see that he is opening up surplus military arms to the police. Will he continue to have them become increasingly more militarized? At this point, what is the point of a military? Just send all of the police to the eventual war that is going to happen. They're already acting like they are at war, anyway.

How will he console the bigly grief of those who will lose loved ones to a maniac who shouldn't have powerful firearms?

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 38m38 minutes ago

Just watched @NBCNightlyNews - So biased, inaccurate and bad, point after point. Just can't get much worse, although @CNN is right up there!

And he continues to attack the media.

I was going to read the rest of your post wilson but couldn't get past the godlike diss in the first sentence

Please will somebody check if trumps ok!

 

[watershed]

I mean, obviously no sense.

It is scary to me that every single far-right politician's game now is "Throw giant, ridiculous lie out to the public, idiots believe it, repeat."

I honestly can't see a way back from this cliff of post-truth we're at in this country. It is genuinely frightening.

We are now in a post-truth society and it saddens me. Education has failed us partly because our system of government and politics does not value a highly educated general population. People are dumb by design and it hurts everyone.

 

[Plinko]

Honestly, I'd love to see what would happen if the democrats just threw all caution to the wind and started playing the exact same games in 2018 and 2020. Make up the absolute most ridiculous lies, throw them to the public for the media to report, and see what happens.

 

[B-Dubs]

Honestly, I'd love to see what would happen if the democrats just threw all caution to the wind and started playing the exact same games in 2018 and 2020. Make up the absolute most ridiculous lies, throw them to the public for the media to report, and see what happens.

The issue is the Democrat's base wouldn't let them. The media either. The issue with this is the Dems are held to a higher standard.

 

[watershed]

The issue is the Democrat's base wouldn't let them. The media either. The issue with this is the Dems are held to a higher standard.

Yes and that's so frustrating that the media simply accepts a lower standard for republicans (this election season being the prime example) clearly to the detriment of their own craft (journalism, supposedly), and to the American people. The public is less thoughtful and less informed because of how the media covers republicans.

 

[benjipwns]

Honestly, I'd love to see what would happen if the democrats just threw all caution to the wind and started playing the exact same games in 2018 and 2020. Make up the absolute most ridiculous lies, throw them to the public for the media to report, and see what happens.

The issue is the Democrat's base wouldn't let them. The media either. The issue with this is the Dems are held to a higher standard.

Yes and that's so frustrating that the media simply accepts a lower standard for republicans (this election season being the prime example) clearly to the detriment of their own craft (journalism, supposedly), and to the American people. The public is less thoughtful and less informed because of how the media covers republicans.

Bless your hearts.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Honestly, I'd love to see what would happen if the democrats just threw all caution to the wind and started playing the exact same games in 2018 and 2020. Make up the absolute most ridiculous lies, throw them to the public for the media to report, and see what happens.

LBJ Aide: "Christ, Lyndon, we can't call the guy a pigfucker. It isn't true."

LBJ: "Of course it ain't true, but I want to make the son-of-a-bitch deny it."

 

[Plinko]

Bless your hearts.

Eh, I'm just curious to see how it would affect the political atmosphere. Republicans are amping it up recently. Would be interesting to see how they dealt with their own medicine for a bit.

 

[VendettaRed07]

The issue is the Democrat's base wouldn't let them. The media either. The issue with this is the Dems are held to a higher standard.

Parts of the dem base are calling for the electors to deny the results of the election and appoint someone else. I think they'll let it slide.

 

[watershed]

LBJ Aide: "Christ, Lyndon, we can't call the guy a pigfucker. It isn't true."

LBJ: "Of course it ain't true, but I want to make the son-of-a-bitch deny it."

Ancient history though. Hillary Clinton said (plagiarizing Michelle Obama) "when they go low, we go high" but going low won and going high led to...moral indignation? Idk.

 

[B-Dubs]

Eh, I'm just curious to see how it would affect the political atmosphere. Republicans are amping it up recently. Would be interesting to see how they dealt with their own medicine for a bit.

Considering the GOP is in nearly full control of our government right now and Trump has indicated he wants to change our libel laws to make it easier to sue someone, I'm not so sure pushing this is a good move.

 

[benjipwns]

Ancient history though. Hillary Clinton said (plagiarizing Michelle Obama) "when they go low, we go high" but going low won and going high led to...moral indignation? Idk.

You believed that nonsense?

Considering the GOP is in nearly full control of our government right now and Trump has indicated he wants to change our libel laws to make it easier to sue someone, I'm not so sure pushing this is a good move.

The SPEECH Act was passed unanimously and by voice.

I doubt he's going to get much support on that one. Especially from the SC.

 

[Rebel Leader]

Parts of the dem base are calling for the electors to deny the results of the election and appoint someone else. I think they'll let it slide.

Electors are constitutionally allowed to ignore the results.
What those people are asking is not illegal.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Considering the GOP is in nearly full control of our government right now and Trump has indicated he wants to change our libel laws to make it easier to sue someone, I'm not so sure pushing this is a good move.

Republicans do what they want and challenge voters to punish them about it. Democrats can't operate in fear of what Republicans might do given how they'll probably do whatever they're afraid of regardless.

Actually do what your base wants you to do and see what happens. It worked for them.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Electors are constitutionally allowed to ignore the results.

What those people are asking is not illegal.

It's also incredibly dangerous regardless of how legal it is. So if they are fine with that they should be fine with playing dirty politics against the GOP when possible.

 

[Wilsongt]

Anyone have a more comprehensive list of things Trump will rollback in his first 100 days?

Healthcare
Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
Equal pay for women
Overtime rules
Opening up lands that Obama closed off to drilling
Offshore drilling
Keystone Pipeline
Dakota Pipeline
LGBT protections
Cuba relations
Paris Climate Agreement

 

[benjipwns]

wait we're actually going to pretend that democrats are above lying to get ahead politically and that there would be some kind of backlash from their base about it lol

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

I am curious how President Ass is going to respond to the next inevitable mass shooting? I mean, if a brown person does it, it's going to be considered terrorism. If a white person does it, it'll be classified under mental illness. What will his response be? We already see that he is opening up surplus military arms to the police. Will he continue to have them become increasingly more militarized? At this point, what is the point of a military? Just send all of the police to the eventual war that is going to happen. They're already acting like they are at war, anyway.

How will he console the bigly grief of those who will lose loved ones to a maniac who shouldn't have powerful firearms?

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 38m38 minutes ago

Just watched @NBCNightlyNews - So biased, inaccurate and bad, point after point. Just can't get much worse, although @CNN is right up there!

And he continues to attack the media.

What did NBC even do?

 

[Wilsongt]

What did NBC even do?

NBC nightly news probably hurt his wittle baby feewings

 

[benjipwns]

What did NBC even do?

aired something?

It is not currently clear what Trump is responding to, though Mediaite will update as this story develops.

UPDATE: 8:56 p.m. ET: While it remains uncertain as to whether this is what angered the president-elect, NBC Nightly News ran a segment tonight about how Trump has refuted the reports suggesting that Russia interfered with the election to help him win. Kate Snow noted that Trump is not taking daily intelligence briefings, and also how his dismissal of the CIA’s findings has drawn the ire of intelligence officials and those calling for an investigation into Russia’s cyberactivities.

 

[watershed]

wait we're actually going to pretend that democrats are above lying to get ahead politically and that there would be some kind of backlash from their base about it lol

Context matters. Of course all politicians lie or play with the truth and facts. But Obama has to cite real job numbers. Trump makes up murder stats. There is a difference. If you want to believe both sides are the same, then ok.

 

[benjipwns]

But Obama has to cite real job numbers.

Since when? He's been almost a constant stream of bullshit for a decade now.

Chasing "cited" numbers in a political speech is a fools errand anyhow. It's a low bar required to get a pass.

If you want to believe both sides are the same, then ok.

I didn't say that. But you certainly just said:

Of course all politicians lie or play with the truth and facts.

 

[Vixdean]

Honestly, I'd love to see what would happen if the democrats just threw all caution to the wind and started playing the exact same games in 2018 and 2020. Make up the absolute most ridiculous lies, throw them to the public for the media to report, and see what happens.

Of course they should, and it would be extremely effective, just look at what Reid did to Romney in 2012. The media doesn't care, they'll report anything a politician says as fact until objectively proven otherwise. The problem is science, facts and truth generally support the Democratic side of the argument, and they naively assume that will be enough.

 

[Lord_Byron28]

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 38m38 minutes ago

Just watched @NBCNightlyNews - So biased, inaccurate and bad, point after point. Just can't get much worse, although @CNN is right up there!

And he continues to attack the media.

It's almost as if it's a ploy to steer people away from mainstream/"liberal" media in favor of Breitbart/Russian media .

 

[Bruce Springsteen]

I'm watching Meet the Press and I'm simply amazed watching this Rance Pirebus fella deny all these Russia connections

 

[Rebel Leader]

I'm watching Meet the Press and I'm simply amazed watching this Rance Pirebus fella deny all these Russia connections

Well, he's getting a promotion.

 

[Dany]

So.

Trump says intelligence briefings are mostly not true and unimportant. What about when they are coming from people he appointed?? He's giving power to his yes-men but will he even listen to them?

 

[Retromelon]

Anyone have a more comprehensive list of things Trump will rollback in his first 100 days?

Healthcare
Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
Equal pay for women
Overtime rules
Opening up lands that Obama closed off to drilling
Offshore drilling
Keystone Pipeline
Dakota Pipeline
LGBT protections
Cuba relations
Paris Climate Agreement

Drastically reduce epa regulations, too. The Paris agreement isn't certain yet, all Trump's said was is that he won't sign it if it gives China an advantage over us.

Also, in an interview aired today, he said this:"Nobody really knows" if climate change is real

Trump said in the "Fox News Sunday" interview, when host Chris Wallace asked the incoming President where he stands on the environment.

"I'm still open-minded. Nobody really knows. Look, I'm somebody that gets it, and nobody really knows. It's not something that's so hard and fast."

 

[Bruce Springsteen]

Well, he's getting a promotion.

I understand it's his job, but it's hilarious hearing him deny 17 intelligence agencies saying the same thing about Russia's involvement in the elections

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Overtime rules
Opening up lands that Obama closed off to drilling
Offshore drilling
Keystone Pipeline
Dakota Pipeline
Paris Climate Agreement

These are mine. Maybe not even these, but the rest were way too large of legislation to get by in the first 100 days (and about a third probably won't even happen in his 4 years)

 

[Wilsongt]

So.

Trump says intelligence briefings are mostly not true and unimportant. What about when they are coming from people he appointed?? He's giving power to his yes-men but will he even listen to them?

Why would he care about intelligence briefings? All he needs to know is coming directly from Putin from now on.

These are mine. Maybe not even these, but the rest were way too large of legislation to get by in the first 100 days (and about a third probably won't even happen in his 4 years)

Technically the overtime rules are already gone, thanks to a Texas judge. Trump getting rid of them would just make them official, instead of a stay.

 

[benjipwns]

I understand it's his job, but it's hilarious hearing him deny 17 intelligence agencies saying the same thing about Russia's involvement in the elections

Those agencies being headed by a known and admitted perjurer.

 

[120v]

Trump says intelligence briefings are mostly not true and unimportant. What about when they are coming from people he appointed?? He's giving power to his yes-men but will he even listen to them?

now that i've thought it over today, why would he listen to intel briefings. it's not like he'd know how to "respond"

"we have intel ISIS will detonate a dirty bomb in times square..."
"okay. can we just nuke them?"

 

[Bruce Springsteen]

Those agencies being headed by a known and admitted perjurer.

meaning?