Hypothetically, would a war with a war Iran support/hurt Trump in 2020?

[213372bu]

I’ve been waffling between the two, but I’d like to think that this could bite Trump in the ass in light of the past couple decades, his running position, and the attitudes of the general populace shifting a bit.

[OnlyRegret]

yes

[daemon]

I think it makes the impeachment taking effect more likely. What Trump did allowing that sort of drone assassination with no actual briefing on the proof they had it's like we're back in Iraq with the "weapons of mass destruction". Even republicans will demand to see proof this time around.

[Himu]

For the worse.

But Americans are also blow hards that like to gather together when it comes to our evil imperialism.

[Himu]

I think it makes the impeachment taking effect more likely. What Trump did allowing that sort of drone assassination with no actual briefing on the proof they had it's like we're back in Iraq with the "weapons of mass destruction". Even republicans will demand to see proof this time around.

Republicans are currently backing their man and the Senate majority leader days he will be impartial towards the WH.

[daemon]

I think it makes the impeachment taking effect more likely. What Trump did allowing that sort of drone assassination with no actual briefing on the proof they had it's like we're back in Iraq with the "weapons of mass destruction". Even republicans will demand to see proof this time around.

Republicans are currently backing their man and the Senate majority leader days he will be impartial towards the WH.

They're currently backing him. Let's see how he responds now that they called out his bluff and what do the republican senators do. Remember some of them want to be re-elected.

I won't lie, i'm deeply disappointed in the drone strike. I was all for the strongarm attitude to get favorable results, but this attack... with no proof delivered whatsoever... I just can't see any justification. Watch him spin this attack into something that "they were already planning to do"

[OnlyRegret]

I think it makes the impeachment taking effect more likely. What Trump did allowing that sort of drone assassination with no actual briefing on the proof they had it's like we're back in Iraq with the "weapons of mass destruction". Even republicans will demand to see proof this time around.

Republicans are currently backing their man and the Senate majority leader days he will be impartial towards the WH.

They're currently backing him. Let's see how he responds now that they called out his bluff and what do the republican senators do. Remember some of them want to be re-elected.

I won't lie, i'm deeply disappointed in the drone strike. I was all for the strongarm attitude to get favorable results, but this attack... with no proof delivered whatsoever... I just can't see any justification. Watch him spin this attack into something that "they were already planning to do"

[TEEEPO]

“Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”

[daemon]

I think it makes the impeachment taking effect more likely. What Trump did allowing that sort of drone assassination with no actual briefing on the proof they had it's like we're back in Iraq with the "weapons of mass destruction". Even republicans will demand to see proof this time around.

Republicans are currently backing their man and the Senate majority leader days he will be impartial towards the WH.

They're currently backing him. Let's see how he responds now that they called out his bluff and what do the republican senators do. Remember some of them want to be re-elected.

I won't lie, i'm deeply disappointed in the drone strike. I was all for the strongarm attitude to get favorable results, but this attack... with no proof delivered whatsoever... I just can't see any justification. Watch him spin this attack into something that "they were already planning to do"

Remember North Korea talks, how they went to the shitter, but ultimately happened? Hell, his banter worked. Remember the whole F-35 pricing thing (I mean, imagine openly asking boeing if they wanted the contract if they did cheaper aircrafts, only to have the stock of Lockheed plummet. It worked)? If it gives results, i'm fine with it... this one though...


OK, I see what you mean, strongarm implies violence. I always figured it was a metaphor. But yeah, you get me... I meant to be persuasive by playing from a position of strength.

[Skullfuckers Anonymous]

I’d say hurt him unless Iran decides to retaliate by killing the Baldwin brothers.

[OnlyRegret]

I think it makes the impeachment taking effect more likely. What Trump did allowing that sort of drone assassination with no actual briefing on the proof they had it's like we're back in Iraq with the "weapons of mass destruction". Even republicans will demand to see proof this time around.

Republicans are currently backing their man and the Senate majority leader days he will be impartial towards the WH.

They're currently backing him. Let's see how he responds now that they called out his bluff and what do the republican senators do. Remember some of them want to be re-elected.

I won't lie, i'm deeply disappointed in the drone strike. I was all for the strongarm attitude to get favorable results, but this attack... with no proof delivered whatsoever... I just can't see any justification. Watch him spin this attack into something that "they were already planning to do"

Remember North Korea talks, how they went to the shitter, but ultimately happened? Hell, his banter worked. Remember the whole F-35 pricing thing (I mean, imagine openly asking boeing if they wanted the contract if they did cheaper aircrafts, only to have the stock of Lockheed plummet. It worked)? If it gives results, i'm fine with it... this one though...


OK, I see what you mean, strongarm implies violence. I always figured it was a metaphor. But yeah, you get me... I meant to be persuasive by playing from a position of strength.

it was the combination of all those things including "favourable results" when the issue is americans continually fucking around the middle east

[daemon]

manyquotes

I mean in other scenarios, like North Korea / China negotiations (results still pending on both, but not unfavorable so far). This is why I condemn the attack on Soleimani until they give us proof of said "imminent attack". If there's no proof they were pulling a fucking Minority Report and fuck that shit.

[TVC15]

I wonder how many Democrats will vote for this war.

[OnlyRegret]

I wonder how many Democrats will vote for this war.

The Neera crowd.

[Himu]

I wonder how many Democrats will vote for this war.

Warren half defended it, showing her to be an establishment candidate through and through. Only Bernie and the woman not to be named are completely anti-war in this scenario.

[TVC15]

It’s a shitty situation for Dems. If the media can spin up a successful rah rah rah support our troops BS storm like they normally can at the start of a war, Democrats are in a lousy election position if they stick to their principles. Ugh I hate America

[james]

Really depends on gas prices.

Stays under 3, Trump polls up

Between 3 and 4, neutral

Over 4, Trump polls down

[El Babua]

Considering how incompetent the administration has been the last couple days after their assassination, I wouldn't be surprised if this whole situation kinda dies on the vine and it goes remembered as one of Trump's episodes. One of many dozens during his presidency. ie. not affecting shit.

That's the best case scenario, anyway 

[TVC15]

And there’s an equally likely chance I could wake up to Tehran being bulldozed by an immense fleet of Cybertrucks tomorrow.

[VomKriege]

thinking we vote for wars anymore

I understand how nuclear missiles and I imagine the "tempo" of modern war forced the issue of concentrating into a single commander in chief but there's something to be said for parliamentary-based conduct of wars...

[OnlyRegret]

I wonder how many Democrats will vote for this war.

Warren half defended it, showing her to be an establishment candidate through and through. Only Bernie and the woman not to be named are completely anti-war in this scenario.

which is a bad thing because it makes trump look good to his base and centr*sts

https://twitter.com/_curlytrill/status/1214605633288323077

[TVC15]

It’s a shitty situation for Dems. If the media can spin up a successful rah rah rah support our troops BS storm like they normally can at the start of a war, Democrats are in a lousy election position if they stick to their principles. Ugh I hate America

That famously principled anti-war Democrat party, whose politicians have been increasingly anti war and intervention in their actions and rhetoric. Especially recently where they schedule about 20 minutes during every debate to talk about America's enemies and how happy they are Trump isn't openly belligerent with them (till now of course). I'm sure all these new congresspersons with interesting backgrounds will get us out of this unsightly war mess.

Haha, I walked into that. I thought I felt my Spidey sense tingling as I typed the word “principles.”

I think their principle on war is something like “ujhhhjhhhh, I only voted for it because I ate nothing but Twinkies for the month before and I wasn’t all there man vote for me agin”

[Transhuman]

So what was the imminent threat? I haven't really been keeping up on this.

[Mandark]

I wonder how many Democrats will vote for this war.

Warren half defended it, showing her to be an establishment candidate through and through. Only Bernie and the woman not to be named are completely anti-war in this scenario.

which is a bad thing because it makes trump look good to his base and centr*sts

https://twitter.com/_curlytrill/status/1214605633288323077

lol bernie called him a bad guy

spoiler (click to show/hide)

all explanations of why it's okay when senpai does it should be sent via PM to Glen

[close]

[OnlyRegret]

lol bernie called him a bad guy

spoiler (click to show/hide)

all explanations of why it's okay when senpai does it should be sent via PM to Glen

[close]

I'm not a Bernard-or-Bust man so I won't go down the special exception case angle.

But yeah, it is easy to point out what everyone has, what I shared. But taking the pragmatic angle I'd have to concede Warren, Sanders, and co. did the better option. As much as I like, "as much a terrorist as
past and present US gov officials" it is absolutely not going to go over well. So yeah, what I wish for and what is the better political posturing and maneuvering lacks any overlap. The nuanced approach for the man the gov's PR branch has doubled down on making the number 1 baddie all along would never sit well for the electorate.

[Cerveza mas fina]

Trump would prob get reelected without a war cause Americans love him, just like Russians love Putin and Polacks love PiS.

[Transhuman]

[Nintex]

So what was the imminent threat? I haven't really been keeping up on this.

They were going to bomb the US base in Iraq was missiles.

Turns out Pompeo was right

[Transhuman]

They should have bombed the bombs

[jorma]

will hurt trump a little, up until the day 'muricans start dying and from then on it will help him massively is my guess

[ToxicAdam]

Gaining global support was pretty crucial in past military actions in the Middle East. Trump has zero skills or wherewithal to pull that off. We are more influenced by global media today then we were 20 years ago.

 I think it can even hurt with his base. There are a good number of them that are anti-interventionist or detest needless military spending. They’re not all war hawks or blind patriots.

[VomKriege]

I understand how nuclear missiles and I imagine the "tempo" of modern war forced the issue of concentrating into a single commander in chief but there's something to be said for parliamentary-based conduct of wars...

I think it's worth mentioning that the only reason this "tempo" exists is because of the global deployment of armed forces, not some secular progression of technology.

I don't think I was clear enough, by the "tempo" I meant of actual conventional warfare conflicts, not so much the breadth and continuity of armed presence.

Doesn't really change the overall point.

[Rahxephon91]

lOVE YOU GUYS. hOPE NO WAR HAPPPENS AND HURTS YOU

[Mandark]

Gaining global support was pretty crucial in past military actions in the Middle East. Trump has zero skills or wherewithal to pull that off. We are more influenced by global media today then we were 20 years ago.

I think it can even hurt with his base. There are a good number of them that are anti-interventionist or detest needless military spending. They’re not all war hawks or blind patriots.

wrong