The Trump Presidency – 2016

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Radii

Because I don't care how the US stacks up against Angola, I care how the US stacks up against the developed world, and the easiest place for a quick comparison is to look at Western Europe. I'm not trying to discount Australia, Japan, Canada, South Korea and many other places, they all count too.

I'm not comparing the desirability of the US vs Angola. I am saying Angolan's and other pop. from non-first world should be taken into account when identifying most desirable countries that people want to migrate to.

When you factor in the whole world and look at the links I listed, it indicates the US is the most desired country (by far) that people want to immigrate to.

If the other countries you listed are that great, why isn't the world-in-aggregate emigrating to those places? Sure they beat the US in areas, but with "warts and all" its still the place (or perceived) to be.

Originally Posted by Radii

The Problems with First Past the Post Voting Explained - YouTube

This has always been my favorite "simple explanation"

Other videos in that series explain other voting systems and show how they allow much better representation of the people than what we do here in the US.

I agree that gerrymandering is a problem.

You are in favor of the "Alternative Vote" system?

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Trump's decided to leave the NK summit a day early.

Low energy. SAD.

do you have a link for this?

[JPhillips]

White House announces Trump and Kim will have a bilateral meeting and working lunch tomorrow after their one-on-one tomorrow. Then Trump will have a press conference and depart Singapore at 8 p.m. No second day of meetings. pic.twitter.com/CwkJO30x86

— Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) June 11, 2018

[Thomkal]

thanks, wasn't finding. So basically a one-day summit and all of Korea's problems will be solved? He's such a negotiator.

[whomario]

How can you decide to cut this short before even exchanging one word ? And after communicating that you want to have little fixed program and give all the time in the world for actual conversation just yesterday ...

Maybe the hotel didn't have FOX.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by Edward64

If the other countries you listed are that great, why isn't the world-in-aggregate emigrating to those places? Sure they beat the US in areas, but with "warts and all" its still the place (or perceived) to be.

It really is as easy as this in this case. The US has had amazing PR for a long time via a variety of media, reaching the furthest corners of the earth. People in most places don't know enough about most other countries to even entertain the though of moving there. Do you think before answering a simple poll like this, people get a week to review the pros and cons of all countries ?

[Edward64]

Perception is reality sometimes.

Amazing PR? You think the world gets this image of US being all great? I think the world knows of the many flaws the US has and still wants to come and live here.

I would still like to get your top 5 countries you think are more desirable than the US?

You criticize the US alot. I think its fair to flesh out the discussion to allow me to counter your selections?

(and no, I certainly don't think that "sustainability" study answers the question)

[jeff061]

Originally Posted by whomario

How can you decide to cut this short before even exchanging one word ? And after communicating that you want to have little fixed program and give all the time in the world for actual conversation just yesterday ...

Maybe the hotel didn't have FOX.

Only one lunch is needed for a photo opp. Mission Accomplished!!

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by whomario

It really is as easy as this in this case. The US has had amazing PR for a long time via a variety of media, reaching the furthest corners of the earth. People in most places don't know enough about most other countries to even entertain the though of moving there. Do you think before answering a simple poll like this, people get a week to review the pros and cons of all countries ?

I agree with this. Hollywood has probably helped the most in how people think of the US. Most migrants don't know, for instance, that the Republic of Ireland has a higher GDP per capita (PPP) than the US.

[Thomkal]

Trump not even going to discuss human rights with North Korea at the summit.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Trump not even going to discuss human rights with North Korea at the summit.

Which he ought to, for more than just purely moral reasons:

By Law, Trump Must Discuss Human Rights with Kim | Human Rights Watch

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by whomario

You seriously don't get...

Am I the only one that reads posters here saying this and translate that into "you're a fucking moron?" When I see this stuff, I sometimes think those posters should be punched in the face. Thank God it's just the Internet.

[JPhillips]

It appears that Trump changed his departure only after Kim decided to leave at 4 pm the first day.

Trump's going to end up at the DMZ with a boom box over his head playing Peter Gabriel.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Am I the only one that reads posters here saying this and translate that into "you're a fucking moron?" When I see this stuff, I sometimes think those posters should be punched in the face. Thank God it's just the Internet.

Because i went straight there and it wasn't my 4th post basically explaining the same thing only to be told repeatedly that essentially the facts and figures are some sort of interesting, but ultimately nonconsequential cutesy opinion in the grand scheme of things that could maybe warrant a closer look if we manage to agree that they are indeed kinda sorta relevant. (not counting at least one other thread where the same user pretty much danced around similar topics with the same magnanimous tone. Not everything is varying degrees of "interesting". Some things are also true or wrong. Even in an age of alternate facts)

Not to mention it sounded a lot like the user in question suggested that discarding 3rd world countries in a comparison with the US makes the argument either not sensible or makes it an expression of thinly veiled racism and/or elitism on my/our part.

[Edward64]

Still waiting on your 5 better countries.

I've already conceded UK, Australia and Canada as good candidates to Radii.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Still waiting on your 5 better countries.

I've already conceded UK, Australia and Canada as good candidates to Radii.

Denmark and Sweden easily make that list and as a bonus New Zealand.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

Denmark and Sweden easily make that list and as a bonus New Zealand.

I have some thoughts on these but I think I'll wait on his answer if you don't mind. I think he said there were plenty of countries ahead of the US.

I'll wait to see what 5 he comes up with, I'm sure he can come up with his original 5.

[Warhammer]

I find it interesting that all the places better than the US are ethnically very homogeneous. The outliers being Canada and New Zealand. Which is interesting to me as they were both English colonies.

[stevew]

Nike withdraws Iran World Cup squad's supply of boots due to sanctions

No shoes for you!

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I have some thoughts on these

Yeaaah, you don't think he sees it as an obvious gotcha? Where you rip apart his 5 and then you end up into some strange argument over whether the cuisine in Luxembourg is as good as Omaha, Nebraska?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by whomario

Because i went straight there and it wasn't my 4th post basically explaining the same thing only to be told repeatedly that essentially the facts and figures are some sort of interesting, but ultimately nonconsequential cutesy opinion in the grand scheme of things that could maybe warrant a closer look if we manage to agree that they are indeed kinda sorta relevant. (not counting at least one other thread where the same user pretty much danced around similar topics with the same magnanimous tone. Not everything is varying degrees of "interesting". Some things are also true or wrong. Even in an age of alternate facts)

Not to mention it sounded a lot like the user in question suggested that discarding 3rd world countries in a comparison with the US makes the argument either not sensible or makes it an expression of thinly veiled racism and/or elitism on my/our part.

I like your sentence construction. It makes my head hurt. I think you are basically saying "I suck". Okay, I get it.

On "dancing around" I think this is the 4th or 5th time I requested your list of countries you think is more desirable than the US?

Its easy to snipe, let's check out your list? According to you, the US is nowhere close to the top so you shouldn't have problems coming up with your original 5?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Yeaaah, you don't think he sees it as an obvious gotcha? Where you rip apart his 5 and then you end up into some strange argument over whether the cuisine in Luxembourg is as good as Omaha, Nebraska?

Nope, I really don't think that.

He (whomario) is supposedly ripping apart my argument on the US as a pretty desirable place to live/be.

Why shouldn't I get a shot as his?

Radii listed his. I see his point, I conceded some and I countered some. I had something to react to vs just a plain old "sustainability study".

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

I find it interesting that all the places better than the US are ethnically very homogeneous. The outliers being Canada and New Zealand. Which is interesting to me as they were both English colonies.

Colonies tend to be far more ethnically diverse, for obvious reasons. The "New World" and sub-Saharan Africa are far more ethnically diverse than Europe or China.

A revealing map of the world’s most and least ethnically diverse countries - The Washington Post

[whomario]

Ironically, considering the current outcry, the US always does very well when it comes to unemployment among (legal/documented of course) immigrants due to strict criteria compared to other countries.

Originally Posted by Edward64

Still waiting on your 5 better countries.

I've already conceded UK, Australia and Canada as good candidates to Radii.

Better for what ? I'm not going to play the "but where do immigrants want to go or where are they most likely to (...)" game because i really don't see that leading anywhere. My original assessment was that the US isn't quite as prosperous and "free" as FOX made it out to be: which is supposedly light years ahead of anybody else with all other countries toiling in the dark ages of repression and unfair socialism or sth.

So in terms of livability/quality of life for the majority of citizens, which was always my point, i can only point to the figures already posted and then you can take your pick of the vast majority of OECD countries ranking ahead of the US, which ranks below the OECD average pretty much everywhere. And that even includes countries like Chile, Poland, Estonia or Mexico, not just other great industrial nations.

I simply don't feel i need to weed out the ideal candidates to submit into the debate given the available data. And yes, of course there are categories the US does fairly good in, even a few they are near the top. But it's undeniable that, when you consider a large spread of categories, many OECD countries statistically offer it's citizens a safer, more well maintained place to live with better health care resulting in better overall health. Also a lot of those countries invest more into renewable energy and offer better education on average for much lower costs (just because you have a few elite universities doesn't really change that fact for the majority of the population), thus setting themselves up better for the future.

https://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/He...TED-STATES.pdf

United States - OECD Data

Read this as you want in between "still doing ok in categories i care about" and "still better than others and actually pretty good considering the Rest of the World" but in no way do these numbers indicate that somehow the US is the greatest place in the world to live. Which is all i ever wanted to state, simply because i find it statement that lies at the root of a lot of the issues in your country.

Which i have a great fondness for, otherwise i wouldn't bother to take part in these discussions.

[ISiddiqui]

I will say Ireland surprised me in the list of indicators. Higher GDP per capita (PPP) than the US and a lower Gini Coefficient (Switzerland also does the same, but that's more expected I think). I had heard Ireland got hit hard by the 2008 crisis - it appears it has rebounded quite significantly.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by whomario

Ironically, considering the current outcry, the US always does very well when it comes to unemployment among (legal/documented of course) immigrants due to strict criteria compared to other countries.



Better for what ? I'm not going to play the "but where do immigrants want to go or where are they most likely to (...)" game because i really don't see that leading anywhere. My original assessment was that the US isn't quite as prosperous and "free" as FOX made it out to be: which is supposedly light years ahead of anybody else with all other countries toiling in the dark ages of repression and unfair socialism or sth.

So in terms of livability/quality of life for the majority of citizens, which was always my point, i can only point to the figures already posted and then you can take your pick of the vast majority of OECD countries ranking ahead of the US, which ranks below the OECD average pretty much everywhere. And that even includes countries like Chile, Poland, Estonia or Mexico, not just other great industrial nations.

I simply don't feel i need to weed out the ideal candidates to submit into the debate given the available data. And yes, of course there are categories the US does fairly good in, even a few they are near the top. But it's undeniable that, when you consider a large spread of categories, many OECD countries statistically offer it's citizens a safer, more well maintained place to live with better health care resulting in better overall health. Also a lot of those countries invest more into renewable energy and offer better education on average for much lower costs (just because you have a few elite universities doesn't really change that fact for the majority of the population), thus setting themselves up better for the future.

https://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/He...TED-STATES.pdf

United States - OECD Data

Read this as you want in between "still doing ok in categories i care about" and "still better than others and actually pretty good considering the Rest of the World" but in no way do these numbers indicate that somehow the US is the greatest place in the world to live. Which is all i ever wanted to state, simply because i find it statement that lies at the root of a lot of the issues in your country.

Which i have a great fondness for, otherwise i wouldn't bother to take part in these discussions.

Your first link just refers to Health?

Your second shows US data?

I really don't want this to be nebulous. Why can't you just list your 5?

Do you really want me to pick India which is on your first link?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Nope, I really don't think that.

Well of course YOU don't, because that's what you are planning on doing! Instead of dealing with his substantive issues, you've gone into a name your 5 rut and when someone has mentioned some, you go "I have some thoughts on these"

[whomario]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Its easy to snipe, let's check out your list? According to you, the US is nowhere close to the top so you shouldn't have problems coming up with your original 5?

Originally Posted by Edward64

Nope, I really don't think that.

He (whomario) is supposedly ripping apart my argument on the US as a pretty desirable place to live/be.

Why shouldn't I get a shot as his?

Radii listed his. I see his point, I conceded some and I countered some. I had something to react to vs just a plain old "sustainability study".

And just to be super clear here: I never even said the US isn't a "pretty desirable place to live", especially in the grand scheme of things. The point was that it is pretty ignorant to think it is far and above every other country when there is just an abundance of facts pointing to the opposite assumption when comparing the US with places even roughly comparable in terms of development.

Then i posted an easy to digest/read overview of how the US stacks up with other developed countries in a number of important categories that allow for a pretty straight forward and factual comparison. And in none of these do they come out on top, much less in the sum of all categories. In fact they rank closer to the bottom and below average in most categories when compared with a group of countries that includes many countries that shouldn't even be close to the US.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Your first link just refers to Health?

Your second shows US data?

I really don't want this to be nebulous. Why can't you just list your 5?

Do you really want me to pick India which is on your first link?

There is no "my 5" because that isn't the bloody point and it really doesn't do the subject justice to simplify it in that way I won't go on and on about how one or the other can't be correct since not all 5 measure above the US in all categories. Which no 5 likely do. But which also isn't the point. Just like a 41-41 NBA team is still average even if it manages to beat the Warriors once during the season.

I think i have linked enough comparative material to show that there is a substantial number (more than 5) of countries consistently ranking considerably ahead in a substantial number of categories to be considered ahead of the US rather than light years behind.

My first link has already been posted a page ago and then twice over and it compares among a wide spread of categories.

As for my 2nd set of links: I figured health would deserve a 2nd seperate link based on the same data, feels kind of an important factor when it comes to questions of quality of live ... And the other link shows the US ranking in all categories compared to all other OECD countries. It places a single Subject within a group of Subjects within a statistical analysis. Making it much easier to navigate rather than having to pull of every category and then locate the US' place in the rankings.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I will say Ireland surprised me in the list of indicators. Higher GDP per capita (PPP) than the US and a lower Gini Coefficient (Switzerland also does the same, but that's more expected I think). I had heard Ireland got hit hard by the 2008 crisis - it appears it has rebounded quite significantly.

yeah, same for me. Ireland has definitely come a long way in a very short time. And not just in a few categories and/or areas of life. Lots of investment in recreational avenues as well, marked progress socially and a very active younger generation in terms of political and social activity. Might even actually profit from the UK heading into the Iceberg named Brexit, at least that's what a friend of mine keeps telling me whose studying economics and specialises on the british isles
Similar narrative goes for Iceland. In general i think that the smaller and more "cohesive" countries have an easier time shaking off these crises due to having a lot less 'inertia' when it comes to adjusting economical policies and implementing them.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by whomario

And just to be super clear here: I never even said the US isn't a "pretty desirable place to live", especially in the grand scheme of things. The point was that it is pretty ignorant to think it is far and above every other country when there is just an abundance of facts pointing to the opposite assumption when comparing the US with places even roughly comparable in terms of development.

When I said one of the greatest place to be, you had some sarcasm and then said "but do you have any contemporary statistics/research to back this up?".

It does sound as if you are saying the US is not that desirable of a place to live?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward64 View Post
And yet the vast majority of people when asked where, want to immigrate to the US. Far and above any other country.

Warts and all, when taken as a whole. One of the greatest place to be.

Later on you continued on "facts". You provide a "sustainability study" as your facts to justify your position.

I provided facts with links that show the vast majority of the world want to immigrate to the US "warts and all". I replied to your sustainability study ...

How does "life below water" or "climate action" apply other than in the cerebral sense? Under nutrition, it talks about obesity ... so what, why is this a big deal in the context of our discussion?

This seems to be more of a elitist first world's achieve Maslow's "self actualization" than a "hey what is a country I want to immigrate/live in because I think my family and I will do best there".

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Well of course YOU don't, because that's what you are planning on doing! Instead of dealing with his substantive issues, you've gone into a name your 5 rut and when someone has mentioned some, you go "I have some thoughts on these"

It's only a rut because he hasn't answered the question after 5 requests?

I honestly need something solid to understand his point of view. I had a better understanding of Radii when he came up with his list. He may not agree with my counters but at least there was something to react to.

Whomario seemed to have provided "Chile, Poland, Estonia or Mexico" as countries he thinks are better than the US as more desirable? (trying to confirm)

I think Mexico/Chile is pretty far out (don't know much about Estonia) but it may just be me.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by whomario

There is no "my 5" because that isn't the bloody point and it really doesn't do the subject justice to simplify it in that way I won't go on and on about how one or the other can't be correct since not all 5 measure above the US in all categories. Which no 5 likely do. But which also isn't the point. Just like a 41-41 NBA team is still average even if it manages to beat the Warriors once during the season.

You said you didn't say the "US wasn't a desirable place to live" and I think you did (see above post).

If you don't think the US is a desirable place to live, you must think there are plenty of others.

Asking for 5 specific ones allows to level set before continuing the discussion (vs potentially a moving target re: whatabout this other country).

If you really didn't say (or mean to say) the "US wasn't a desirable place to live", then lost of wasted time today.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by whomario

Because i went straight there and it wasn't my 4th post basically explaining the same thing only to be told repeatedly that essentially the facts and figures are some sort of interesting, but ultimately nonconsequential cutesy opinion in the grand scheme of things that could maybe warrant a closer look if we manage to agree that they are indeed kinda sorta relevant. (not counting at least one other thread where the same user pretty much danced around similar topics with the same magnanimous tone. Not everything is varying degrees of "interesting". Some things are also true or wrong. Even in an age of alternate facts)

Not to mention it sounded a lot like the user in question suggested that discarding 3rd world countries in a comparison with the US makes the argument either not sensible or makes it an expression of thinly veiled racism and/or elitism on my/our part.

I get that it is frustrating to discuss something with someone who doesn't seem to be arguing the facts you are presenting or having the kind of rational discourse you're seeking. But when you go the "you really don't get..." you're using a passive aggressive form of calling him an idiot. I just think if you can't avoid going that route, you should just walk away from the discussion. It's clear at that point you two aren't going to have a meeting of the minds.

I feel like I see this sorta thing from a lot of posters here now.

[whomario]

You listed studies showing where people want to go, a "want" that is based on incomplete knowlegde and/or personal reasons/contact via media.

I also didn't link a sustainability study but an analysis of the categories set forth by the UN as a way to judge the development of countries on their road to sustainability. Which kinda is something one might want to be.

And thinking that preservation of the marine environment or climate action is merely cerebral and is not kinda important to the quality of live in the near future at the very least (and i am talking in a decade or two, not centuries from now), i don't even know where to start ... Let's get practical: they don't refer to dive tourism, but the fact that a ton of food comes from there. Climate action also includes a lot of measurements improving live right now, for example promote/support sustainable energy or less exhaust from cars. Both of which improves the air quality in big cities which again seems kind of a worthwhile goal.
And Obesity is a) an indicator to a flawed "system" based on a lack of information/education and b) leads to a variety of health related problems, which again the US isn't as well equipped to handle as it should be.

But if all you want to hear is that the US is 1) that many people still want to go to, is 2) a place that is better than the majority of countries where immigrants do come from and can 3) be a great place right now in the right situation ? Sure. Don't think anybody can argue against that.

But when measuring it against other developed western countries, the quality of life for the grand sum of it's citizens in terms of prosperity, education, health and safety ? It's objectively lagging behind a substantial number of them.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I feel like I see this sorta thing from a lot of posters here now.

If you hang around with idiots for 15 years, eventually you get tired of their idiocy?

[whomario]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I get that it is frustrating to discuss something with someone who doesn't seem to be arguing the facts you are presenting or having the kind of rational discourse you're seeking. But when you go the "you really don't get..." you're using a passive aggressive form of calling him an idiot. I just think if you can't avoid going that route, you should just walk away from the discussion. It's clear at that point you two aren't going to have a meeting of the minds.

I feel like I see this sorta thing from a lot of posters here now.

I do see your point, that's fair.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by whomario

You listed studies showing where people want to go, a "want" that is based on incomplete knowlegde and/or personal reasons/contact via media.

I think this is a fair statement. I don't think it invalidates the conclusion. It may be incomplete but that doesn't mean its not accurate.

Are you then saying if people had perfect information, they would pick Mexico or Chile instead of the US? Because I would dispute that and conclude something(s) is missing from your study.

Originally Posted by whomario

I also didn't link a sustainability study but an analysis of the categories set forth by the UN as a way to judge the development of countries on their road to sustainability. Which kinda is something one might want to be.

This is the link you posted https://qz.com/879092/the-us-doesnt-...loped-country/

There is a link in there with the 17 categories Sustainable Development Goals .:. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform

It analyzes the US based on these sustainability categories. I don't understand the nuance, it seems as if it is a sustainability study that was used to compare the US to other countries.

Originally Posted by whomario

And thinking that preservation of the marine environment or climate action is merely cerebral and is not kinda important to the quality of live in the near future at the very least (and i am talking in a decade or two, not centuries from now), i don't even know where to start ... Let's get practical: they don't refer to dive tourism, but the fact that a ton of food comes from there. Climate action also includes a lot of measurements improving live right now, for example promote/support sustainable energy or less exhaust from cars. Both of which improves the air quality in big cities which again seems kind of a worthwhile goal.
And Obesity is a) an indicator to a flawed "system" based on a lack of information/education and b) leads to a variety of health related problems, which again the US isn't as well equipped to handle as it should be.

Let's agree to disagree here. Way too cerebral and long term for what most immigrant people want for their lives. I contend you are at the top of Maslow and most are still looking at a couple rungs down.

Originally Posted by whomario

But if all you want to hear is that the US is 1) that many people still want to go to, is 2) a place that is better than the majority of countries where immigrants do come from and can 3) be a great place right now in the right situation ? Sure. Don't think anybody can argue against that.

I happy with this agreement but would update and say "most people still want to go to by far" (per my links).

Originally Posted by whomario

But when measuring it against other developed western countries, the quality of life for the grand sum of it's citizens in terms of prosperity, education, health and safety ? It's objectively lagging behind a substantial number of them.

I'm willing to have this discussion if you add "citizens and minorities/immigrants". I think it'll be educational for me.

Here are a couple quick questions to show my hand ...

1) Do you think immigrants or first-gen immigrants have this same level of prosperity in France or Greece?
2) How welcoming are immigrants or first-gen immigrants in Finland?
3) Are there any domestic Nordic companies that have minorities as CEO's?

My POV

The US is pretty diverse. Immigrants and minorities definitely help but honestly sometimes hurt. I am not blaming all immigrants (I am one myself) and I don't know where the balance/cut-off is.

Are some of these less diverse Nordic countries better ranked than the US because of their lack of diversity? I don't know but it would be interesting to understand if there may be a relationship.

Hence my request to factor in minorities/immigration into our analysis and not just citizens.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I get that it is frustrating to discuss something with someone who doesn't seem to be arguing the facts you are presenting or having the kind of rational discourse you're seeking. But when you go the "you really don't get..." you're using a passive aggressive form of calling him an idiot. I just think if you can't avoid going that route, you should just walk away from the discussion. It's clear at that point you two aren't going to have a meeting of the minds.

I feel like I see this sorta thing from a lot of posters here now.

I really don't think you get the point of arguing on the internet.

[JPhillips]

Woah. Larry Kudlow has had a heart attack and is at Walter Reed.

God bless.

[Edward64]

I sense another clarification coming from Bill.

Norms have changed meaning previously it would be okay?

Why doesn't he just clam up.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/11/polit...ent/index.html

Former President Bill Clinton suggested the "norms have changed" in society for what "you can do to somebody against their will" in response to a question about former Minnesota Sen. Al Franken's resignation from Congress following sexual harassment allegations.

"I think the norms have really changed in terms of, what you can do to somebody against their will, how much you can crowd their space, make them miserable at work," Clinton told PBS Newshour in an interview that aired Thursday. "You don't have to physically assault somebody to make them, you know, uncomfortable at work or at home or in their other -- just walking around. That, I think, is good."

Clinton's remarks come amidst a series of media appearances promoting a new book he co-authored with legendary novelist James Patterson. Last Monday, he had to clarify remarks he made to NBC, where he defended himself from criticism of his 1995 affair with then-White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

[JPhillips]

The USA and NK as equals. Why would we agree to this?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The USA and NK as equals. Why would we agree to this?

I think its a good die roll.

[Thomkal]

(just kidding)



Damn that Larry Kudlow for upstaging me on my biggest moment

[JPhillips]

He starves and kills his own people. Even if he gives up nukes, which I can't imagine he will, he's still one of the worst leaders in the world. We're putting him on equal footing with the USA.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

He starves and kills his own people. Even if he gives up nukes, which I can't imagine he will, he's still one of the worst leaders in the world. We're putting him on equal footing with the USA.

Might be more ashamed than ever to be an American seeing deal with this dictator .

[Edward64]

Minute is up. Wonder what he thinks?

My prediction is "Trump will say crazy kid is serious" and continue to build off this. Too much good press for him so far.

So what if he really isn't, Trump will find a way to say it wasn't his fault.

[miked]

Man, I'm so old I remember when republicans were up in arms about Obama saying he would meet with leaders of Iran and NK.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by miked

Man, I'm so old I remember when republicans were up in arms about Obama saying he would meet with leaders of Iran and NK.

So you're like 12 or something?

[Radii]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

He starves and kills his own people. Even if he gives up nukes, which I can't imagine he will, he's still one of the worst leaders in the world. We're putting him on equal footing with the USA.

He has full and complete power over his people, Trump admires this and perhaps even envies it.