Trump- how low can he go?

[The Romulan Republic]

Surely to be replaced by someone equally terrible. Meh.

Perhaps, but Bannon seemed horrible even by Trump Administration standards. He's basically a white supremacist propagandist/apocalypse prophet, who was openly pushing the idea that war with China and the entire Muslim world is inevitable.

[Admiral X]

Personally, I'd like another TR to shake things up.

[Durandal_1707]

Teddy's all right in my book.

[The Romulan Republic]

Its my understanding that Teddy was quite the imperialist warmonger, but domestically, he seems to have been quite good (and nothing at all like contemporary Republicans).

Aaannnyway... Nunes has recused himself. This, coming right after the Great Bannon Booting, is the best news I've seen in a while.

[Durandal_1707]

Yeah, come to think of it, that is true. We mostly tend to think of his domestic policies when we think of TR, because his presidency came at a time of relative peace, when no major wars were going on (other than the Philippine-American war, but no one ever knows about that one). So yeah, that part of TR could get ugly quick. Domestically, though, he was a breath of fresh air.

[Admiral X]

If you think he was nothing but a warmonger, you have very little historical knowledge of TR and are probably basing this off of his pre-Presidential stances. During his Presidency, he was actually known as something of a peacemaker. We came pretty close to war with Germany in 1903 over an attempt by them to ignore the Monroe Doctrine, but he negotiated a way for Germany to back out and save face at the same time. He also helped to negotiate peace between Japan and Russia. That's not to say he was without fault, but he's far more complex than the cowboy he's often made out to be.

[Durandal_1707]

Well, and his post-Presidential stances, being as he was one of the most prominent voices clamoring for the US to enter WWI as soon as it began.

[SuccubusYuri]

Surely to be replaced by someone equally terrible. Meh.

Perhaps, but Bannon seemed horrible even by Trump Administration standards. He's basically a white supremacist propagandist/apocalypse prophet, who was openly pushing the idea that war with China and the entire Muslim world is inevitable.

Word on that, at least from the spins, McMasters has a view in line with Bannon, so Bannon's presence is no longer required. The story goes Bannon was appointed as a check on Flynn, to make sure Trump's agenda of pushing for a smaller NSC and more streamlined think tank would go through.

...Which of course raises the question that if Flynn was so unreliable, why was Bannon necessary in the first place? Perhaps it was a favor? Understanding that there were forces that Trump needed to get elected and moving, who were more happy with Flynn? If that's so, it would have had to have been a pretty hefty favor to compel Trump to appoint a national security adviser who would be prone to telling the president "No" with his structural reforms, wouldn't it?

I mean Trump has very few actual points to get done, but the "smaller government" one has been his unifying force with the Freedom Caucus. Flynn seems like a completely illogical choice if the current spindoctors are correct.

[Admiral X]

It amuses me how often Republicans speak of smaller government considering how seldom they live up to that talk.