Whatever Atrocity is Next... - Trump Thread #154

[Spandauer]

I actually put this as a 'placeholder' title whilst I tried to think of a better one. But then, on reflection, copy editing didn't seem necessary.

Previous thread:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5479042-blackmail-bluster-and-batshit-bonkers-trump-thread-153

It’s such a freighted expression. Be nice, sweet, don’t raise your voice, be always amenable and pleasant for the men. 🤮🤮🤮

We are hurtling back to the 1970s. It is so depressing

🤞🤞🤞🤞

I grew up in the 70s. This is worse.

The thing is that while Trump IS the useful idiot , Miller and Vance etc don’t have that. ( inexplicable to me) hold on the racist, hard of thinking fan base

I was a child in the 70s. I think women’s experience of the world then . And before, was hideous. As a child I didn’t catch on to all or most of it

No financial independence, young women and girls seen as total fair game and blamed for sexual assault and violence meted on them .

Donestic abuse was completely unrecognized or a joke

Rape in marriage was only criminalized in 1991.

As a young woman at University in the mid 80s I thought those days were over 😵‍💫

Oh it wasn't a golden age. But it was tempered with a clear view of it improving.

In 2026, I see nothing to suggest womens rights have gone backwards.

Well you have your view and I will have mine

Where Harry Hill ?

I grew up in the Sixties and came of age in the Seventies. I’m not sure which is worse - except that this is another case where history ought not to be repeating itself, which I suppose is what does make it worse now, if you see what I mean?

This is worse. The 1970s led to progress. This BS is simply regressive.

Another scary prospect explained in this video - and we know they are enacting 'Project 2025' stuff, so this isn't 'scaremongering'. Basically making it economically impossible for women to exist without a man (or I guess their parents) in an attempt to force early marriage and childbirth (only if heterosexual, of course), and reducing childcare availability so women can't work, although they'll get some piffling tax credit for being stay at home mums. And no IVF, that's cheating and makes women put off having kids. Essentially sounds like a charter for abusive men: 'Wanna move out of mum and dads? Better have babies with me then, but, like, you'll never be able to leave'

Makes being a gay female couple almost impossible too.

I gotta say, I don't think they've thought this through because a lot of women will just choose not to have kids if it means no financial independence at all and also I can't imagine they're planning to pay men twice as much, so the men will be screwed over by having to doi twice the work for no more pay and having to support a family on it.

Well, it is the Party in charge of the US, and it does campaign at a local, state, and national level to "bring the Bible back".

And going by the last 100 years or so of world history, once theocracy gets a handhold, it does not let go.

So with those 2 bits, I agree with @Serpentstooth

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2026/feb/04/donald-trump-epstein-files-us-politics-live-latest-news-updates

Wipe that smile from your face.

Yes, you’re right. It’s what I was trying to say but more succinct!

Maybe we should start calling him DONzymandias.

Nothing to see here.

Meanwhile, going by PMQs an hour ago, I see no way for Starmer to survive this. Starmer needs to be gone.

OK. I thought this was a bit vulgar to post, but you talked me into it.

It'll probably take a bit to post. This one will have to get through the mods. Plus I've marked it 'sensitive.

Yep. My teen daughters have fewer rights in the US than I did there as a teen in the 1990s.

It would be lost on him. He thinks shelly is the guy who passes him peanuts.

I am reminded of "You make a desert and call it peace"

I was listening to a historian on the radio, who said that once an autocrat is voted in, on average, their regime is in for 30 years (47 and counting for Iran…).

Here is an interesting one, just out.

Trump reveals first look at his massive $300,000,000 White House ballroom | News US | Metro News

So I think this is the 2nd or third version I have seen. Getting bigger all the time. He is going to have this built, all lined in gold, for 300 mil and in 2 years?

Will the next rendering issued next week be even bigger ?

Why has he forgotten to put his 200 foot gold crapto statue in ?

"They plunder, they butcher, they ravish, and call it by the lying name of 'empire'"

Tacitus' speech is rather apropos, isn't it?

McConnell is rapidly approaching Thurmond territory. I expect we'll see him being wheeled into the Senate Chamber with a drool cup before he's through.

A king needs a palace!

That's succumbing to the right wing media playbook. From 2015 to 2024 when the Tories were in Government, there were 5 changes of Prime minister - three from 2019 to 2024.

It's up to Starmer whether he goes or not. Perhaps this is the time but you can be sure that the right wing MSM will make much capital on it. Especially Farage and his bigly pal Trump.