You don't speak for all or even most Americans. A majority of US voters selected Donald Trump as their President. I'm pleased with the President's pushback on the disrespectful, high-pressure bargaining tactics Zelensky tried to use today in front of the press at the White House.
Under half of voters selected him - roughly a quarter of the population - and many of them claim to have done so on the basis of the policy positions he made during the campaign which have been reversed (Canada, Gaza, Ukraine, Project 2025, etc.).
You're right, he won 49.7% of the popular vote compared to Kamala Harris' 48.4%. Many states like Arizona and California took weeks to finish counting and I had not checked the final numbers.
If you're curious how most Americans feel now, you can read about Trump's approval ratings here; currently his poll results are net-favorable:
Do you not see the incredible irony accusing Zelenskyy of "disrespectful, high-pressure bargaining tactics"??
His country has been under attack by an authoritarian government for YEARS, and the problem is that he's not "respectful enough" for you? What happened to "facts don't care about your feelings"?
It's "facts don't care about your feelings". As the originator of the quote shows himself, his feelings are still very important and must be cared for.
What does this have to do with the fact that Trump and Co are complaining about their hurt feelings while pretending they were the party that valued facts over feelings?
The fact is, this problem is proving a lot harder to solve than just "get a deal done" like Trump and Co promised us
Trump behaved like a petulant fool. If you don't know it, let me tell you, every foreign government on the planet and their diplomatic corps knows it. Shouting over someone speaking your language at a public meeting was such a god damned embarrassment for the country. A total lack of decorum, a total lack of diplomacy, a total lack of understanding or control of themselves or the situation. He's not fit to run a McDonalds.
> the disrespectful, high-pressure bargaining tactics Zelensky tried to use today
Such as? All I heard was him asking how an agreement or deal would help when the history of Ukraine-Russia deals has always ended up with Ukraine being invaded more
Why couldn't what Zelensky did be equally described as "appealing to the American people"? After all, aren't we a democracy? The President is supposed to represent us, and thus be receptive to such appeals. If it so happens that the appeal persuades Americans, the President should follow suit.
Dissuading and choking off appeals to the people suggests to me that the President is highly insecure in his position. People in secure positions don't get offended or upset when people appeal to their bosses (i.e., us).
Calling the recently-elected Vice President of the United States "bitch" in Russian, on camera, in the White House, was probably not the right way to appeal to the American people.
I've read it was more like cursing at a situation, not calling someone a name. As if I said "son of a bitch" when reading comments that defend Russia and attack Ukraine.
For a foreign head of state in the White House on a state visit sitting next to the President in front of cameras, you mean? Or did you mean someone else in an entirely different context?
You’re grasping at straws, I’m afraid. (Even if he did mutter it under his breath, by then, the boorish behavior by Vance and the President was well under way.)
Can you kindly answer the question presented? When—before this testy tirade began—was Zelensky disrespectful, and how? When considering your answer, what makes Zelensky’s behavior different from anyone else’s who wished to plead their case to the American people, which has been done throughout history without incurring similar drama and blowback?
What in the heck are you on about? "I'm talking about the kind of diplomacy that will end the destruction in your country" was what our VP said to kick off the spat.
"high-pressure bargaining tactics," get that terrible characterization out of here. Zelensky didn't kiss the ring and our representatives acted like little baby children when he corrected them gently on the actual history of diplomacy in that region since 2014.
You are denigrating anyone who has ever made a sacrifice to the USA if you think this extortive BS is appropriate American diplomacy, and you should be ashamed. You need to do better.
Whoa—swipes like this will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong someone is or you feel they are. Please don't post any more of this. Your comment would have been just fine without it. (Well, that and the "little baby bitches".)
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, that would be good. I don't want to ban you and we've had to ask you this before.
I appreciate the response! However it looks like I didn't explain the point clearly. I'll try again. (sorry, this is going to be kind of long...)
The problem isn't profanity and the solution isn't sanitization. Rather, the problem is crossing into pejoratives and/or name-calling and/or being aggressive to other commenters. And the solution is to edit all that out.
When you make edits like these:
WTF are you talking about? -> What in the heck are you on about?
get the fuck out of here -> get that terrible characterization out of here
You are pissing on anyone -> You are denigrating anyone
... you've sanitized the profanity, but your comment is still pejorative and swipey in the way the site guidelines are asking you (not you personally, of course! I mean all of us) to avoid.
Also, I totally missed this in the original post—this is another one:
> you should be ashamed. You need to do better.
The way to follow the site guidelines is to edit out swipes and take out pejoratives (especially personal ones). There are lots of ways to do that, but in case it's helpful, here's one:
"I'm talking about the kind of diplomacy that will end the destruction in your country" was what our VP said to kick off the spat.
"High-pressure bargaining tactics" is not accurate. Zelensky didn't kiss the ring and our representatives reacted angrily when he corrected them gently on the actual history of diplomacy in that region since 2014.
That is extortive, not appropriate American diplomacy.
I don't mean to tell you how to edit your own post! I just thought a concrete example might be helpful. In any case, if you'd posted that or anything similar, I wouldn't have responded with a mod reply.
A nice side effect of doing this kind of editing is that it makes your comments more persuasive, by both polishing and sharpening your argument.
I'll go through the guidelines again, obviously I hadn't yet since my edits. Your house, your rules and I'll try to make sure to depersonalize my displeasure in the future.
well then i’m even more ashamed of my country lol. high pressure?
JD vance calling the guest out for being disrespectful in front of the media. Trump not letting the guest talk at all. did we watch the same video? Hilarious take.
i also saw the full 1 hour segment and i think it was overall pretty cordial. I’m specifically referring to this heated exchange (the short clip).
I guess we all see what we want to see. We have biases after all.
At the end of the day it doesn’t matter whose fault it is, I just find it interesting that Zelensky is having no problem talking politics with other countries (excluding russia). See the recent emergency summit in europe as an example. Why is that? Are we as americans that difficult to work with? If so - why is that? Do we want to be left with 0 allies after all is said and done? As Zelensky alluded, nobody is #1 forever, and pretending you will be (and treating all your allies like shit) is probably not a smart long term strategy?
Dang,
thanks for stepping in here, and as always, for the unseen work you do behind the scenes keeping the trolls at bay.
Regarding political posts since inauguration, can you explain this, because I am flumoxed:
- on the one hand, there's been a huge surge in clamoring about posts critical of the new administration being flagged
- on the other hand, when such posts have not been flagged, they have consistently and overwhelmingly been dominated by one-sided comments critical of the new administration, while the vast majority of counterargument comments become greyed out, and quite quickly.
- a large portion of that one-sided piling on shows utter disregard for the HN guidelines, esp.:
"Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes."
I grew up in East Germany, fwiw. The things I have pointed out here remind me more of the bad old days there than the spirit of independent inquiry, individualism and fairness that I associate with the best of America.
