International confidence in the American president

Confidence in Trump remains low internationally

I would take a sceptical attitude as reasonable except these parts of the Anglosphere and the former members of the nation states that once comprised Western Civilisation are filled with people who are saturated in ignorance and lacking in common sense. They are impervious to the dangers they were led into by Obama and the left in general, and are fearful of the actions taken by Donald Trump. This  in fact goes beyond mere ignorance into a kind of cultish stupidity that makes no sense on any level.

The ABC, and the media overall, are filled with people whose only stock in trade are their opinions. They support mass murderers who would snuff out their lives without hesitation, and snuff out their culture as well if they could.

If not Donald Trump, who do they think would do better? Hillary? Bernie? Calling them clueless is too good for them.

Here by the way is the source of the chart. And here is the president’s address this morning on Iran.

This entry was posted in International. Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to International confidence in the American president

  1. stackja

    The world opinion of DT based on MSM reports about DT, of course, would be as revealed.

  2. I went through the report in the link but couldn’t find where they derived the term ‘confidence’, unless I missed it. Did they actually ask those surveyed whether they had confidence in trump or was this outcome decided from the various other metrics and converted into a ‘confidence’ vote?

    Merkel, Macron and Putin rate higher than Trump, who is just above Xi Jinping. Who were surveyed? It looks like they surveyed the EU assembly. Seems likely with the major policies surveyed. Boris Johnson would have probably tied with Trump.

    It’s more like TDS survey, to prove what we already know.

  3. 2dogs

    At first glance, there appears to be a correlation between Trump confidence figures and economic growth.

    It would be interesting to do a plot and check the residuals.

  4. struth

    Yeah, surveys and polls……………………………………………………….yawn.
    MSM propaganda.

  5. Bruce of Newcastle

    MSM here in Oz is entirely antagonistic to Trump. Even the commercial channels. It’s amazing that the number for Oz is as high as it is in the face of all that leftist propaganda.

  6. struth

    Not just MSM.
    I said to Mrs S last night, we’ll turn on the Melbourne comedy festival until it shows it’s leftist activism.
    Fist sentence I turned it off.

    The left are insane with rage.
    They are screaming but no one is listening.
    It’s not woking er working anymore

  7. It’s amazing that the number for Oz is as high as it is in the face of all that leftist propaganda.

    You may find that the figure is much higher than that, it’s simply that many people no longer express their true feelings and thoughts. It also depends on who were asked.

  8. Dr Faustus

    “Confidence in Trump” might better be described as ‘uncertainty’.

    Trump has broken the mould on so much that pundits, marinaded in traditional US policy approaches, have no idea what to expect. And, having to rely on assessment (often coloured by personal distaste for the man), rather than conventional precedent, flounder in judgement.

  9. Iampeter

    I do love when cultist Trump supporters call anyone cultish.

    But not as much as I love Trump supporters believing themselves to be opposing politicians like Bernie or Hillary.
    Why? Are they not buffoon and clownish enough for a Trump supporters refined taste?
    Because policy wise Trump is as left wing as the best of them.

    If the reason for that needs to be explained, then maybe you shouldn’t be blogging about politics.

  10. John A

    2dogs #3287088, posted on January 9, 2020 at 12:05 pm

    At first glance, there appears to be a correlation between Trump confidence figures and economic growth.

    It would be interesting to do a plot and check the residuals

    Ignoring pebbles above, do you mean that, given the collectivist bias of the “survey takers”, you might expect an inverse correlation between the values expressed in the results chart above and the economic performance of nations not using Keynesian centralist policies?

    Whereas a positive correlation might subsist between the chart results and those nations fully implementing Keynesian centralist policies?

  11. Tim Neilson

    It’s time to trial the Iamashiteater Bullshit Bingo card (generic).If you don’t feel like articulating in detail why Iamashiteater’s drivel is erroneous, you can still let him know you’re onto him by playing Iamashiteater Bullshit Bingo.
    Thanks to Fencesitter for a useful suggestion. If there’s any facet of Iamashiteater’s conceit, ignorance, stupidity and dishonesty that’s not covered, let me know and I’ll modify future versions.
    You know the format. When Iamashiteater posts some bullshit, save time and trouble by identifying the type by reference to the list below. (There may be more than one point per bullshit comment.)
    1. REPELLENT DELUSIONS OF SUPERIORITY – e.g. strutting onto the thread and denouncing others as “confused”, ignorant etc.
    2. HYPOCRITICAL SELF PITY – despite his incessant predilection for 1. and for other abuse, he dissolves into whining about other people criticising him (even where all they’re doing is calling out his bullshit).
    3. UTTERLY FALSE FACTUAL ASSERTIONS – no explanation necessary.
    4. UNSUBSTANTIATED ABSOLUTISM SELF-BECLOWNMENT – he issues some dogmatic absolutist decree, then someone asks him how it applies to some perfectly valid specific scenario, and he either flails around hopelessly or puts on an embarrassing display of dissembling or stubborn stupidity.
    5. EPIC BACKFLIPS – e.g. claiming that there are plenty of examples to support his assertion, then claiming that the lack of examples somehow justifies his position.
    6. EPIC LOGIC FAILS – of all sorts. His “existence exists!” bullshit alone qualifies him as the world’s worst ever logician.
    7. WILFUL IGNORANCE – e.g. pontificating over several threads about tech giants and defamation laws without ever once having looked at the “subordinate distributor” exemptions in the uniform defamation laws (despite being repeatedly referred to them).
    8. SHEER MEGALOMANIA e.g. asserting that WN Hohfeld and Sir John Salmond have no idea about “rights”. Generally claiming that the mere fact he’s asserted something is proof of it.
    9. DENIAL OF REALITY – e.g. he starts by asserting that proposition X is true because of some assertion as ridiculous as “2+2=5”; someone points out the equivalent of “2+2=4”; later in the thread, or on a subsequent thread, he claims that no-one has refuted his arguments.
    10. DISHONESTY ABOUT HIS OWN COMMENTS e.g. as in 9, but he denies having said 2+2=5 (despite the proof being available earlier in the thread or on a prior thread).
    11. NARCISSISM – he posts his tired, stale, repeatedly and incontrovertibly refuted bullshit, then when every other commenter ignores him out of sheer boredom and contempt, he announces that the lack of response somehow proves his assertions.
    12. ASSUMING THAT ATTACHING A LABEL TO SOMETHING OR SOMEONE PROVES SOME POINT. E.g. “Leftist”, “collectivist” etc. Also as in 9, when in response to his “2+2=5” someone points out that 2+2=4, and he says “That’s a non sequitur”.
    13. FALSELY ACCUSING OTHERS OF HIS OWN FAULTS – e.g. when he’s called out for his stupidity, ignorance, mental deficiency and conceit and he goes for one of his favourite words – “projecting”, with zero evidence to back it up. Or beginning a screaming fit of hysterics by asserting that someone else is “triggered”.
    14. CIRCLING BACK TO PREVIOUSLY REFUTED BULLSHIT – often in conjunction with 9.
    15. GUTLESS EVASION – e.g. having been utterly humiliated and refuted he just announces ex cathedra that he’s won the argument.
    16. CHILDISH TANTRUM THROWING – when all else fails (or just in conjunction with any of the above). E.g, often in conjunction with 15, he flounces off the thread with a few parting falsehoods and insults.

  12. Tim Neilson

    Iampeter
    #3287192, posted on January 9, 2020 at 1:42 pm

    1

  13. Cui Bono

    High figures considering the MSM trashing. Must try harder

  14. Tim Neilson

    Interesting that it’s only 20% in Wussia Wussia Wussia even though The Donald and Vladimir are apparently besties, sharing election-rigging plots etc.
    You would have thought that the Wussians would have shown more respect for one of Vladimir’s close allies.
    Or is the 20% result some sort of deeply cunning disinformation strategy?

  15. John A

    The President seems to speak with conviction – almost ten minutes without notes and even without a teleprompter that I can see.

  16. Professor afred Lenin

    Saw an interview on youtube , English lefty journalist with Marine le Pen ,he described her as leader of an extreme right party ,in other words anti communist global fascist,populist French peoples party .
    He quoted poll figures to score a gotcha Marine laughed “you are English and you believe polls ?Incroyable !! .polls wasnt shortass going to win the last election ?

  17. Bazinga

    Interesting numbers from Kenya given his predecessor.

  18. Jo Smyth

    I think Trumps aims during his first term were to strengthen the American economy, Judiciary and military and win over the minds of more of the minority. This he has done. His second term will be to deal with the institutions, mainly the fake media and education. It’s all part of the plan.

  19. FelixKruell

    They are impervious to the dangers they were led into by Obama and the left in general, and are fearful of the actions taken by Donald Trump. This in fact goes beyond mere ignorance into a kind of cultish stupidity that makes no sense on any level.

    They survived Obama. They seem afraid they might not survive Trump.

    Oh and the lack of self awareness in calling those people ‘cultish’ is just delicious…

  20. JC

    Plodes

    You are an subjectivist. It’s the very definition of a cult, you ridiculous wanker.

    Yes, it’s a cult Kruell. Sure. One likes the things he does at times and you refer to that a cult. You are such a dickhead.

  21. Spurgeon Monkfish III

    Oz 35% – WTF?

    The highest rating in the Yanglosphere (well, apart from Kenya, Nigeria, Inja and Sud Efrica).

  22. 2dogs

    do you mean that, given the collectivist bias of the “survey takers”, you might expect an inverse correlation between the values expressed in the results chart above and the economic performance of nations not using Keynesian centralist policies?

    I simply used my knowledge of recent economic growth figures in various countries. I did not consider what policies may have caused that economic growth. I suspect if Keynesian policies were an underlying factor i e would leave a “fingerprint” in the residuals.

  23. Mique

    What a heap of irrelevant bullshit that survey is. Apart from anything else, who defines the “right thing regarding world affairs”? And why should Trump care what Lower Slobovia’s (or its analogue, Australia’s) opinion is?

  24. jupes

    His second term will be to deal with the institutions, mainly the fake media and education.

    We can only hope.

  25. Iampeter

    Wow, Tim. You need to get your autistic projection exercise into a more concise form.

    Boy oh boy do I live in your head rent free…

  26. JC

    stfu plodes. Hand over the computer to the orderly and head back the the padded room.

  27. Remember when Obama used the IRS to target political groups he didn’t like?

    Give us a reminder when Trump is caught out doing the same, plodes.

  28. nb

    struth #3287108, posted on January 9, 2020 at 12:28 pm says:

    ‘we’ll turn on the Melbourne comedy festival until it shows it’s leftist activism.’
    Fist sentence I turned it off.

    I play that game too, with all sorts of media/performances. Another game, while channel flicking in the car, is to listen to the ABC as long as it takes to reach the word ‘community’. Often seconds. There’s also the ‘íncrease government funding’ game, probably best played on Radio National. It’d be a terrible torture to play, but the tally for each day, and the year, would be fun to know.

  29. Scott Osmond

    Ah, and right on cue plodes the secretist of all secret kings shows up to tell the whole thread that only he knows the truth. After the 6th or 7th month of this it gets tiresome.
    As for DJT the only confidence that matters is that of the 128 million or so Americans that choose to show up on election day. For the rest of us it’s just entertainment. I’m sure that the yanks will put on quite a show this year. Stocking up for November. It will be enjoyable to watch the excuses from the democratic activists with bylines when the GEOTUS maintains the mandate of heaven.

  30. max

    A Lawless Political Assassination
    By Andrew P. Napolitano
    January 9, 2020

    The president has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution. The Constitution provides only two means for the federal government to kill a human being. The first is pursuant to a declaration of war, which only Congress can do. That permits the president to use the military to kill the troops of the government of the country against which war has been declared. Congress has not declared war on Iran.

    The second way that the Constitution permits federal government killings is pursuant to due process. That means that the person to be killed is lawfully in custody, has been properly charged, lawfully tried and fairly convicted of a capital crime, and the conviction has been upheld on appeal.

    The Donald’s Assassination of General Soleimani – As Stupid as It Gets
    By David Stockman

    We have long believed that there is nothing stupider in Washington than the neocon policy mafia that has wrecked such unspeakable havoc on the middle east as well as upon American servicemen and taxpayers who have been marched time and again into the jaws of their folly.

    But, now, the Donald has single-handedly given even neocon stupidity a run for the money.

  31. Iampeter

    Ah yes the Babyon Bee is a great site, but it has a thing or two to learn about comedy from the Cat.

  32. Elderly White Man From Skipton

    Collateral damage
    JOHN R. BRADLEY

    A blood-red flag was raised over the Jamkaran mosque in the Iranian holy city of Qom last week, one normally reserved to commemorate the death of martyrs. This time, it was intended as a call to arms. ‘We have unfurled this flag so that all [Shia] believers in the world gather around it to avenge Qassem Soleimani’s blood unjustly shed,’ said the mosque’s leader. In Tehran, there were calls for bloody retribution for the air strike that killed Iranian general Soleimani — and everywhere, talk of all-out war. If it was also intended to strike the fear of Allah into the hearts of Iran’s Sunni Arab enemies, it certainly succeeded.

    In Riyadh, there was panic. The Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, hastily sent an anti-war delegation to Washington and London. At home, his officials emphasised that the kingdom had not been consulted beforehand about the drone strike. ‘Please don’t blame us,’ was the message to Tehran. The Emirati foreign minister likewise called for restraint, warning of the devastating consequences for the Persian Gulf if war between the US and Iran were to break out.

    The foreign minister of the UAE’s arch rival Qatar, home to a US air base that would be a crucial launching pad for any American war against Iran, went one step further. He visited Tehran, met with President Hassan Rouhani and offered his condolences. ‘Qatar understands the deep pain and sadness that the Iranian people and government are enduring,’ he said.

    This unified Sunni Arab response to Soleimani’s murder is hardly what Washington had envisaged. After all, from the beginning of his presidency, Donald Trump’s Middle East strategy — orchestrated by his son-in-law, Jared Kushner — was aimed at fomenting an alliance between Israel and the Sunni Gulf Arab states (particularly Saudi Arabia and the Emirates) against Shia Iran.

    The unified Sunni Arab response to Soleimani’s murder is hardly what Washington had envisaged
    The goal for the hawks Trump has surrounded himself with was to isolate Iran diplomatically, then to confront the country militarily on multiple fronts. To this end, Trump gave the Saudis a free pass at every juncture, even when Bin Salman had the Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi chopped to pieces and his remains cooked in a tandoori oven.

    Israel, the Emirates and Saudi Arabia had been flaunting their new intelligence co-operation and their united front against what they saw as the growing Iranian menace. They flirted with closer diplomatic and cultural ties; at one stage, the idea of an ‘Arab Nato’ was floated. Leaked documents reveal that the Saudis — like the Israelis — had previously been pushing Washington for a direct US strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

    So Trump could have been forgiven for thinking the Saudis would be elated at Soleimani’s demise. Instead, they and the Emiratis waved the white flag before a single shot was fired. As per Iran’s request: its military offered a truce with Arab states that distanced themselves from America. It said Sunni cities would only be directly targeted if they assisted any US response to its air strikes against US bases in Iraq (in which case Dubai would be the first city to be ‘destroyed’). At the same time, Israel and the US were considered by Iran ‘as one’.

    General Jonathan Shaw, former commander of UK forces in Iraq, put it well: Iran’s objectives are political, not military. Their aim is not to destroy any American air base, but to drive a wedge between the US and its Arab allies — and the Soleimani assassination has achieved more to this end than anything that could have been cooked up in Tehran. The Sunnis are standing down and the US and Israel now once again face being without real friends in the region. When push came to shove, all Kushner’s efforts amounted to nothing. How elated the Iranians must be, even in the midst of such a setback.

    For those who had been paying closer attention, there were in fact plenty of reasons to believe that the Saudi royal court would respond cautiously to Soleimani’s murder. There were also reasons for them to doubt Trump as an ally. America’s supposedly state-of-the-art defence systems didn’t detect the recent drone strike on Saudi oil facilities. Adding insult to injury, Trump ordered the return of American planes that had been en route to Iran for a retaliatory strike.

    This led to a big rethink in Riyadh. Iran might have no navy or air force to write home about, but it does have more missiles than any other country in the region. The attacks on the US air bases in Iraq on Wednesday, and the earlier Saudi strikes, prove it knows how to use them. The damage to the Saudi oil industry if war breaks out, then, would be immense. Riyadh had to ask: if this were to happen, how certain could they be that Trump would come to their aid? It goes without saying that the bold Saudi drive to diversify their economy would come crashing down with the oil installations and water desalination plants. And Bin Salman could also kiss goodbye to the dream of mass tourism. No one but YouTube weirdos would want to visit a war zone.

    More to the point, after losing faith in Trump — and seeing what the Iranian military was capable of — the Saudis had decided to talk. Extensive back-channel negotiations had been taking place to ease tensions with Tehran as well as with the Houthis in Yemen. In recent months, the Saudis and Iranians had been using intermediaries in Oman, Kuwait and Pakistan, and reconciliation talks were speeding up. The Iraqi Prime Minister has said that when Soleimani was killed, the general was not planning attacks on American soldiers (as the Pentagon claims) but was on his way to a meeting in Baghdad to discuss how to speed up Saudi-Iran peace talks.

    Perhaps no one in Washington realised how quickly things were moving. Or perhaps they did, and killing Soleimani was an effort to stop that rapprochement taking place. Either way, the Saudis had every right to be angry, and after Trump met the Saudi delegation at the Oval Office this week unusually a transcript of the meeting was not released.

    The behaviour of Washington since the strike will have underlined every Saudi fear about Trump’s reliability. The US military released a letter declaring it would withdraw from Iraq (as per its parliament’s recent instruction) but the Pentagon said it had been released in error. Trump then tweeted that he could hit Iran’s cultural sites, only to be contradicted by his Defence Secretary.

    Just after Iranian missiles were fired at a US base in Iraq this week, an Iranian presidential adviser tweeted that Saudi Arabia could have ‘total peace’. It is not inconceivable that we will see closer ties being forged in the coming years between Iran and Saudi Arabia than between Saudi Arabia and Israel. Washington hawks will not be pleased, but it would be an easier — and perhaps more dependable — option for Riyadh. After all, ordinary Arabs have long considered Israel, not Iran, to be their main enemy.

    What is certain is that Iran is now far more united. Its economy shrank by about 10 per cent last year, taken in Washington as proof that sanctions were working. The mullahs were in trouble and badly needed a cause to rally the nation behind. Soleimani’s assassination has given them one. The demonstrations in Iran over fuel price hikes a few months ago already seem like a thing of the past; those who had been on the streets protesting against the government have now turned out in its support. The crowd that marched in Tehran on Monday — chanting ‘Death to America’ — was one of the largest ever seen in the capital.

    ‘All is well!’ chirped Trump after the Iranian retaliation, signalling that he now sees this episode as at an end. Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, offered his own verdict: that we have just witnessed the beginning of the end of the ‘malign US presence in West Asia’. For Trump, it will be an awkward point. He set out to weaken Iran and its control over the Middle East — but may have ended up handing the region to the mullahs on a platter.
    https://app.spectator.co.uk/2020/01/donald-trump-has-just-blown-up-his-goal-of-isolating-iran/pugpig_index.html

  33. Tim Neilson

    Iampeter
    #3287716, posted on January 10, 2020 at 7:32 am

    1

  34. Tim Neilson

    Iampeter
    #3287506, posted on January 9, 2020 at 8:36 pm

    13

  35. Iampeter

    For Trump, it will be an awkward point. He set out to weaken Iran and its control over the Middle East — but may have ended up handing the region to the mullahs on a platter.

    The Middle East, Korean Peninsula, Hong Kong, Eastern Europe, is there any hot spot in the world Trump hasn’t signaled readiness to surrender to the West’s enemies yet?

    What’s he going to do with his second term? Give Washington to the Taliban?
    His religious conservative supporters would probably like that.

Comments are closed.