Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

TomOnBoard

jooksavage wrote: »

Why does everyone keep focussing on Mexico? Almost none of the separated families are Mexican. Most are from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras.

And that's part of the argument that the Administration is making- if they are in danger, and require asylum, why don't they seek it in/from Mexico or from the US embassy in countries in which they fear for themselves.

That argument is made to further the case that most are, in fact, economic migrants and should follow the same immmigration processes as other folks are required to follow.

mcmoustache

relax carry on wrote: »

How long will it take to undo the damage Trump has done and continues to do? Is it even possible? Even if he is impeached or only manages 1 term, will the US ever go back to the way it was before him?

It's a bit hard to make a long term deal with a country if they go schizo every four years.


Generally, administrations respect the treaties and other international agreements that their predecessors make. Now, that gets a bit tricky. A country is only as good as its word on the international stage and America's word means nothing.


From our point of view here in europe, this means that any difficult negotiation is a bit pointless. Will the US rip up any agreement after 4 years? Will they ally with the Russians and the Turks instead of ourselves? That kind of uncertainty isn't healthy and will have real consequences down the road unless they get their shít together and cop on.

strandroad

relax carry on wrote: »

How long will it take to undo the damage Trump has done and continues to do? Is it even possible? Even if he is impeached or only manages 1 term, will the US ever go back to the way it was before him?

I actually don't think so... it seems to be more of a change of paradigm. He has the GOP behind him and he's dismantling the already crumbling state for them while providing useful sideshows and nuking all kinds of standards into oblivion; same with the global presence where his word means nothing. His friends will all be alright. With no strong contender as of mid 2018 he's likely to get another round too. A lot of what US is about now can be traced back to Reagan; I see him as another figure(head) of this type. We'll be looking back at this in 2050 as to where something began.
If he's impeached they'll put a clone forward; all you need to do is to promise a wall, QED.

mcmoustache

TomOnBoard wrote: »

And that's part of the argument that the Administration is making- if they are in danger, and require asylum, why don't they seek it in/from Mexico or from the US embassy in countries in which they fear for themselves.

That argument is made to further the case that most are, in fact, economic migrants and should follow the same immmigration processes as other folks are required to follow.

It's actually fair enough to have a strict immigration policy. I myself would like to see the bogus asylum seekers sent home from this country. An economic migrant masquerading as a persecuted asylum seeker should be told to take a hike and try again in whichever countries that they passed through on the way to this island.



Economic migrants should go through the proper channels.


But separating kids from their parents? Stealing them and deporting their parents? That's some sick stuff. There's no way in hell that that can be justified, despite the attempts on this thread to do just that. That's sociopathic.

BabyCheeses

TomOnBoard wrote: »

And that's part of the argument that the Administration is making- if they are in danger, and require asylum, why don't they seek it in/from Mexico or from the US embassy in countries in which they fear for themselves.

That argument is made to further the case that most are, in fact, economic migrants and should follow the same immmigration processes as other folks are required to follow.

Mexico is dangerous enough to require a wall.

jooksavage

Malcolm Gladwell did a podcast recently about the southern border. He questioned exactly what extreme measures like the wall are intended to achieve. Before Leonard Chapman took over the immigration service in the 1970s and started implementing what became todays border infrastructure, the "soft", porous border meant that 85% of Mexicans who went to the US returned home within 12 months When this casual approach to the border was replaced, that "circular migration" became impossible and rather than return home every few months, the migrants (overwhelmingly young men) stayed put in the US, sent for their families or started families on the US side of the border. While a certain proportion of Mexicans had always put down roots in the US, this exploded from the 70s on. Chapmans new, hard border was keeping Mexicans in the US as much as it kept them out.

weisses

BabyCheeses wrote: »

Mexico is dangerous enough to require a wall.

The way Trump is acting Mexico might even help with erecting the wall...

manual_man

pixelburp wrote: »

No judges or court cases is precise totalitarianism; even illegal immigrants get their day in court, cos that's why they're called 'illegal' in the first place, right? Unless you want an Erdogan style 'democracy' (and again, some people think they do), checks and boundaries are required. Honestly? A rigorous solution is needed because I'm not sure I'm 100% behind people just walking across the border, but I'd still want those people treated fairly, justly and with dignity

I think you're really out of touch here. A major, if not THE major issue that Trump got elected on was his stance on illegal immigration and wanting to clamp down on it. I honestly can't buy the idea that non citizens that have just broken a serious international law by crossing a border illegally should have the right to a day in court (at yet MORE expense to the state) in relation to their said breaking of the law - it's absolutely absurd. Now don't get me wrong, i know there's people that genuinely want a better life and may be in danger in their home countries, but i don't believe that any country should ever be forced to accept ANYONE who crosses illegally. A nation gets to choose who they take in and that's how it should be. Respect the law. Go through the legal ports of entry like other people do and apply. It's not complicated.

Danzy

everlast75 wrote: »

The decent down the dark path continues...


https://twitter.com/AndrewFeinberg/status/1011316500819533824?s=19

It is a convention that has no relevance to the modern world, especially now that the wheel has fallen off Neoliberalism.

Danzy

strandroad wrote: »

I actually don't think so... it seems to be more of a change of paradigm. He has the GOP behind him and he's dismantling the already crumbling state for them while providing useful sideshows and nuking all kinds of standards into oblivion; same with the global presence where his word means nothing. His friends will all be alright. With no strong contender as of mid 2018 he's likely to get another round too. A lot of what US is about now can be traced back to Reagan; I see him as another figure(head) of this type. We'll be looking back at this in 2050 as to where something began.
If he's impeached they'll put a clone forward; all you need to do is to promise a wall, QED.

The new, emerging politics, whatever it is, seen in Austria, Trump, Brexit etc is a backlash against Reaganism or Neoliberalism.

NeoLiberalism and a liberal approach to migration/refugees went hand in hand. The increase in migration really took off in America in the 80s and in the 90s in Europe.

In Europe it went with the ever increasing rejection of the Social Democratic model. Which naturally it would as a Social Democratic economic model depends on tighter borders than any Western State has.

Nox

Concerning international treaties the former POTUS made a deal with Iran.  He knew better than to send it to the Senate to legitimize it as a treaty so he made it an EO.  I think the world political leaders should know the difference between an EO and a treaty even if their citizens do not.  

Here are some options for the US.

• Arrest parents, keep children separate.
• Arrest parents, keep them with their children.
• Arrest parents, keep children separate. Allow anonymous pickup of children by legal or illegal family in the US.
• Arrest parents, keep them with their children. Allow anonymous pickup of children by legal or illegal family in the US.
• Quick deportation to Mexico without arrests.
• Quick deportation to their home country without arrests.
• Let them stay and give them visas.
• Let them stay and give them citizenship.
• Let them stay and put them in a refugee camp.
• Let them stay and give them a court date before likely deportation.

So I've made a poll where you pick one answer.. https://www.strawpoll.me/15967888

If I've left some stuff out, maybe make a new one if it's quick. I assume lots of people have strong opinions on this in here so I'm hoping for a lot of responses.

Less likely ones like concentration camps and gas chambers aren't in the poll. Sorry.

Manic Moran

Danzy wrote: »

It is a convention that has no relevance to the modern world, especially now that the wheel has fallen off Neoliberalism.

I think it still has relevance globally, but as I noted back a few pages ago, it doesn't seem to have much relevance to the current situation on the US's SouthWestern Border. Economic migrants are not refugees. The percentage of folks who are refugees out of all those on the border is very small.

I really do wonder how many commentators, on either side, have actually read the texts of the conventions. http://www.unhcr.org/protect/PROTECTION/3b66c2aa10.pdf

Captain_Crash

manual_man wrote: »

I think you're really out of touch here. A major, if not THE major issue that Trump got elected on was his stance on illegal immigration and wanting to clamp down on it. I honestly can't buy the idea that non citizens that have just broken a serious international law by crossing a border illegally should have the right to a day in court (at yet MORE expense to the state) in relation to their said breaking of the law - it's absolutely absurd. Now don't get me wrong, i know there's people that genuinely want a better life and may be in danger in their home countries, but i don't believe that any country should ever be forced to accept ANYONE who crosses illegally. A nation gets to choose who they take in and that's how it should be. Respect the law. Go through the legal ports of entry like other people do and apply. It's not complicated.

So you want the people crossing the border to respect the law, but the US themselves don't have to no??

Leroy42

I do love the fact that Trump supporters on here and elsewhere are clearly more tuned in and educated about the issues than the POTUS himself, It makes for good debate, but does anybody really think that Trump has considered the international treaties, the definition of migrant and refugee?

NO, he sees a problem and comes up with the populist answer and how to deal with it. And people cheer him as the first to ever think of this and getting things done. Then eventually the realities of the situation cannot be ignored and Trump is forced to back down, most notably when he had to actually, and embarrassingly, reverse his previous decision on separating children.

IT has happened so many times. Repeal and replace, became "wow health care is complicated" to getting nothing done. He was forced in the end, out of spite and to be able to say he did something, to actively try to wreck the system as it was. Not make things better, not MAGA, simply destroy what was there.
Muslim ban was the same thing. What exactly did he achieve with that? Wasted a lot of time and effort and made America look racist.

So onto this clusterfu3k. He demands a policy, gets the WH to 1st claim there is no policy, then claim that if there was it was Obama, then that this is a new policy to focus on this, then that the policy is good and needed to MAGA and secure the borders and that f few thousand crying kids is worth it, and then to roll back on it with the explanation that Trump loves kids and never wanted this in the first place but the Dems made him do it.

But through all this, the clear truth is that Trump is unaware of the laws and realities around whatever subject he is dealing with. So those arguing for Trump, you need to consider that none of the points that you are making have anything to do with Trumps position.

spacecoyote

StringerBell wrote: »

I see Harley Davidson have said they will be moving some of their production outside of the US to avoid tariffs.

Wonder how many more will follow suit. Another good news story for the Trump administration.

And yet...https://www.ft.com/content/29f24644-78f1-11e8-bc55-50daf11b720d

for those that can't access the link, in essence, most of the American Harley workers appear to be blaming Europe for the fact that they might lose their jobs, rather than Trump

"He wouldn’t do it unless it needed to be done, he’s a very smart businessman,” said one Harley employee whose name is embroidered on his work shirt — though he asks not to be quoted by name.

Asked whether they blame the president or the EU for causing Harley’s offshoring decision, most say emphatically that they blame only the Europeans. “The president was just trying to save the US aluminium and steel industry”

Or blaming Harley themselves, saying they're using Trump as an excuse to shut down some US operations

“I think Harley is just using it as an excuse”....“They will just blame it on Trump.”

So, it appears that, for some at least, he is completely Teflon. I guess the incessant messaging may be having the desired effect. Promises he'll save jobs in the rust-belt. Then starts a retaliatory trade war that might result in lost jobs in the rust-belt, and yet he's blameless. It beggars belief

everlast75

manual_man wrote: »

I think you're really out of touch here. A major, if not THE major issue that Trump got elected on was his stance on illegal immigration and wanting to clamp down on it.

Oh I don't dispute it is one of the things he banged on about at his rallies, along with jailing Hillary Clinton (not done), repeal and replace Obamacare (not done), about the election being rigged so that she would win (not true), but moving on.

manual_man wrote: »

I honestly can't buy the idea that non citizens that have just broken a serious international law by crossing a border illegally should have the right to a day in court

They have a right to try and claim refugee status. That doesn't come down to you to decide (thankfully). They have a right to a hearing.

manual_man wrote: »

(at yet MORE expense to the state) in relation to their said breaking of the law - it's absolutely absurd.

It may come as a surprise to you, but Trump's way is more expensive that the previous way. And that, before you cry "fake news", is information from the Trump administration. So, if (and its a big IF) it is down to money, then you have defeated your own argument.

manual_man wrote: »

Now don't get me wrong, i know there's people that genuinely want a better life and may be in danger in their home countries, but i don't believe that any country should ever be forced to accept ANYONE who crosses illegally.

How compassionate of you, and again - the US is not forced to accept anyone. There are laws in place, treaties that previous administrations from both sides have signed, as it was the proper and decent thing to do.

Trump gave a rally the other night, in which he claimed there was thousands and thousands of judges that have to be paid to deal with the immigration issue.
Fact - there are 345.

Trump said that only 3% of those in the catch and release return to deal with their application.
Fact - the rate is 75%.

When will it sink into your heads that you cannot believe to a word this guy says?

manual_man wrote: »

A nation gets to choose who they take in and that's how it should be. Respect the law. Go through the legal ports of entry like other people do and apply. It's not complicated.

My point to Trump exactly!

Leroy42 wrote: »

I do love the fact that Trump supporters on here and elsewhere are clearly more tuned in and educated about the issues than the POTUS himself, It makes for good debate, but does anybody really think that Trump has considered the international treaties, the definition of migrant and refugee?

NO, he sees a problem and comes up with the populist answer and how to deal with it. And people cheer him as the first to ever think of this and getting things done. Then eventually the realities of the situation cannot be ignored and Trump is forced to back down, most notably when he had to actually, and embarrassingly, reverse his previous decision on separating children.

IT has happened so many times. Repeal and replace, became "wow health care is complicated" to getting nothing done. He was forced in the end, out of spite and to be able to say he did something, to actively try to wreck the system as it was. Not make things better, not MAGA, simply destroy what was there.
Muslim ban was the same thing. What exactly did he achieve with that? Wasted a lot of time and effort and made America look racist.

So onto this clusterfu3k. He demands a policy, gets the WH to 1st claim there is no policy, then claim that if there was it was Obama, then that this is a new policy to focus on this, then that the policy is good and needed to MAGA and secure the borders and that f few thousand crying kids is worth it, and then to roll back on it with the explanation that Trump loves kids and never wanted this in the first place but the Dems made him do it.

But through all this, the clear truth is that Trump is unaware of the laws and realities around whatever subject he is dealing with. So those arguing for Trump, you need to consider that none of the points that you are making have anything to do with Trumps position.

It's worse again, in that he implemented his policy and did not plan for the consequences, that is to say, the additional judges he would need to hear the cases, the lawyers needed to try the cases, the premises required to house the people while awaiting trial.

He and his cabinet are beyond inept.

everlast75

Manic Moran wrote: »

I think it still has relevance globally, but as I noted back a few pages ago, it doesn't seem to have much relevance to the current situation on the US's SouthWestern Border. Economic migrants are not refugees. The percentage of folks who are refugees out of all those on the border is very small.

I really do wonder how many commentators, on either side, have actually read the texts of the conventions. http://www.unhcr.org/protect/PROTECTION/3b66c2aa10.pdf

well if there is an argument to strengthen the border, or augment current practice, then how about this wild idea - educate people at the rallies, or through civil spokespersons with logic and facts.

You and I both know however that Trump's approach is to whip up a frenzy using hyperbole and lies. What you should know is that's incitement to hatred to those that have sleeper racist cells in their bodies.

Take the ****ing higher ground for once, instead of always trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Carry out independent studies, produce bi-partisan reports.

That won't be done though, and anyone who can't see reasoned and factual debate as the way forward are rubbing their grubby little mitts at what is happening in the U.S. right now.

jooksavage

spacecoyote wrote: »

And yet...https://www.ft.com/content/29f24644-78f1-11e8-bc55-50daf11b720d

for those that can't access the link, in essence, most of the American Harley workers appear to be blaming Europe for the fact that they might lose their jobs, rather than Trump





Or blaming Harley themselves, saying they're using Trump as an excuse to shut down some US operations



So, it appears that, for some at least, he is completely Teflon. I guess the incessant messaging may be having the desired effect. Promises he'll save jobs in the rust-belt. Then starts a retaliatory trade war that might result in lost jobs in the rust-belt, and yet he's blameless. It beggars belief

That's not going to wash for long. Wait until those poor guys start signing on for benefits or need to access healthcare. They can thank their very own Paul Ryan for their woes.

Victor

This sums up Trumpism up nicely.

https://twitter.com/crandallgold/status/1011118721371377664

RIGOLO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=728SW65tlU0

Chuck Schumer , the Democratic Senate Minority Leader , gave a very detailed speech at the Immigration Law & Policy conference in Georgetown Law in 2009. 
Very interesting speech, well worth watching, some common themes. 
Alot of what he speaks of is similar to Trumps message, i will say Schmuers delivery is much better. 
Whats the relevance to today , well theres quite a few,
If perhaps the DNC had enacted some of their policys of one of their own senior leaders, one wonders would Trump have won in 2016. 
And 'immigration' just like many other issues,  the DNC and liberals in general have lost ownership of the theme. Where once on so many issues, they had a message and a policy they have now lost both their message & policy as they are consumed with Trump and the 1930s. 
Trumps action based administration has not only won the election, its gooing to sweep into the mid-terms, and on a long term basis its actually taken ownership of some issues from the left and and made them neo-Trump-Republican . 
If , its a big IF, some day , the democrats and liberals ever stop shouting 1930s to everyone with a different opinion to them and they try to get back to politics which is many ways is all about winning over the moderate middle of the road voter base, they will be pushed to find a policy or issue they can run on as Trump has taken most of theirs and actually done something about them .

Water John

Here is a camp manager speaking out against the separation policy. Seems a very humane regime in the camp, considering the circumstance within which it has to operate.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jun/25/family-separations-donald-trump-harm-children-camp-manager

Look at the cost $10M and his contract expires on July 13th.

Now Trump wants to renege on International Treaties and issue summary dismissal of all refugee and asylum claims.

Christy42

RIGOLO wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=728SW65tlU0

Chuck Schumer , the Democratic Senate Minority Leader , gave a very detailed speech at the Immigration Law & Policy conference in Georgetown Law in 2009. 
Very interesting speech, well worth watching, some common themes. 
Alot of what he speaks of is similar to Trumps message, i will say Schmuers delivery is much better. 
Whats the relevance to today , well theres quite a few,
If perhaps the DNC had enacted some of their policys of one of their own senior leaders, one wonders would Trump have won in 2016. 
And 'immigration' just like many other issues,  the DNC and liberals in general have lost ownership of the theme. Where once on so many issues, they had a message and a policy they have now lost both their message & policy as they are consumed with Trump and the 1930s. 
Trumps action based administration has not only won the election, its gooing to sweep into the mid-terms, and on a long term basis its actually taken ownership of some issues from the left and and made them neo-Trump-Republican . 
If , its a big IF, some day , the democrats and liberals ever stop shouting 1930s to everyone with a different opinion to them and they try to get back to politics which is many ways is all about winning over the moderate middle of the road voter base, they will be pushed to find a policy or issue they can run on as Trump has taken most of theirs and actually done something about them .

Hey do you have a better link about that Opiod bill you were talking about? The only one I found saw Republicans battling against supplying decent funding to help with the crisis. It also described the bill as incredibly limited.

You wrote about it in such glowing terms that I figured I had missed something and would like to keep up to date.

pixelburp

RIGOLO wrote: »

Chuck Schumer , the Democratic Senate Minority Leader , gave a very detailed speech at the Immigration Law & Policy conference in Georgetown Law in 2009. 
[...].

By all accounts I think it's fair to you say you're a supporter of the administration and keen to share press snippets or proof of Trump's successes.

Rather than pasting infodumps however, it'd be more useful to discuss than lecture, and I'm keen to know how you square away the reality of Trump's trade war - the "easy to win" trade war by his own exact words - and the recent news that Harley Davison are likely to move manufacture to the EU to avoid the tariffs imposed by the Union. All of which is resulting in approximate 400 US job losses.

Do you just see this as a blip, or is there wriggle room for admission that perhaps Trump's ad-hoc economic policy is not a rational, considered approach that'll result in broad wins for the American worker?

weisses

RIGOLO wrote: »

Chuck Schumer , the Democratic Senate Minority Leader , gave a very detailed speech at the Immigration Law & Policy conference in Georgetown Law in 2009. 
Very interesting speech, well worth watching, some common themes. 
Alot of what he speaks of is similar to Trumps message, i will say Schmuers delivery is much better. 
Whats the relevance to today , well theres quite a few,
If perhaps the DNC had enacted some of their policys of one of their own senior leaders, one wonders would Trump have won in 2016. 
And 'immigration' just like many other issues,  the DNC and liberals in general have lost ownership of the theme. Where once on so many issues, they had a message and a policy they have now lost both their message & policy as they are consumed with Trump and the 1930s. 
Trumps action based administration has not only won the election, its gooing to sweep into the mid-terms, and on a long term basis its actually taken ownership of some issues from the left and and made them neo-Trump-Republican . 
If , its a big IF, some day , the democrats and liberals ever stop shouting 1930s to everyone with a different opinion to them and they try to get back to politics which is many ways is all about winning over the moderate middle of the road voter base, they will be pushed to find a policy or issue they can run on as Trump has taken most of theirs and actually done something about them .

What happened to the Bill ?

RIGOLO

Alot of people here worrying about 400 motorbike jobs , Im not sure , why. It exposes a very limited perspective. 
Missing the big picture, Chinese Shanghai index just entered bear market territory. 
Shanghai index is down 20% since January and the yuan has weakened considerably in the last few months adding more pressure for dollar denominated debt in China. 

The trade rebalancing has begun, some may call it a trade war, people have a penchant for 1930s and militarism I guess. 
Its trade rebalancing and the big numbers for now , suggest the American economy is more fundamentaly sound to absorb the hits than other countries.   
So if you think the markets and money react , and international trade games are won or lost based on  400 jobs making noisy motorbike engines in Illinois, thats a big mistake. Dont be taking your economic insights from the headlines on MSM news outlets which are just pandering to Trump derangement syndrome. As I said before on this forum you should be looking at the billion dollar moves in indicies and forex, looking at interest rates in the emerging markets etc.   Those are all telling us that DT and the American economy is wining the first salvos (back to militarism)  in the trade exchanges.

Christy42

RIGOLO wrote: »

Alot of people here worrying about 400 motorbike jobs , Im not sure , why. It exposes a very limited perspective. 
Missing the big picture, Chinese Shanghai index just entered bear market territory. 
Shanghai index is down 20% since January and the yuan has weakened considerably in the last few months adding more pressure for dollar denominated debt in China. 

The trade rebalancing has begun, some may call it a trade war, people have a penchant for 1930s and militarism I guess. 
Its trade rebalancing and the big numbers for now , suggest the American economy is more fundamentaly sound to absorb the hits than other countries.   
So if you think the markets and money react , and international trade games are won or lost based on  400 jobs making noisy motorbike engines in Illinois, thats a big mistake. Dont be taking your economic insights from the headlines on MSM news outlets which are just pandering to Trump derangement syndrome. As I said before on this forum you should be looking at the billion dollar moves in indicies and forex, looking at interest rates in the emerging markets etc.   Those are all telling us that DT and the American economy is wining the first salvos (back to militarism)  in the trade exchanges.

Do you have links or backup for anything you say?

You talk about billion dollar trade deals etc. but you show no evidence of it happening.

You claimed the opiod bill could save hundreds of lives. You seem to have forgotten about it when pressed.

robinph

Trump is worried about the 400 motobike manufacturing jobs, he's been tweeting about it.
Does he have a limited perspective? Is he now also mainstream media...and therefore fake news presumably?

Leroy42

Trump called it a trade war!

Trying to call it something else is going directly against Trump statements.

But lets just look at your thinking. 400 jobs is not important in the overall scheme of things. But he said he was bringing manufacturing back and the first real outcome of his policy is to lose US manufacturing jobs. Now maybe its just a blip, but it goes against everything he has said so it warrants being sceptical about the rest of it.

pixelburp

RIGOLO wrote: »

Alot of people here worrying about 400 motorbike jobs , Im not sure , why. It exposes a very limited perspective. 

Trump's tweeting about it, he's clearly worried about (hello, midterms?), so obviously we're discussing it, you can park the faux-bafflement at our 'limited perspective'. Unless of course you're implying Trump himself has a limited point of view.

After all, why would a Real Estate tycoon know a damn thing about international Trade? You wouldn't ask a physicist to be an expert in biology.

And you yourself demonstrate a limited perspective if you think 400 job losses translate into JUST 400 loses in the local economy, as anyone will tell you that there will be a huge knock on effect in tertiary businesses - this is proven time & time again.

RIGOLO wrote: »

The trade rebalancing has begun, some may call it a trade war, people have a penchant for 1930s and militarism I guess. 

Again, TRUMP is calling it a 'trade war', and declared then "Easy to win". Are we to just ignore his own declarations to this effect?

RIGOLO wrote: »

Its trade rebalancing and the big numbers for now , suggest the American economy is more fundamentaly sound to absorb the hits than other countries.   
So if you think the markets and money react , and international trade games are won or lost based on  400 jobs making noisy motorbike engines in Illinois, thats a big mistake. Dont be taking your economic insights from the headlines on MSM news outlets which are just pandering to Trump derangement syndrome.

When I challenged you on using 'MSM' as a pejorative, you affected bewilderment as to what I might mean, that you were 'just' using an innocent acronym, yet here you are again making side-of-the-mouth insinuations about the mainstream press - and those who might take more council from the financial press than, I dunno, a real estate tycoon with no experience in international trade.

You insinuate the President is playing 3D chess, when actual, demonstrative evidence suggests otherwise. And the health or otherwise of the US economy cannot be taken in sheer isolation of the 18 months of the Trump presidency.

For someone who's trying to put across a 'big picture' image of being above all the bickering, you seem insistent that we ignore the last 8 - 10 years of growth or development of the US economy. It's almost as if, oh I dunno, you're being heavily bias and partisan in your outlook. Heavens forfend!.