Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

weisses

RIGOLO wrote: »

Heres a detail , NK hasnt tested any nuclear devices since the summit was announced and happened, nor have they tested an ICBM.
Those are the details I like and I see as a success, and yes its a long term issue.
Just cause you ignore this sort of DETAIL , doesnt mean I dont post details. 
It just means you dont see it as a detail, nothing I can do about it. 
You dont like my details, its a free country , thats fine, Im comfortable with them.

How can you see it as a success with your head buried in the sand ?

He doesnt need to do any more tests ?

North Korea's decision Friday was made in a meeting of the ruling party's Central Committee, during which Kim, according to the Korean Central News Agency, said, "Nuclear development has proceeded scientifically and in due order and the development of the delivery strike means also proceeded scientifically and verified the completion of nuclear weapons.

"We no longer need any nuclear test or test launches of intermediate and intercontinental range ballistics missiles and because of this the northern nuclear test site has finished its mission," he said.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/04/20/north-korea-suspends-missile-tests-closing-nuclear-test-site-report.html

rossie1977

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Aye, especially when they reside in the womb.

Have to say, I find it rich when liberals act like they have the monopoly on compassion, when the truth is that they just use compassion as a facade. Liberal policies have created so much damn suffering.

What specific liberal policies are you referring to?

The war on drugs which has cost countless lives worldwide and has resulted in more black Americans in prison per capita than there was black South Africans at the height of apartheid is not a liberal policy.

Prohibition was not a liberal pollicy

Treating women as second and third class citizens is not a liberal policy

Jailing and executing homosexuals is not a liberal policy.

Not wanting to place any type of regulation on military firearms for sale is not a liberal policy

Telling certain segments of society they shouldn't use contraception is not a liberal policy.

Thargor

RIGOLO wrote: »

Here you go .. Pelosi, Schumer and Maxine in a tit for tat public spat over Maxines comments 
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/395092-maxine-waters-on-criticism-from-pelosi-schumer-leadership-will-do-anything
Add in the ousting of Crowley in NY by Cortez, remember he was the 4th highest ranking Democrat in Congress, chair of their house caucus, and he has lost to an newcomer. 
Id call that imploding , if your #4 guy is losing his seat , and your leaders are in spats with members of the House, especially in the run into a November mid-term cycle. 
Look at multiple events to determine a cycle, dont be looking at a single events. 
Ive been consistent in what I said the Dems need to do to recover, Cortez whilst not an ideal candidate represents the sort of change and re-energising they need. I still doubt they will get their act together by November and even 2020 is too close, too much of HRC baggage still hanging about that party for it to take on Trump in 2 years.

Sounds like completely normal politicking to me, a democratic seat was won by a different democrat and a couple of other Democrats said they disagreed with each other over an issue, that's your criteria for declaring a party has imploded? Do you think you might be displaying a tiny bit of cognitive dissonance there when you claim everything Trump and the republicans do is the best thing ever?

everlast75

everlast75 wrote: »

Now this is an interesting development.

Cohen is indisputably not the brightest, so God knows what he will admit on camera to. The fact that he is doing it at all is baffling.

https://twitter.com/MichaelCohen212/status/1013580058760540160?s=19

Leroy42 wrote: »

If he had said anything worthwhile it would have already been leaked.

A simple PR exercise, setting Cohen up as the simple guy just trying to get through life.

Something like - Trump was always great, always helped him out etc. His main work was on charities etc and sometimes he needed to ward off people trying to extort funds from Trump's generous and giving nature. If he did things that people consider odd it was only for the greater good and his love of America and if that led to Trump being POTUS than he feels he did America a favour.

Oh, and he loves Vets and coal and Space Force.

make of this what you will.

"Michael Cohen says family and country, not President Trump, is his 'first loyalty'"

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/michael-cohen-family-country-president-trump-loyalty/story?id=56304585

Nody

Nody wrote: »

Financial times among others; and it appears to be true based on his own cabinet even confirming it but claiming it as an "exaggeration".

Not that it should surprise anyone; it's probably pre-emptive to avoid losing the cases on steel tariffs etc. claiming the organization is "anti USA" when his advisors tried to explain why him slapping tolls on items will not work in reality.

Remember this one? Well as always when Trump administration denies something it tends to be true. Trump now wants to pull out of WTO in practice but not officially doing so, Go Trump!

Donald Trump’s administration has drafted a bill that proposes abandoning fundamental principles of the World Trade Organisation (WTO.)

The Fair and Reciprocal Tariff Act, dubbed the Fart Act, would give the president licence to raise tariffs without congressional consent and sidestep international rules.

The legislation, reportedly ordered by Mr Trump himself, would mark an extraordinary shift in trade policy, allowing the US to raise tariffs above ceilings agreed by WTO countries and set different rates for individual nations outside of free trade agreements.

“It would be the equivalent of walking away from the WTO and our commitments there without us actually notifying our withdrawal,” a source familiar with the bill told Axios, which obtained a leaked copy of the proposals.

The source described the bill as “insane” and said most officials involved in its drafting think it is unrealistic or unworkable.

Source. The best negotiator in the world in action people; of course this is one of the few times I think the Republicans will actually draw a line and say no but we'll see.

RIGOLO

Thargor wrote: »

RIGOLO wrote: »

Here you go .. Pelosi, Schumer and Maxine in a tit for tat public spat over Maxines comments 
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/395092-maxine-waters-on-criticism-from-pelosi-schumer-leadership-will-do-anything
Add in the ousting of Crowley in NY by Cortez, remember he was the 4th highest ranking Democrat in Congress, chair of their house caucus, and he has lost to an newcomer. 
Id call that imploding , if your #4 guy is losing his seat , and your leaders are in spats with members of the House, especially in the run into a November mid-term cycle. 
Look at multiple events to determine a cycle, dont be looking at a single events. 
Ive been consistent in what I said the Dems need to do to recover, Cortez whilst not an ideal candidate represents the sort of change and re-energising they need. I still doubt they will get their act together by November and even 2020 is too close, too much of HRC baggage still hanging about that party for it to take on Trump in 2 years.

Sounds like completely normal politicking to me, a democratic seat was won by a different democrat and a couple of other Democrats said they disagreed with each other over an issue, that's your criteria for declaring a party has imploded? Do you think you might be displaying a tiny bit of cognitive dissonance there when you claim everything Trump and the republicans do is the best thing ever?

Wrong on both fronts. 
fivethirthyeight , one of the US premiere politico analysts has claimed the Cortez as a potentially 'tea party' movement.  You should pay attention to more of the events and what they mean as a collective and a trend. 
And Ive never claimed everything Trump and the republicans do is the best thing ever.

everlast75

RIGOLO wrote: »

And Ive never claimed everything Trump and the republicans do is the best thing ever.

That's funny, as every single post of yours reads like a press release espousing the virtues of this administration, ticking off various talking points as if sent directly from the GOP.

And would you like to comment about my reply to your contention that " there are adults involved in the negotiations who understand that the road to peace and stability is long and winding and has many turns". Can you admit that Trump did not listen to any of the advice from any of these adults, and that this was to the detriment of the US' standing, to the benefit of KJU, and made him look inexperienced and naive?

mcmoustache

everlast75 wrote: »

make of this what you will.

"Michael Cohen says family and country, not President Trump, is his 'first loyalty'"

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/michael-cohen-family-country-president-trump-loyalty/story?id=56304585

I wouldn't make much of this just yet. He knows that he's in a lot of trouble and may still be angling for a pardon. Of course, being pardoned loses 5th amendment privileges which wouldn't be a good idea for Trump. Cohen would know this so hopefully he's thinking that a pardon is unlikely.

He has a new lawyer now with a lot of experience with the SDNY and I'd bet that Cohen will be advised to cooperate if the case against him is strong and carries a long penalty. The rational thing for him to do would be to flip but we're not living in particularly rational times right now. I would put money on him flipping myself but I won't believe that he's doing it until he actually enters into such an agreement.

Danzy

mcmoustache wrote: »

If Trump does it, it's a major success. In fact Trump doesn't even have to do something for it to be a success - he just has to claim to have done so and his supporters will believe it and rush to the forums for some premature bragging.

A good example of this was his North Korean trip. FOX "news" were broadcasting as though world peace had broken out thanks to the only genius who could do it and his supporters here were repeating the nonsense as though Trump had gotten something out of this for the US that they hadn't gotten multiple times already.

If Trump supporters hadn't rushed to glorify a diplomatic performance and had actually compared it to other diplomatic performances or even just compared the concessions that each side was making, they might have realised that it was mediocre at best. But that's not how it works if you support Trump. When you support Trump, every thing he does is the best thing ever, even if he didn't actually do it.

Adoration of every word he says is a problem in his core.

Trump derangement syndrome is a problem in many of his opponents as well.

Both are a help to his election in 2020.

The electorate are going to tune out, it has been built to such a pitch that unless the economy crashes and the police are burning dissenting newspapers that people will think,great job.

He is counting on it and his opponents will deliver for him.

mcmoustache

everlast75 wrote: »

That's funny, as every single post of yours reads like a press release espousing the virtues of this administration, ticking off various talking points as if sent directly from the GOP.

If you replaced Trump with "Dear Leader" it has the same tone as the the North Korean propaganda broadcasts. I've never seen that posting style from anyone on these forums that wasn't a wind-up of some sort. I can't fathom why someone would post like that in a forum designed for discussion.

Thargor

RIGOLO wrote: »

Wrong on both fronts. 
fivethirthyeight , one of the US premiere politico analysts has claimed the Cortez as a potentially 'tea party' movement.  You should pay attention to more of the events and what they mean as a collective and a trend. 
And Ive never claimed everything Trump and the republicans do is the best thing ever.

Wow if Nate Silvers blog says says something is potentially true then it must totally, definitely signal the implosion of the Democratic party as you claim, well done, more of the top notch analysis we've come to expect from your posts here...

mcmoustache

Danzy wrote: »

Adoration of every word he says is a problem in his core.

Trump derangement syndrome is a problem in many of his opponents as well.

Both are a help to his election in 2020.

The electorate are going to tune out, it has been built to such a pitch that unless the economy crashes and the police are burning dissenting newspapers that people will think,great job.

He is counting on it and his opponents will deliver for him.

I agree that ultimately, it's going to be the economy that decides his reelection. If people see their pensions and salaries doing well, cost of living remaining stable, medical expenses not increasing too much, they'll vote to keep it going.

In order to achieve this, all he needs to do is not get into trade wars, leave the Affordable Care Act alone and protect workers' rights. That should be easy enough, right?


By the way, I've seen the term Trump Derangement Syndrome on alt right social media but I couldn't find anything about it on the National Institute of Mental Health website. What is it exactly - symptoms, manifestations, that sort of thing?

Christy42

mcmoustache wrote: »

Danzy wrote: »

Adoration of every word he says is a problem in his core.

Trump derangement syndrome is a problem in many of his opponents as well.

Both are a help to his election in 2020.

The electorate are going to tune out, it has been built to such a pitch that unless the economy crashes and the police are burning dissenting newspapers that people will think,great job.

He is counting on it and his opponents will deliver for him.

I agree that ultimately, it's going to be the economy that decides his reelection. If people see their pensions and salaries doing well, cost of living remaining stable, medical expenses not increasing too much, they'll vote to keep it going.

In order to achieve this, all he needs to do is not get into trade wars, leave the Affordable Care Act alone and protect workers' rights. That should be easy enough, right?


By the way, I've seen the term Trump Derangement Syndrome on alt right social media but I couldn't find anything about it on the National Institute of Mental Health website. What is it exactly - symptoms, manifestations, that sort of thing?

It kinda depends. They went against the economy last time. Hillary would have been a continuation of Obama's successful policies. Of course there is the argument that they went off what they thought the economy was with Trump spouting off about 40% unemployment rate and other such nonsense that millions lapped up.

pixelburp

2020 is all well and good, but there's no way either party is looking beyond November at this juncture - so why should we? These 18 months have been unpredictable to say the least and with the threatened 'blue wave' the entire landscape could change overnight sometime before Christmas. We have a president who can't keep a story straight for 3 days, so speculating about how a Presidential election cycle might go is foolhardy (though I'm going to take a punt and suggest it'll be as ugly as hell, with Trump-Hannity-Fox fighting dirty from the offset).

Catching up on this thread is interesting though, not least with some of the misinformation thrown around about Ocasio-Cortez - this thread included with sniffing about 'champagne socialist' or that she was just an anti-Trump candidate. The backlash has already begun in the media, conservative outlets already trying to smear her background, with the usual mix of 'red panic' over her overtly progressive policies, alongside some old-fashioned lies. She's clearly a grenade in the Democrats status quo too, sending a top Democrat packing and arguably adding legitimacy to the idea that there is an appetite for progressive politics - even if New York is far from a clear barometer of that sort of thing.

mcmoustache

Christy42 wrote: »

It kinda depends. They went against the economy last time. Hillary would have been a continuation of Obama's successful policies. Of course there is the argument that they went off what they thought the economy was with Trump spouting off about 40% unemployment rate and other such nonsense that millions lapped up.

I agree. Even if Trump supporters see that they are becoming worse off and poorer, they'll find a way to blame anyone but Trump. I wish I was joking but interviews with Trump supporters laid off due to tariffs demonstrate this.

FreudianSlippers

I do think that more people like Ocasio-Cortez could be potentially damaging to the Democratic election hopes later this year.

I know plenty of well off people (not "rich" by US standards - but very comfortable) who would fall in the middle of the party stools - socially Democrats and economically Republicans (for the most part) and the thought of increased taxation on them could really flip these voters back to Republicans in local and State elections.

I don't think there's a chance Trump could get re-elected (as it stands) but I don't think it follows that a "blue wave" in local and State elections is a given.

Leroy42

My own view, and this is slighty OT, is that the Dems need to decide what they are. For too long they have tried to be just a little left and they end up failing at that, and the GOP have the far right sown up.

I really believe that the left is actually where the US stands. Health care, social justice gun control etc. The Dems are scared to really embrace it as they worry about a potential backlash but at the moment they are getting it from both sides. The right is a shrinking demographic, but the Dems need to show that their version is not just a watered down version yet still entralled to big business. Sanders touched on it but the Dems were too scared to take the risk.

We see from the recent elections like the loss of Roy Moore, the won for Ocasio-Cortez (although I except that that was in NY) that their is an appetite for progressive politics.

And far from being happy about the election of people like Ocasio-Cortez the GOP should be concerned because if people like her start to take over the Dems and move it away from the old brigade of Pelosi etc, they I think the GOP is in serious trouble.

RIGOLO

Leroy42 wrote: »

My own view, and this is slighty OT, is that the Dems need to decide what they are.  For too long they have tried to be just a little left and they end up failing at that, and the GOP have the far right sown up.

I really believe that the left is actually where the US stands.  Health care, social justice gun control etc.  The Dems are scared to really embrace it as they worry about a potential backlash but at the moment they are getting it from both sides.  The right is a shrinking demographic, but the Dems need to show that their version is not just a watered down version yet still entralled to big business.  Sanders touched on it but the Dems were too scared to take the risk.

We see from the recent elections like the loss of Roy Moore, the won for Ocasio-Cortez (although I except that that was in NY) that their is an appetite for progressive politics.

And far from being happy about the election of people like Ocasio-Cortez the GOP should be concerned because if people like her start to take over the Dems and move it away from the old brigade of Pelosi etc, they I think the GOP is in serious trouble.

Your about 3 years too late with that idea .
Even republicans were saying this in 2015 ,and many Trump administrations supporters on this thread have said the same thing many times.  
The Dems and HRC had no policy other than we arent Trump , wether it was the Bernie split vote or choosing  the route of flyover states,  fund raising and basking in the pre-emptive coronation of the first female POTUS by the main stream media . 
I hear the sound of a penny dropping .
Did someone mention DNC self-imploding , trust me there will be further self-implosion before any consensus is reached on who and what represents the left. Plenty of the old HRC rearguard will fight to hold onto what they have before letting the reins go. 

As to the poster
Pixelburp
who says " 2020 is all well and good, but there's no way either party is looking beyond November at this juncture - so why should we?" 
More short-term-itis...
Please keep this up and spread that message among your DNC friends, its just the sort of attitude Trump Administration would like to spread , your doing Trump a great service.
Your a fool to think the GOP is not already working on making inroads into the 2020 election . 
For one thing it will play a huge part in the SCOTUS decision , both for the midterms and 2020. 
You dont understand the mindset of the broader American electorate if you dont realise they are always thinking in both the 2 and the 4 year cycles . Theres few if any in either camp thinking as you do and not considering 2020 . 

Leroy42

Well Rigolo, it is certainly true that the Dems have got themselves into a bit of a bind, but to try to portray the GOP as somehow being a collective is trying to rewrite not only the past but the present.

They have POTUS that they openly, even coming up to the conference, against. They have a large amount of senators resigning, they couldn't get their singular policy of Repeal Obamacare through when presented with majorities in all 3 parts.

Many are still actively hostile to many things that Trump does, going along with it due to the backlash from his base. They have no clear policies, and seem to think that once the Tax reform was done that that was it. After years as being totally against any giving in to Russia they are now full scale behind an appeasement.

For years they have been strong on policing and security yet have said nothing whilst Trump tries to actively dismantle the FBI and CIA.

It is continually stated that the Dems don't have a message, but what message did Trump have? MAGA! Super, how? Bring back coal. Great how? Bring back manufacturing jobs, by starting a trade war! Build a wall and Mexico will pay.

If the Dems had come out with the nonsense that Trump continues to peddle you would quite rightly by laughing at them. Hell, you have gleeful that the latest election seems to paint the picture of a divided party. You cannot get more divided that the GOP (well perhaps the Tories in the UK).

Trump is a once off. Whether is captured a particular point in time, whether it is down to his talents, or a combination of both, it is not something that will be easily replicated. You only had to look at the excitement at the possibility of Oprah running to see that it is moving away from the parties and towards personalities.

The Dems are struggling to come up with a coherent message that the voters will listen to as it really seems that Trump has concerned the media market. Challenge him on anything and you are decried as a left whinger, try to propose something different and Trump will simply give you a nickname and mock you.

THe recent Space Force is merely the latest example. Trump supporters love it, though they have no idea what it is, what it is for, how much it will cost. So do the Dems double down and try to out trump Trump, or do they accept that whilst things stay as they are there is little point and better to tackle things from the sidelines and focus on voter registration etc.

pixelburp

RIGOLO wrote: »

Pixelburp
who says " 2020 is all well and good, but there's no way either party is looking beyond November at this juncture - so why should we?" 
More short-term-itis...

Enough with the affectations towards some lofty, chessboard view. If you can't debate an issue without resorting to GOP press releases, or dismissive reductionism towards posters who take a more immediate viewpoint.

If the maxim that all politics is local, equally politicians live from election to election.

Your a fool to think the GOP is not already working on making inroads into the 2020 election . 

I never said they weren't, I'm sure the Democrats are too, but in your rush to perceive everything in some 10 year helicopter view, the immediate, demonstrable reality is that many red and blue congress people and senators are vying for the balance of power in Washington. The 2020 campaign will take its cues from that result. The recent shock victory for Ocasio-Cortez suggests the landscape is not predictable - making bold definitive statements is foolhardy. Trumps very election as candidate shows short term politics change the nature of the game.

Danzy

Christy42 wrote: »

It kinda depends. They went against the economy last time. Hillary would have been a continuation of Obama's successful policies. Of course there is the argument that they went off what they thought the economy was with Trump spouting off about 40% unemployment rate and other such nonsense that millions lapped up.

An awful lot of people were left behind in the Obama years.

That is why so many turned from him last time to Trump, well picking the most establishment candidate in decades was some achievement.

A lot of people couldn't take the chance.

Obama got a mess but it was an awful eight years for many, don't let your blind loyalty hide it from you.

RIGOLO

Leroy42 wrote: »

Well Rigolo, it is certainly true that the Dems have got themselves into a bit of a bind, but to try to portray the GOP as somehow being a collective is trying to rewrite not only the past but the present.

They have POTUS that they openly, even coming up to the conference, against.  They have a large amount of senators resigning, they couldn't get their singular policy of Repeal Obamacare through when presented with majorities in all 3 parts.

Many are still actively hostile to many things that Trump does, going along with it due to the backlash from his base.  They have no clear policies, and seem to think that once the Tax reform was done that that was it.  After years as being totally against any giving in to Russia they are now full scale behind an appeasement.

For years they have been strong on policing and security yet have said nothing whilst Trump tries to actively dismantle the FBI and CIA.

It is continually stated that the Dems don't have a message, but what message did Trump have?  MAGA!  Super, how?  Bring back coal.  Great how?  Bring back manufacturing jobs, by starting a trade war! Build a wall and Mexico will pay.

If the Dems had come out with the nonsense that Trump continues to peddle you would quite rightly by laughing at them.  Hell, you have gleeful that the latest election seems to paint the picture of a divided party.  You cannot get more divided that the GOP (well perhaps the Tories in the UK).

Trump is a once off.  Whether is captured a particular point in time, whether it is down to his talents, or a combination of both, it is not something that will be easily replicated.  You only had to look at the excitement at the possibility of Oprah running to see that it is moving away from the parties and towards personalities.

The Dems are struggling to come up with a coherent message that the voters will listen to as it really seems  that Trump has concerned the media market.  Challenge him on anything and you are decried as a left whinger, try to propose something different and Trump will simply give you a nickname and mock you.

THe recent Space Force is merely the latest example.  Trump supporters love it, though they have no idea what it is, what it is for, how much it will cost.  So do the Dems double down and try to out trump Trump, or do they accept that whilst things stay as they are there is little point and better to tackle things from the sidelines and focus on voter registration etc.

Ever heard of Ronald Reagan , Arnold Schwaznegger , Jesse Ventura 
Trump a once off, personalities a new trend in American politics..... are they even teaching history in school anymore. Im starting to wonder if they are, or maybe people just havent studied it.

Midlife

I may be incorrect but I think that if the opposition take the senate, the only thing that would remain tricky to undo whenever the presidency next flips would be the new tax code. Pretty much every other Trump act could be undone by the stroke of a pen.

If that's the case, then people would be nuts to look beyond this year's senate elections.

Leroy42

RIGOLO wrote: »

Ever heard of Ronald Reagan , Arnold Schwaznegger , Jesse Ventura 
Trump a once off, personalities a new trend in American politics..... are they even teaching history in school anymore. Im starting to wonder if they are, or maybe people just havent studied it.

Excuse me if I have this wrong, but when was Venture and Arnie POTUS? There are loads of whacky governors and senators, both well known and just local. Hell, Palin was elected for pete's sake. Reagan was a celebrity no doubt about that. But there no doubt that Trump took that to another level. Aslo, no need to call into question peoples education. If I was to question you're education everytime I called into question one of your opinions I think I'd be asking if your parents always let the creche children play on the computer. So lets stick to an adult debate shall we?

No, you are absolutely correct. The dems have no message and are a rag tag, whilst the GOP are signing a singular tune.

Tell me, those that you mentioned, do you know what they have in common? Nobody predicted that they would end up where they did. It was not some defined plan by any party.

Politics has always been a popularity contest, and celebrities are just the natural progression of that. And Trump rode that to the extreme.

His personality meant that he could override inexperience, a good economy, a strong but rather disliked opposition candidate. Yet your message is that the Dems need to get their house in order and Trump shows that that is nonsense.

And that is where your whole point is lost. You keep banging on about how great Trump is, and taking glee in the apparent mess of the Dems. But you fail to even know Trumps history. Where was he before 2015 in politics? Where was the GOP going?

Danzy

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I do think that more people like Ocasio-Cortez could be potentially damaging to the Democratic election hopes later this year.

I know plenty of well off people (not "rich" by US standards - but very comfortable) who would fall in the middle of the party stools - socially Democrats and economically Republicans (for the most part) and the thought of increased taxation on them could really flip these voters back to Republicans in local and State elections.

I don't think there's a chance Trump could get re-elected (as it stands) but I don't think it follows that a "blue wave" in local and State elections is a given.

Some of her views are reflective of the more radical wings of the Libertarian Party, they got about 3.8% of the vote last time.

Building a consensus may be a concern.

listermint

Danzy wrote: »

An awful lot of people were left behind in the Obama years.

That is why so many turned from him last time to Trump, well picking the most establishment candidate in decades was some achievement.

A lot of people couldn't take the chance.

Obama got a mess but it was an awful eight years for many, don't let your blind loyalty hide it from you.

Shock horror people get left behind after the largest recession since the 20's in the US.

President puts the country back on track and into growth whilst dealing with a Hostile house, a suspect 'tea party' movement with some weird agenda and he even delivered healthcare to millions who never had any.

And he gets derided and vilified.


Laughable stuff.

Christy42

Danzy wrote: »

An awful lot of people were left behind in the Obama years.

That is why so many turned from him last time to Trump, well picking the most establishment candidate in decades was some achievement.

A lot of people couldn't take the chance.

Obama got a mess but it was an awful eight years for many, don't let your blind loyalty hide it from you.

Unemployment was not 40%.

Just under half the population did not get left behind. You have provided 0 evidence for this claim that an awful lot of people (and I want a large proportion of those who voted for Trump).

They believed Trump could make their problems go away because he promised them that. He also told them they were in far more trouble than they were and they believed him. He fed off of Republican lies about Obamacare. After he was elected people looked at Obamacare and realised how good it was and it quickly became popular and untouchable. Within months of the administration taking office we saw a sudden turn from complaining about the economy to praising it with very little actually changing.

If they were left behind why are they still not angry at being left behind because things are not better?

Trump lies.

RIGOLO

Midlife wrote: »

I may be incorrect but I think that if the opposition take the senate, the only thing that would remain tricky to undo whenever the presidency next flips would be the new tax code. Pretty much every other Trump act could be undone by the stroke of a pen.

If that's the case, then people would be nuts to look beyond this year's senate elections.

Trump filed his paperwork for re-election , HOURS, yes HOURS after his inauguration, on the same day Jan 20th 2017.
He trademarked the logo 'Keep America Great' a few days later. 
He announced his formal campaign in Feb 2018, nearly 1,000 days before the election .
His reelection campaign has over 40 million gathered. 
The same guy Brad Parscale who ran his digital campaign first time round has been given the job of Campaign Manager, and is already blitzing a digital 2020 campaign message. 
And yes all the current day to day events are played out on short term immediate basis , on the mid-term cycle but also  long term as part of the 2020 campaign. 
And the American voter does take this strategy into his voting decisions for mid-term. They weigh up executive, legislative and judicial balance and decide where to cast their vote in the 2 and 4 year cycles.

 As Ive said there are now adults in The Whitehouse administration ALWAYS thinking long term.

Danzy

listermint wrote: »

Shock horror people get left behind after the largest recession since the 20's in the US.

President puts the country back on track and into growth whilst dealing with a Hostile house, a suspect 'tea party' movement with some weird agenda and he even delivered healthcare to millions who never had any.

And he gets derided and vilified.


Laughable stuff.

Hillary Clinton certainly doesn't think it laughable.

As for the whack Jobs in the Tea Party, they are reprobates, no doubt, they also have their twins on the other side, quite vocal and just as obnoxious.

listermint

Danzy wrote: »

Hillary Clinton certainly doesn't think it laughable.

As for the whack Jobs in the Tea Party, they are reprobates, no doubt, they also have their twins on the other side, quite vocal and just as obnoxious.

what does hillary have to do with my comment?

I dont get it ?