US Presidential Election 2020

Water John

The Democrat nomination looks like going all the way to Convention. Some interesting deals will be negotiated.

Brian?

The Phantom Jipper wrote: »

You've alluded to part of the problem yourself; hanging your hat on people voting for you because they've heard of you before is a bit of a flimsy case for why you should be president.

Have you seen any of the debates? Did you find those impressive? They've been a very mixed bag to say the least, in my opinion. He doesn't seem to have a good ground game in the early states. His fundraising has been poor, as is his cash on hand etc. If his gradual decline in the polls continues, he won't credibly be able to make an electability case, and what then?

He hasn't been declining in the polls since July, check out the aggregate poll on 538. Some minor fluctuations the last 3 months but hes a trending back up in October

Brian?

Water John wrote: »

The Democrat nomination looks like going all the way to Convention. Some interesting deals will be negotiated.

I seriously doubt that. There hasn't been a single primary yet, way too early to know how this will pan out.

The Phantom Jipper

Brian? wrote: »

He hasn't been declining in the polls since July, check out the aggregate poll on 538. Some minor fluctuations the last 3 months but hes a trending back up in October

You seem to have chosen July because that was the trough in his polling. Why not May when he was up over 40%? Or September when he was back over 30? He's now in the mid 20s on average, that's a decline by any measure. And those are national polls, his decline in the early voting states is even more pronounced.

Anything to say on the other points I raised about his fundraising, ground game or debate performance? You seem to think those are going well at the moment?

rossie1977

Biden announced his candidacy on April 25th so obviously early May was always going to be peak interest in him. Outside Warren everyone in Dem race peaked popularity wise when they first announced they were running.

Debates are not really effecting anything. The vocal online community might big up someone like Gabbard for a while but her numbers remain rock bottom. Trump himself was beyond awful in the debates vs Clinton, sniffling and acting like a stalker yet it didn't hurt him one bit

Brian?

The Phantom Jipper wrote: »

You seem to have chosen July because that was the trough in his polling. Why not May when he was up over 40%? Or September when he was back over 30? He's now in the mid 20s on average, that's a decline by any measure. And those are national polls, his decline in the early voting states is even more pronounced.

Anything to say on the other points I raised about his fundraising, ground game or debate performance? You seem to think those are going well at the moment?

I picked July because his polling numbers have been steady since then. Despite the issues you've mentioned.

The fall in numbers was inevitable as other candidates became more well known. But the fact that they have stabilised is also quite telling. Each debate, whether poor or ok, hasn't really budged the numbers.

I'm not rebutting your other points because I don't really see them as relevant right now.

Bad results in Iowa and New Hampshire will severely damage his campaign. But right now, it can hardly be said it's all negative. He's still a strong front runner.

eagle eye

Biden has been acting like someone in the early throws of dementia from what I've seen. He has no hope against Trump or any other Rep candidate imo.

duploelabs

eagle eye wrote: »

Biden has been acting like someone in the early throws of dementia from what I've seen. He has no hope against Trump or any other Rep candidate imo.

Oringes
Covfefe

Water John

That is just more nonsense. Biden always had a habit, like Bush Jnr of putting his foot on his mouth. I disagreed a lot with Bush but enjoyed his Bushisms and attributed no harm to them. I would apply a similar standard to Biden.

One has to differentiate between that and the constant blatant lies from Trump.

Danzy

https://youtu.be/JtPQQjj01kM

Bill Maher on the Dems and how they are trying to out crazy Trump.

Manic Moran

Speaking of such things, a rather partisan opEd in CNN yesterday, but it did make a reasonable point in amongst a bunch of irrelevant ones.

One issue the Democrats have to worry about is that they are reinforcing the idea that the thing they stand for, and have stood for since the election results in 2016, was removing Trump, as opposed to doing anything positive for the Americans who voted for him in the first place, mainly because they weren't convinced that the Democrats were going to do anything for them. So I decided to have a looksee.

I'm having a look at Govtrack.us, to see what the various bills are. There's not much really of any interest to the typical person in, say, Ohio. Their opportunity was that the Republicans didn't do much when they had control. They passed a tax reform (More partisan), and a criminal justice reform (More bi-partisan), but that's about the end of it when it comes to big-ticket items.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/#docket

I see a couple related to immigration (expanding eligibility for entry and reducing deportations, nothing to do with border security), a couple of firearms ones (Most adding restrictions, one loosening them), one to remove the electoral college, the "Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act" and another one to allow banks and the like to handle money from marijuana sales, one to allow old prisoners to be moved to home detention sooner, one for the Green New Deal, one to extend a current law on violence against women, a resolution to do with the Armenian Genocide, a pay raise for federal civil servants and another for federal pensions, the "No more presidential wars" act, the Equality Act (LGBT protections), something to keep the Coast Guard paid when the government shuts down (Which is good, because the current CR expires in about three weeks, and I haven't seen anything in congress about passing a budget), mandatory vaccinations for all children, something to extend tax relief for victims of disaster, an act covering whether or not someone should pay a few extra dollars on tax preparation software, an animal cruelty act, the "For the People" act, which does everything from allow released felons to vote through making D.C. a state, a fund for improving public schools, a "College affordability act", and a bill which mandates a portion of proceeds from federal geothermal leases goes to kindergartens.

Nothing in this which really is going to convince the voters of Wisconsin or Florida that they are working for them.

This is a list of everything which the house passed this year and is waiting on the Senate
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?status=16,17,19,20,12,13,14&sort=-current_status_date#current_status[]=4
307 on that list, 12 of which are naming post offices, about a score have nothing to do with the US at all (Anything from Serbian crimes in 1999 to a requirement for the CIA to asses just how corrupt Putin is), there are two which put a bit more investment in small businesses, the "Hack your State Department" Act (which is just a cool name for a federal cybersecurity requirement), a study on the use of social media in security clearance investigations, a re-authorisation for state grants to do with water quality, a bill to get Homeland Security to stop misplacing its guns, the "Protecting Americans with Preexisting Conditions Act" (My God, that's actually one that's worth passing!), a removal of the "Cadillac Tax" from Obamacare (Also worth passing, with heavy bipartisan support), and a re-authorisation for medical training support for nurses.

66 bills have been signed into law.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?status=16,17,19,20,12,13,14&sort=-current_status_date#current_status[]=28
A bunch are minor things, like making Bob Dole an honorary colonel, or a bunch of post offices renamed. The $1.8bn autism support bill was a bigger one (pushed by a Republican, but really a modification of an Obama law) and a Democrat submitted one which allows the Feds to pay more for public shooting ranges.

So, if I were a voter in a Swing State, and I were to ask "What have the Democrats ever done for us?", they can't even say "the roads"... (Nothing in there about infrastructure that I can see). They won't even have gotten rid of Trump, because, for all the effort, he's not going to get impeached.

I mean, for all the news, you'd be forgiven for not knowing that the government will be shutting down in 20 days if Congress doesn't sort it out.
Is their eye even on the right ball? If they do win the presidential, will they lose congress again?

Danzy

Manic Moran wrote: »

Speaking of such things, a rather partisan opEd in CNN yesterday, but it did make a reasonable point in amongst a bunch of irrelevant ones.

One issue the Democrats have to worry about is that they are reinforcing the idea that the thing they stand for, and have stood for since the election results in 2016, was removing Trump, as opposed to doing anything positive for the Americans who voted for him in the first place, mainly because they weren't convinced that the Democrats were going to do anything for them. So I decided to have a looksee.

Reminds me of Bob Geldof, he was giving a talk to students and they asked why Trump won, he said because people like you were talking about fuc8ing toilets and who can use them to people who hadn't seen a pay rise in 8 years.

No fan of Bob, he is part of the problem but he is correct.

I see Julian Castro has said how women who were born men should have equal access to abortion clinics.

That's a big one but no shortage of insanity from the Squad, Bernie and Warren, think the last 2 are pandering to the crazy wing who like the Squad and whose support is needed.

As the Dems promote more like that, it will become less workingclass and further sprial down.

State of the Democrats in 2020.

Hande hoche!

Beto is out, took him long enough.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50268843

Professor Moriarty

Danzy wrote: »

Reminds me of Bob Geldof, he was giving a talk to students and they asked why Trump won, he said because people like you were talking about fuc8ing toilets and who can use them to people who hadn't seen a pay rise in 8 years.

No fan of Bob, he is part of the problem but he is correct.

I see Julian Castro has said how women who were born men should have equal access to abortion clinics.

That's a big one but no shortage of insanity from the Squad, Bernie and Warren, think the last 2 are pandering to the crazy wing who like the Squad and whose support is needed.

As the Dems promote more like that, it will become less workingclass and further sprial down.

State of the Democrats in 2020.

I think you've nailed the problem there. The Dems are trying to, and maybe have to, pander to a church that's too broad. You can't ride two horses with the one arse.

The Phantom Jipper

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Beto is out, took him long enough.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50268843

I wonder if he'll run for Senate. Hopefully he will but apparently it's unlikely.

Danzy

The Phantom Jipper wrote: »

I wonder if he'll run for Senate. Hopefully he will but apparently it's unlikely.

Think he might be so damaged after this that it will not be an option.

Hande hoche!

The Phantom Jipper wrote: »

I wonder if he'll run for Senate. Hopefully he will but apparently it's unlikely.

Don't think he will. He wouldn't have the fresh candidate image together with the bags of cash and media coverage. Quite a few donors would feel "burnt" by his presidential run.

The Phantom Jipper

Danzy wrote: »

Think he might be so damaged after this that it will not be an option.

That's true, "hell yeah we'll take their guns" probably isn't a recipe for success in Texas.

Danzy

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I think you've nailed the problem there. The Dems are trying to, and maybe have to, pander to a church that's too broad. You can't ride two horses with the one arse.

The clip about Harvard graduates shouting at unemployed labourers about how privileged they are comes to mind.

This is a problem all across the Western World left and liberal politics becoming dominated by middle class activists with near religious convictions but relying all too much on working class votes.

I think that is really behind the rise of populism, you have a very large segment disenfranchised by the modern economic order but who those traditionally who held the status quo to account don't want to listen to.

StringerBell

The Phantom Jipper wrote: »

I wonder if he'll run for Senate. Hopefully he will but apparently it's unlikely.

He definitively ruled himself out of the senate race a good while back, whatever happened.

However......politics.....who knows

Rjd2

Danzy wrote: »

Think he might be so damaged after this that it will not be an option.

The man does not lack confidence. This is the chap who lost to one of the least popular politicians in America in a senate race and decided he would run for president afterwards.:pac:

He also learned the hard way the media went to bat for him v Cruz but this time not to much and he was brutally exposed.

He along with possibly Harris may be the biggest flops of the campaign considering what was expected.

Manic Moran

Rjd2 wrote: »

He along with possibly Harris may be the biggest flops of the campaign considering what was expected.

Expected by whom?

It seemed to me that there was a lot of hype & publicity, but I never encountered many people who were incredibly enthralled by them. Honestly, I think I've seen more enthusiasm for them on this board than I have in the US.

Moody's, which has a very strong record on predicting elections, and currently believes Trump will win heavily.
The model generally relies purely on economic models, and presumes that people tend to vote with their pocket books (Historically, this is true).
That said, Trump is so far outside of 'normal' and 'presidential', one wonders how close it may be to reality. Moody's rep believes they have been able to account for this. https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2019/10/17/moodys-2020-prediction-election-trump-landslide-qmb-vpx-dbl.cnn

StringerBell

Moody's wouldn't exactly be infallible...

Beto dropping out is good, hopefully some more follow suit. Still have no idea how a guy who couldn't carry his home state thought he could make a dent in a general.

Mind boggling. He is an empty suit, nothing more nothing less.

eagle eye

StringerBell wrote:

Beto dropping out is good, hopefully some more follow suit. Still have no idea how a guy who couldn't carry his home state thought he could make a dent in a general.

Couldn't carry his home state? It's Texas ffs. Do you know anything? There hasn't been a Democrat senator elected in Texas since 1993.
Beto lost an incredibly tight race to Cruz.

marno21

https://twitter.com/business/status/1190590990693871619

This this this x1000

This is a lot of the reason Biden is the clear winner. Theres an election to be won here and extremism is not the answer

rossie1977

The electorate are a lot more progressive than Pelosi thinks though. The main issues Dem voters want solved is healthcare, education costs, wage increases, climate change and gun control. Those are issues many Republicans think need to be fixed too.

Biden is favourite because he has name value, has been in White House so knows how this thing works and would be steady compared to madness we have now but make no mistake if the Dems don't incorporate some form of progressiveness in upcoming election Trump will undercut them with a faux form of it of his own.

Jamiekelly

"This is a lot of the reason Biden is the clear winner. Theres an election to be won here and extremism is not the answer"

Biden has been losing ground since his campaign began. We have a pefect example of centrism vs extremism with Trump and HC. It didn't end well for Clinton and it won't end well for Biden either. The man can barely remember Obama's name sometimes as well as going on rambling tangents that have nothing to do with the questions that get asked. To be honest what would Pelosi know at this point? She is nearly 80 years old and has come out in favour of unrestricted NSA powers and was openly defending waterboarding as not being legally classed as torture. That kind of thinking doesn't get ANY kind of democrat excited to go to the polls.

Rjd2

Manic Moran wrote: »

Expected by whom?

It seemed to me that there was a lot of hype & publicity, but I never encountered many people who were incredibly enthralled by them. Honestly, I think I've seen more enthusiasm for them on this board than I have in the US.

Moody's, which has a very strong record on predicting elections, and currently believes Trump will win heavily.
The model generally relies purely on economic models, and presumes that people tend to vote with their pocket books (Historically, this is true).
That said, Trump is so far outside of 'normal' and 'presidential', one wonders how close it may be to reality. Moody's rep believes they have been able to account for this. https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2019/10/17/moodys-2020-prediction-election-trump-landslide-qmb-vpx-dbl.cnn

Both were strong betting favs and received glowing coverage from many mainstream agencies. Obviously it somewhat eased up for Beto quick enough in his doomed run.

I recall te comments Max Rose a Dem said last month.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/465392-dem-lawmaker-rips-orourke-i-dont-think-losing-is-cool

I

n an interview published in New York magazine's "Intelligencer," Rose lashed out at O'Rourke after the Texas Democrat criticized members of the party who do not support bold action on gun control and other issues. O'Rourke is a supporter of a federally mandated buyback of assault weapons.

“I don’t think losing is cool. I want the Democratic Party to be the party of Kyrsten Sinema and not the party of Beto O’Rourke,” Rose said, referring to the first-term Arizona senator.

"Losing is not as cool as he thinks it is," the Staten Island congressman added to the magazine.

“When you win you get to help people, and when you lose you get to be a social-media rock star," Rose said. "So I don’t think Beto is cool, and I don’t think losing is cool. If we don’t win, we can’t do a f---ing thing for anybody in a union, anybody in public housing, anybody that can’t reunite with their family because of a f---ing racist Muslim ban."

Maybe it's just me but since around the start of the year Biden seems to have the weird pupil thing that happens with senility, like a spark is gone or something. I don't think he's completely senile but he doesn't seem to have any sharpness or pep about him whatsoever. He would've been my Will-Beat-Trump candidate last year but I don't think he's up to it now.

eire4

marno21 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/business/status/1190590990693871619

This this this x1000

This is a lot of the reason Biden is the clear winner. Theres an election to be won here and extremism is not the answer

Pretty much what I would expect from the Corporate Democrats leader. This is the same people who gave the US Hilary Clinton last time and even added another corporate democrat as VP in their arrogance and we saw how that worked out. Fact is the MSM who love the corrupted US political system awash in money which the MSM benefit from financially are happy to peddle the corporate Democrats line. This mentally is why over 40% of the US electorate does not even bother to vote because the system has long since sold them out to the interests of big corporations and wealthy individuals.

IMHO what the Democrats and the US actually need is a big bold FDR type Democrat not another corporate one like Clinton or Obama.

StringerBell

eagle eye wrote: »

Couldn't carry his home state? It's Texas ffs. Do you know anything? There hasn't been a Democrat senator elected in Texas since 1993.
Beto lost an incredibly tight race to Cruz.

I know some things. I know your opinion verbatim regarding the 2020 election for example yet I see it stated every few pages anyway as if it's new

Beto lost an incredibly tight race to Cruz. Yes he did, and what in that would make you think he has enough of a presence, and profile to win a general?

Texas demographics are changing and it won't be long, possibly next year in fact, that you see a democratic senator from Texas. The point remains, if you cannot carry your home state this hubris that you can win a general is just that.

I know you like him, and obviously I touched a nerve when I said he was just an empty suit, but there ya go. He can come again depending on what he chooses to do next, that ok?

is_that_so

Jamiekelly wrote: »

"This is a lot of the reason Biden is the clear winner. Theres an election to be won here and extremism is not the answer"

Biden has been losing ground since his campaign began. We have a pefect example of centrism vs extremism with Trump and HC. It didn't end well for Clinton and it won't end well for Biden either. The man can barely remember Obama's name sometimes as well as going on rambling tangents that have nothing to do with the questions that get asked. To be honest what would Pelosi know at this point? She is nearly 80 years old and has come out in favour of unrestricted NSA powers and was openly defending waterboarding as not being legally classed as torture. That kind of thinking doesn't get ANY kind of democrat excited to go to the polls.

Age doesn't come into it when you're a smart politician, which she is. She is also right in where they need to win, which is far from the PC ideology of the coasts they would win with a broken wind-up toy. Biden is a likeable, well-recognised, old guy, who is not Trump. He can talk at the same level of people, people who don't read "cutting edge" blog posts of 100 reasons not to vote for Biden.

He's an old style politician who does not revert to the asinine name calling and is prepared to work with others, even ones he disagrees with. In these times that's actually refreshing. Sure he may bumble, misremember or get things wrong but Trump has set a dropping bar very low.

They need to win and if he's the guy to do it they should back him. A democratic WH gives hope to AOC and any others who have policy aspirations that they may have a President who who will listen to them, never mind the numbers to do something. Shooting down a candidate who can deliver the WH is a very poor political call in that respect.

is_that_so

eire4 wrote: »

Pretty much what I would expect from the Corporate Democrats leader. This is the same people who gave the US Hilary Clinton last time and even added another corporate democrat as VP in their arrogance and we saw how that worked out. Fact is the MSM who love the corrupted US political system awash in money which the MSM benefit from financially are happy to peddle the corporate Democrats line. This mentally is why over 40% of the US electorate does not even bother to vote because the system has long since sold them out to the interests of big corporations and wealthy individuals.

IMHO what the Democrats and the US actually need is a big bold FDR type Democrat not another corporate one like Clinton or Obama.

Who is that? They don't have one. FDR was a man who have them hope at a terrible time. These are not terrible times, despite the dreadful President, and voters would be as happy getting things to work properly.

Water John

This is an interesting perspective from Will Hutton, on Warren remaking capitalism. It is a view I would concur with, at this point. Having been a bit cautious, I think now the Dems need to be brave and bold.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/03/elizabeth-warren-project-to-remake-capitalism-what-can-british-politicians-learn-from-her

is_that_so

Water John wrote: »

This is an interesting perspective from Will Hutton, on Warren remaking capitalism. It is a view I would concur with, at this point. Having been a bit cautious, I think now the Dems need to be brave and bold.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/03/elizabeth-warren-project-to-remake-capitalism-what-can-british-politicians-learn-from-her

Just as long as it wins them the WH. I'd like to see her on the ticket anyway.
Brave, bold and loser is no praise nor achievement.

Water John

Agreed. My initial focus was to get a President, any President, to normalise the office. My deeper hopes would be to start and reflect the change needed to benefit the widest number of people.
Biden ticks the first box and Warren ticks both.

pixelburp

So if Biden remains unstoppable the next question obviously becomes the VP pick, cos that in of itself is a huge message sent. Imo Clinton's own was a terrible choice among terrible choices, a bland centrist in ... Jesus, I can't remember his name? Tim Cain? Rather than a natural foil to Clinton's lack of charisma, or placating the wounded left wing with someone non establishment.

Bidens the star of the show, but Warren as VP - assuming she wanted the job - could be the voice that reached the again spurned left wing while running counter to Bidens off the cuff style. Biden would be the attack dog this time so the cooler head of Warren might work.

Water John

He could, like With Cheney, let Warren as VP, largely run Govn't.

eagle eye

StringerBell wrote:

I know you like him, and obviously I touched a nerve when I said he was just an empty suit, but there ya go. He can come again depending on what he chooses to do next, that ok?

Well you are wrong, I don't like him. I said he has a better chance of beating Trump than what's leading the race.
What annoyed me was you saying that because he didn't win Texas that he shouldn't be considered when his performance would be a bigger deal than a Dem winning Massachusetts.
Trying to back your argument with your own prediction that a Dem will win Texas soon is ridiculous at best.

pixelburp

What it comes down to is that the trajectory for a failed shot at the senate, is not then a shot at the presidency. It doesn't matter how red Texas has been the last 40 odd years, it has certainly been growing more purple in the interim, O'Rourke took what amounted to a political bloody nose and decided the best course ... was to aim even higher. That hubris is ludicrous, and lord knows Americans love to dogpile on a loser, which ultimately O'Rourke is at this minute

rossie1977

Cruz was most unpopular senator in America and even with tons of national media publicity and donations from outside Texas O'Rourke failed to win. Trump is alot more popular than Cruz so I don't see how O'Rourke beats him nationwide.

As for VP I doubt the main candidates pick each other. Someone like Stacey Abrams has better chance of being Biden’s vp than Warren.

StringerBell

eagle eye wrote: »

Well you are wrong, I don't like him. I said he has a better chance of beating Trump than what's leading the race.
What annoyed me was you saying that because he didn't win Texas that he shouldn't be considered when his performance would be a bigger deal than a Dem winning Massachusetts.
Trying to back your argument with your own prediction that a Dem will win Texas soon is ridiculous at best.

I'm not trying to back my own argument with that point, it is to show you how foolish your metric is, or how fragile it is maybe is a better way of saying it. Texas is republican at the minute, great. Not like it hasn't been showing signs of change over the last few years though so relying on historical data to back a point isnt all that great.

His performance was great, and he should have built on it by staying in Texas, helping to turn in blue and come again later, he is a young man with no real record to speak of but had some good momentum going for him. His arrogance has probably cost him but it isn't too late for him to rehabilitate and come again.

He couldn't win a senate seat in his home state. This provides plenty of evidence that he wasn't ready to step into the national stage, his performance on the national stage confirmed that.

Danzy

marno21 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/business/status/1190590990693871619

This this this x1000

This is a lot of the reason Biden is the clear winner. Theres an election to be won here and extremism is not the answer

It is painfully obvious but many of the activists won't care, they have all the answers and if you don't agree, then you are a gammon, a dascisy, alt right, a Zio or an Uncle Tom or one of the countless others.

They are like missionaries for their God.

Danzy

Jamiekelly wrote: »

"This is a lot of the reason Biden is the clear winner. Theres an election to be won here and extremism is not the answer"

Biden has been losing ground since his campaign began. We have a pefect example of centrism vs extremism with Trump and HC. It didn't end well for Clinton and it won't end well for Biden either. The man can barely remember Obama's name sometimes as well as going on rambling tangents that have nothing to do with the questions that get asked. To be honest what would Pelosi know at this point? She is nearly 80 years old and has come out in favour of unrestricted NSA powers and was openly defending waterboarding as not being legally classed as torture. That kind of thinking doesn't get ANY kind of democrat excited to go to the polls.

Trump isn't really extreme, he is loud and talks a lot though he is like a pre Reagan Republican or even Democrat despite all the drama.

One way he has been very radical is rolling back in areas that were bastions of neoliberal economics since the 80s.


His position in trade is closest to Bernie Sanders.

His scrapping of the EU US trade deal and Pacific trade one were the biggest setback in 40 years to the unfettered free market world vision.

His crackdown on illegal migration has driven record wage growth for African Americans especially and strong wage growth and employment for the poorer on society.

They are things Democrats should have been doing as standard, not castigating him for it.

He is no progressive but he ran with the obvious.

Professor Moriarty

Danzy wrote: »

Trump isn't really extreme, he is loud and talks a lot though he is like a pre Reagan Republican or even Democrat despite all the drama.

One way he has been very radical is rolling back in areas that were bastions of neoliberal economics since the 80s.


His position in trade is closest to Bernie Sanders.

His scrapping of the EU US trade deal and Pacific trade one were the biggest setback in 40 years to the unfettered free market world vision.

His crackdown on illegal migration has driven record wage growth for African Americans especially and strong wage growth and employment for the poorer on society.

They are things Democrats should have been doing as standard, not castigating him for it.

He is no progressive but he ran with the obvious.

How's his environmental policies doing? How's the deficit getting on?

Danzy

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

How's his environmental policies doing? How's the deficit getting on?

Don't like his environmental position but his position on trade and migration are the first break from Reaganism In decades, hopefully that will continue and spread politically.

The deficit is a concern but it is not at dangerous levels and there is strong growth in their economy.

He is far from ideal but he is at least better than the alternatives.

Professor Moriarty

Danzy wrote: »

Don't like his environmental position but his position on trade and migration are the first break from Reaganism In decades, hopefully that will continue and spread politically.

The deficit is a concern but it is not at dangerous levels and there is strong growth in their economy.

He is far from ideal but he is at least better than the alternatives.

Instead of leading the fight against climate change, he has shredded American environmental polices to enrich his billionaire cronies. He even called climate change a Chinese conspiracy. He's that stupid or that much of a liar. Or both.

The deficit is a disaster. It grew by 17% in 2018 and that total then grew by 26% in 2019. Trump doesn't give a crap though. He'll be dead when it comes home to roost.

He is a dreadful person and a dreadful president. He is a narcissistic and lying racist who feeds off division. Bozo the clown would be a better alternative.

Danzy

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Instead of leading the fight against climate change, he has shredded American environmental polices to enrich his billionaire cronies. He even called climate change a Chinese conspiracy. He's that stupid or that much of a liar. Or both.

The deficit is a disaster. It grew by 17% in 2018 and that total then grew by 26% in 2019. Trump doesn't give a crap though. He'll be dead when it comes home to roost.

He is a dreadful person and a dreadful president. He is a narcissistic and lying racist who feeds off division. Bozo the clown would be a better alternative.

Record low unemployment for African American s and strong job growth for Hispanic Americans and wider working class America. The best President for them in decades.

Like I said he is far from ideal but on certain key issues he is moving things along nicely.

At the least he marks the end of Reaganism.

marno21

Danzy wrote: »

Record low unemployment for African American s and strong job growth for Hispanic Americans and wider working class America. The best President for them in decades.

Like I said he is far from ideal but on certain key issues he is moving things along nicely.

At the least he marks the end of Reaganism.

You are still ignoring the points about the deficit.

Burning the furniture to heat the house is not an effective economic policy.

Overheal

Danzy wrote: »

Record low unemployment for African American s and strong job growth for Hispanic Americans and wider working class America. The best President for them in decades.

Like I said he is far from ideal but on certain key issues he is moving things along nicely.

At the least he marks the end of Reaganism.

You aren’t living it and your view is cobbled together from dear leader remarks about the economy?