America under President Trump

[Omni]

2 minutes ago, taxme said:

I have never seen Trump having to scramble for words any time that I have listened too him. Obama speaks completely what the globalist like Soros elite tell him what to say. All I see in Obama's head is how can I completely destroy America for always. Of course we all should know by now that there has never been anything found in the top of his head. 

Do you think anybody is ever going to pay Trump $400K to speak, like they do for Obama? I think not. Of course if he went off script he would totally screw up, and who wants to pay to watch some idiot speak while he follows his finger along the page?

[bush_cheney2004]

13 minutes ago, taxme said:

....Germany is a screwed up bloody mess thanks to commie Merkel who has done more harm and destruction to Germany and it's people than a Trump or Hitler could have ever have done in twenty years. 

 

Agreed...Germany is screwed up because of its own history and foolish choices.   Merkel wants to dominate the EU economically, but uses past German militarism as an excuse for deadbeat NATO defense spending.   Germany was a much bigger deadbeat debtor nation than Greece.

President Trump has called out Merkel and Germany on the world stage. 

Edited May 29, 2017 by bush_cheney2004

[Omni]

5 minutes ago, ReeferMadness said:

Look at the Republican presidents since Reagan.  Bush Senior is an outlier, being reasonably articulate and having a measure of integrity. 

Every Republican president seems less intelligent and more more sociopathic than the last.  If you leave out Bush senior (as an outlier) and go from Reagan to Bush to Trump, it's a straight line into the cellar.  I don't know how the Republicans could possibly dig up anyone less articulate than Trump but I said that about Bush too.  If you compared Trump on his best day to Obama at his worst, the difference would still be staggering. 

If you averaged the intelligence of Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama and compared that to the average of George W Bush and  Donald Trump, I wonder what the delta would be.  40 points?  50?  more?

It's lunacy.  Conservatives have convinced the common folk that intelligence and knowledge are things not to be trusted. 

And I've heard the odd interview with the people from the rust belt who "held their noses" and voted for him now saying they wished now they hadn't. They were hoping for jobs and they aren't happening so they feel they got screwed. Now of course you will have heard of the Chinese water torture, well now I am suggesting a much more effective version that I call the "Trump off script speech torture". Give me 5 minutes with your toughest nut and I'll have him singing. 

[ReeferMadness]

9 minutes ago, Omni said:

And I've heard the odd interview with the people from the rust belt who "held their noses" and voted for him now saying they wished now they hadn't. They were hoping for jobs and they aren't happening so they feel they got screwed. Now of course you will have heard of the Chinese water torture, well now I am suggesting a much more effective version that I call the "Trump off script speech torture". Give me 5 minutes with your toughest nut and I'll have him singing. 

I get how people from the middle states might feel that there is a great gap between the rhetoric of the Democrats and their actual governance.  I can understand (although not agree) with the relatively poor might see government assistance for the seriously poor as unfair.  I can even understand (although it's something I disparage) how people can be inclined to blame outsiders like immigrants when they feel their lives are not going as well as they would like. Still, I can't imagine how any intelligent person with a working internet connection could fail to see Trump for what he is.

The tragedy is that while these people might honestly have believed in Trump as a savior, he will destroy many things that are making their lives even as  good as they are today.  Analysis shows that many of the states that rely most heavily on government programs are those states that voted most heavily for Trump.  Conversely, I've read that something like 2/3 of the GDP of the US is produced in regions that went for Clinton.

 

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, ReeferMadness said:

...The tragedy is that while these people might honestly have believed in Trump as a savior, he will destroy many things that are making their lives even as  good as they are today.  Analysis shows that many of the states that rely most heavily on government programs are those states that voted most heavily for Trump.  Conversely, I've read that something like 2/3 of the GDP of the US is produced in regions that went for Clinton.

 

 

I don't think you fully understand the nature of candidate Trump's political support from "these people"....more government programs and mismanaged existing programs/regulatory schemes are targets regardless of their impact.  One of the best examples comes from coal mining states that Obama/Clinton just abandoned for political expediency (for "climate change").   "These people" flocked to Trump in great numbers.

[Omni]

15 minutes ago, ReeferMadness said:

I get how people from the middle states might feel that there is a great gap between the rhetoric of the Democrats and their actual governance.  I can understand (although not agree) with the relatively poor might see government assistance for the seriously poor as unfair.  I can even understand (although it's something I disparage) how people can be inclined to blame outsiders like immigrants when they feel their lives are not going as well as they would like. Still, I can't imagine how any intelligent person with a working internet connection could fail to see Trump for what he is.

The tragedy is that while these people might honestly have believed in Trump as a savior, he will destroy many things that are making their lives even as  good as they are today.  Analysis shows that many of the states that rely most heavily on government programs are those states that voted most heavily for Trump.  Conversely, I've read that something like 2/3 of the GDP of the US is produced in regions that went for Clinton.

 

I've been searching around for a thin a buddy of mine sent me many moons ago about red states vs blue states but I can't find it. It explained things like the where the best schools are, the highest unemployment, highest salaries, strongest healthcare etc. You can guess who scored best. Maybe you've seen it, if not I'll keep looking.

[ReeferMadness]

6 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

I don't think you fully understand the nature of candidate Trump's political support from "these people"....more government programs and mismanaged existing programs/regulatory schemes are targets regardless of their impact.  One of the best examples comes from coal mining states that Obama/Clinton just abandoned for political expediency (for "climate change").   "These people" flocked to Trump in great numbers.

Coal has no future.  Smart Republicans know that.  Even in India and China, they are cancelling new coal plants in favor of solar and natural gas.  And even if coal were to continue to be mined the job losses will continue due to automation. 

Trump lied to the gullible masses.  Those jobs that were exported as part of globalization (the ones that the right wingers claimed at the time weren't going to leave) are never coming back.  The factories might return but the jobs will be automated out of existence.

As is the case most of the time, we continue to argue about things that mattered to the last generation, not what will matter to the next generation. 

[ReeferMadness]

8 minutes ago, Omni said:

I've been searching around for a thin a buddy of mine sent me many moons ago about red states vs blue states but I can't find it. It explained things like the where the best schools are, the highest unemployment, highest salaries, strongest healthcare etc. You can guess who scored best. Maybe you've seen it, if not I'll keep looking.

I haven't seen it but I can well imagine.  The wealthiest, best educated portions of the country are blue states for sure.  If you split the country between red states and blue states you'd have one wealthy country with good education and universal health care and one, well... you get the picture.

If you find it, post a link.

[bush_cheney2004]

Just now, ReeferMadness said:

Coal has no future.  Smart Republicans know that.  Even in India and China, they are cancelling new coal plants in favor of solar and natural gas.  And even if coal were to continue to be mined the job losses will continue due to automation.

 

The political calculus for the 2016 election didn't care about that...right or wrong.   U.S. exports for steam and metallurgical coal are increasing.   Clinton lost several of her key "firewall states" partially because of her well documented opposition to coal mining.    Trump became president...Clinton did not.

Those who refuse to understand these things (not necessarily agree) were surprised by Trump's victory.

 

Quote

Trump lied to the gullible masses.  Those jobs that were exported as part of globalization (the ones that the right wingers claimed at the time weren't going to leave) are never coming back.  The factories might return but the jobs will be automated out of existence.

As is the case most of the time, we continue to argue about things that mattered to the last generation, not what will matter to the next generation. 

 

But it really didn't matter in 2016.   Trump's supporters want to "blow it all up" and damn the consequences.

In the United States, all politics are ultimately local, not national. 

As for automation, U.S. workers have faired far better than those in Canada who lag in productivity and investment, regardless of ruling government.

 

[WestCoastRunner]

Had an interesting conversation with a Floridian republican tourist up here in Canada. She's vehemently against universal health care or any kind of health care that causes her to pay more taxes. She's a strong supporter of Trump still. I didn't challenge her as she is a tourist in our country but she was sure representative of older white folks. And get this. She's a retired principal of an elementary school. I guess her students can afford private health care insurance. 

And maternity leave for parents. Forget it. She won't support it 

Edited May 29, 2017 by WestCoastRunner

[bush_cheney2004]

5 minutes ago, WestCoastRunner said:

Had an interesting conversation with a Floridian republican tourist up here in Canada. She's vehemently against universal health care or any kind of health care that causes her to pay more taxes. She's a strong supporter of Trump still. I didn't challenge her as she is a tourist in our country but she was sure representative of older white folks. And get this. She's a retired principal of an elementary school. I guess her students can afford private health care insurance.

 

Most "older white folks" (age 65 and older) in the U.S. are covered by Medicare insurance (80% pay) and privately purchased gap insurance + copays.   They also have Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage.   A large majority of other Americans, including her students are covered by private insurance through their parent's employer as an untaxed benefit.

Messing with that to provide the unknowns of universal coverage and wait times is a valid concern.

[WestCoastRunner]

Just now, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Most "older white folks" (age 65 and older) in the U.S. are covered by Medicare insurance (80% pay) and privately purchased gap insurance + copays.   They also have Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage.   A large majority of other Americans, including her students are covered by private insurance through their parent's employer as an untaxed benefit.

Messing with that to provide the unknowns of universal coverage and wait times is a valid concern.

A concern?  Certainly no concern for children born into low income families. 

[bush_cheney2004]

Just now, WestCoastRunner said:

A concern?  Certainly no concern for children born into low income families. 

 

Actually, low income families are already covered by state and federal programs (MediCal, Medicaid, SCHIP, etc.).

Ideologically, what the tourist was expressing is a common belief and concern that universal health care will reduce choice and access to private health insurance/providers.   The ACA (Obamacare) has reinforced the notion that government is incompetent at such things.

 

[WestCoastRunner]

4 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Actually, low income families are already covered by state and federal programs (MediCal, Medicaid, SCHIP, etc.).

Ideologically, what the tourist was expressing is a common belief and concern that universal health care will reduce choice and access to private health insurance/providers.   The ACA (Obamacare) has reinforced the notion that government is incompetent at such things.

 

Sure. This is why people lose their homes, lives. Nice try. 

 I can assure you. She didn't give a dam about less fortunate people. 

Edited May 29, 2017 by WestCoastRunner

[bush_cheney2004]

37 minutes ago, WestCoastRunner said:

Sure. This is why people lose their homes, lives. Nice try. 

 I can assure you. She didn't give a dam about less fortunate people. 

 

Why should she ?   Government taxes her income to provide the less fortunate such benefits already. 

[Omni]

1 hour ago, Omni said:

I've been searching around for a thin a buddy of mine sent me many moons ago about red states vs blue states but I can't find it. It explained things like the where the best schools are, the highest unemployment, highest salaries, strongest healthcare etc. You can guess who scored best. Maybe you've seen it, if not I'll keep looking.

Finally found the darn thing.

http://www.maxkeiser.com/2012/11/good-bye-red-states/

[Omni]

1 hour ago, ReeferMadness said:

I haven't seen it but I can well imagine.  The wealthiest, best educated portions of the country are blue states for sure.  If you split the country between red states and blue states you'd have one wealthy country with good education and universal health care and one, well... you get the picture.

If you find it, post a link.

http://www.maxkeiser.com/2012/11/good-bye-red-states/

[WestCoastRunner]

14 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Why should she ?   Government taxes her income to provide the less fortunate such benefits already. 

Sure they do. 

[Argus]

19 hours ago, taxme said:

Trump has a mind of his own. 

An empty one, based on observable data.

[Argus]

18 hours ago, ReeferMadness said:

I haven't seen it but I can well imagine.  The wealthiest, best educated portions of the country are blue states for sure.  If you split the country between red states and blue states you'd have one wealthy country with good education and universal health care and one, well... you get the picture.

An even more obvious fault line is between urban and rural. In a lot of blue states the rural areas vote Republican, but get outvoted by the city people. In red states the city people vote Democrat but are outnumbered by the rural people.

The only major cities that voted Republican in the 2012 presidential election were Phoenix, Oklahoma City, Fort Worth, and Salt Lake City. 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/red-state-blue-city-how-the-urban-rural-divide-is-splitting-america/265686/

 In the 2016 election, virtually every large urban center and many small ones — white Boise and majority-black Baltimore, wealthy San Francisco and beaten-down Detroit, sprawling sunwashed megalopoli and shrinking union strongholds — rejected the man who became president, often by yawning margins.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/the-urban-rural-divide-matters-more-than-red-vs-blue-state.html

 

Edited May 30, 2017 by Argus

[Omni]

So Trump is home and apparently a little frustrated that the issues that he left to go for a little international spin, are still there, and perhaps worsening. So now he wants to start up a "war room". Kushner is now solidly now under investigation by the FBI, I wonder if he'll fire Meuller next.  

[taxme]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

An empty one, based on observable data.

Who really cares what your observations are? They really mean nothing to me or anyone else except yourself. If there was anyone who had an empty one it was Obama and Hillary. Those two had no clue as to how to run a country except maybe knowing how to run it into the ground. And they did a pretty good job at doing just that. 

What is so sad about all this Trump bashing is that he has been president for a very short time. People like yourself are allowing the fake and phony leftist liberal media to convince you that Trump is a disaster for America. Give the guy a chance for Christ sake, and stop being and talking so foolish most of the time. 

[Omni]

45 minutes ago, taxme said:

Those two had no clue as to how to run a country except maybe knowing how to run it into the ground. And they did a pretty good job at doing just that. 

Take a look at the US deficit Bush handed to Obama, and what Obama was able to do with it. Once again, fact is a smart thing to do.

[Wilber]

I get a real hoot  out of this stuff. Obama and Harper both inherited wars and the biggest economic melt down since the Great Depression early in their mandates. Both ran big deficits as a result. One did a great job and the other was a disaster. Which one depends on who is doing the talking. Funny.

[Bob Macadoo]

.....ummmm Harper didn't take over during economic depression.....if you believe do nothing governments have an affect on the economy.....I don't.

8 minutes ago, Wilber said:

I get a real hoot  out of this stuff. Obama and Harper both inherited wars and the biggest economic melt down since the Great Depression early in their mandates. Both ran big deficits as a result. One did a great job and the other was a disaster. Which one depends on who is doing the talking. Funny.

 

Edited May 30, 2017 by Bob Macadoo