Something bigger than indictments that Trump should be worried about

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Big assumption considering we haven't seen any of the charges. This is all based on media assumptions and last I heard, they weren't admissible in court. The only opinion that counts is a jury's.

Sorry man, that's the kind of talk people use when they're afraid what's being said might be true.  It's like "The only poll that matters is on voting day!!!"   Yeah.  Thats right ,But it doesn't mean polls taken before that day are wrong or can be just dismissed.

There's only so many kinds of charges he can be charged with in regards to stormy.  It isn't going to be a murder charge for example. We can rule that out. So - assumption? Sure. Big ones? Nope.

And a LOT of people are involved in the prep for a grand jury trial. So it's not hard for me to believe some details have leaked.

Sure - we will have to wait and see what really happens but the evidence so far is that they aren't exactly in a stellar position. It will be a tough fight i suspect.

[Aristides]

The only opinion that counts is the jury's and they will make their decision on what is presented in court, not what is in media or on the internet. Why on earth would you think all 34 counts are about Stormy?

You claim the charges are weak without even knowing what they are.

Edited April 2, 2023 by Aristides

[CdnFox]

Just now, Aristides said:

The only opinion that counts is the jury's

on voting day, right?  LOL!

If that were true then why would we be here discussing it?  why do you even care? Just wait for the jury's decision and don't think about it till then.

Of course, it's a  complete horseshit thing to say.  Discussing and speculating about it is fun. It's why we have "discussion" boards in the first place.

So knock it off with the whole crybaby routine of "but but but muh feels get hurt if it turns out to be that way".  Right now the information out there is that this is all in connection with the stormy daniels issue, and if we're going to discuss it at all then we're going to discuss the information we have.

If you don't want to talk about it,that's fine, but then don't talk about it.

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

Well i certainly wouldn't put it AGAINST him either.  I mean - we heard all this in 2016 - there's no WAY he could win right? Right? People were adamant - comedians BEGGED him to run JUST SO THEY COULD LAUGH WHEN HE FAILED. Except.. that's not how it went.

I would like to think he's on his last legs but to be honest he still commands a hell of a lot of excitement and loyalty out there. It would not surprise me if he wins the nomination that he wins the election.

Yep, I remember it well.  I was in a Holiday Inn Express in Bonnyville and I got some cans in and a pizza delivered to watch the results come in.  At that time I didn't have much of an opinion of Trump either way (I leaned towards tw@t because of Garry Trudeau) and I remember being surprised (and amused) at how CNN kept up a desperate hunt for ridings where Hillary might still be able to score a few votes.  I'd only ever watched CNN for things like 9/11 before.

I thought that maybe Trump was going to surprise everyone, and actually turn out to be presidential.  Go figure, eh?

Right now he looks like a lock for the nomination.  It will be interesting to see if anyone actually debates him.

 

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

It sounds like your own bias and hatred seems to be getting in the way.  If what you were saying was true he wouldn't have won the first time. He does have the ability to convince people that he's a good choice.  Suggesting that it's a 'respect' issue or the like defies history and all you're really saying is YOU don't like him and don't THINK anyone else should. Fair enough - but that is meaningless in the real world. Clearly he can actually get broad support.

And Biden now has a track record - and it is NOT good. 

Meanwhile while trump is clearly insane and said all kinds of stupid crap and does all kinds of stupid things - his actual track record wasn't bad at all. The economy improved significantly, and that can be tied to his policy significantly which is important, he did do project lightspeed, he did trade deals that a lot of Americans like, crime got better and other metrics of interest to people improved.

He'd have a shot at it.

Biden died a little over 7 years ago. 

I get why they chose him... bernie sanders would have been an absolute disaster beyond belief.  But he's just been terrible. Not that i know who the dems would replace him with that would be much better - there are choices that would be a little more 'awake' but they're all too 'woke'  

The american parties are VERY polarized right and left at the moment and the mushy middle seems unsure which way to jump. God knows what's going to happen.

 

I get this a lot.  There's a difference between hate and contempt.  I don't know if I actually hate anything.  Pushed in the past I came up with Alberta winters and those guys at ISIS who cut the heads off people for videos.  Not Trump.  He really isn't worth hate. 

As I said, the first time, no-one really knew him.  And it could be argued Hillary lost, not Trump won.  But that could be argued about a lot of elections. 

I don't agree his track record was not bad.  I don't insist it was wholly awful, but I'm opposed to things like corporate tax cuts and turning a country into a theocracy.  (I'm pro-choice, pro-gay rights, etc.  Basically pro-personal freedom as opposed to religious control of others) To see Trump holding a Bible was bad enough.  To see evangelical Christians buying it was a lot worse. 

I don't agree with weakening environmental regulations.  There are sometimes good reasons to loosen red tape, but typically, whenever I read about one proposed by Trump's government, I was against it.

Trump standing next to Putin and saying he trusted him more than he trusted US intelligence agencies was also a low point for me.  Not to mention that he was still POTUS when he cried about the 2020 result in the runup to Jan 06, and when he urged his supporters to challenge the vote certification on that day.

I would never argue that Biden's, or the Democrats' track record was good.  I like his attempts at gun reform.  Doomed to failure but at least it shows whose side he's on.  I liked his infrastructures bill and his chips bill, but only superficially.  I didn't go into the details on any of them.  I do think they are gutless when it comes to certain issues, and they do not read the people very well.  The "woke" label is well likely to cause them trouble with the "mushy middle", as you say. 

The issue is the choice.

 

[CdnFox]

15 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I remember being surprised (and amused) at how CNN kept up a desperate hunt for ridings where Hillary might still be able to score a few votes. 

For those who are political junkies - it has GOT to have been one of the very best elections to watch in history. The media literally having a melt down more and more as it became more and more clear he'd won. I've never seen the like anywhere.

The thing that really stuck with me tho is when he came on stage, and there's a moment just as he come out where he stops and looks around, and my friend and i said at the same moment - "HE IS SHOCKED HE WON".  He very clearly did NOT expect to win, i don't know if he really thought about what it would mean, he very clearly did NOT expect to be there. 

It was literally an outcome that took EVERYONE including the candidate by surprise.

Quote

Right now he looks like a lock for the nomination. 

We'll see. Like i said i won't bet against him.

 

21 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

There's a difference between hate and contempt. 

I won't pick a fight over it, for the purposes of this discussion i'm happy to call it either.

26 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I don't agree his track record was not bad.  (SNIP) I'm opposed to things like corporate tax cuts and turning a country into a theocracy.  (I'm pro-choice, pro-gay rights, etc.  Basically pro-personal freedom as opposed to religious control of others) To see Trump holding a Bible was bad enough.  To see evangelical Christians buying it was a lot worse. 

Well - there's some important distinctions.

First - policy vs outcome is important. You may not agree with his policies but that's personal preference. However - if he states his policy and then acts on that and achieves his policy goals successfully -  REGARDLESS of your opinion of that policy that's a pretty good leader. That is a successful leadership (assuming all else is neutral).

Trump ran on a variety of things and for the most part achieved them and most were things a lot of americans wanted.  Did the economy go up? Yep. Did jobs go up? Yep. Did taxes go down? yep.  etc etc.   So he did VERY well.

The second thing is you cannot equate his 'antics' and 'showmanship' with results.  He waived bibles around and such - but really what new laws did he bring in that were anti gay? None.  So sure the dems have their rhetoric and the republicans have theirs but if they're not using their powers in that regard it's kind of meaningless. IF trump had banned gay marriage or something then fine but that never happened.

26 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I don't agree with weakening environmental regulations.  There are sometimes good reasons to loosen red tape, but typically, whenever I read about one proposed by Trump's government, I was against it.

Again - that's your take on his policy - that does not mean he was not a successful leader. It's what americans wanted and he did it well

26 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Trump standing next to Putin and saying he trusted him more than he trusted US intelligence agencies was also a low point for me. 

Well in fairness the US intelligence agencies went after trump a lot more than Putin did

It was a dark and dishonorable time for the us intelligence people.  Not a good or nice for trump to say but even you would have to admit given the steele dossier and the trump witch hunts and the leaked texts etc that its not ENTIRELY unprovoked.

But the bottom line is that when it comes to performance trump did achieve much. He ran on making the economy better, improving the US strength abroad etc and was largely successful.

[Guest]

18 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Since then he's just lost and lost.

He shouldn't have won to begin with. He had a seasoned veteran. People were joking.

Some people never learn.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

For those who are political junkies - it has GOT to have been one of the very best elections to watch in history. The media literally having a melt down more and more as it became more and more clear he'd won. I've never seen the like anywhere.

The thing that really stuck with me tho is when he came on stage, and there's a moment just as he come out where he stops and looks around, and my friend and i said at the same moment - "HE IS SHOCKED HE WON".  He very clearly did NOT expect to win, i don't know if he really thought about what it would mean, he very clearly did NOT expect to be there. 

It was literally an outcome that took EVERYONE including the candidate by surprise.

We'll see. Like i said i won't bet against him.

 

I won't pick a fight over it, for the purposes of this discussion i'm happy to call it either.

Well - there's some important distinctions.

First - policy vs outcome is important. You may not agree with his policies but that's personal preference. However - if he states his policy and then acts on that and achieves his policy goals successfully -  REGARDLESS of your opinion of that policy that's a pretty good leader. That is a successful leadership (assuming all else is neutral).

Trump ran on a variety of things and for the most part achieved them and most were things a lot of americans wanted.  Did the economy go up? Yep. Did jobs go up? Yep. Did taxes go down? yep.  etc etc.   So he did VERY well.

The second thing is you cannot equate his 'antics' and 'showmanship' with results.  He waived bibles around and such - but really what new laws did he bring in that were anti gay? None.  So sure the dems have their rhetoric and the republicans have theirs but if they're not using their powers in that regard it's kind of meaningless. IF trump had banned gay marriage or something then fine but that never happened.

Again - that's your take on his policy - that does not mean he was not a successful leader. It's what americans wanted and he did it well

Well in fairness the US intelligence agencies went after trump a lot more than Putin did

It was a dark and dishonorable time for the us intelligence people.  Not a good or nice for trump to say but even you would have to admit given the steele dossier and the trump witch hunts and the leaked texts etc that its not ENTIRELY unprovoked.

But the bottom line is that when it comes to performance trump did achieve much. He ran on making the economy better, improving the US strength abroad etc and was largely successful.

Basic disagreement here.  I'm not going to say Trump did a great job on something I don't agree with but his base does.  If you ask me to comment on his record I'm going to do so based on my views.  Biden pushed for student loan forgiveness.  Do you think that's good because his base wanted it?  I don't.

I don't believe Trump provided what Americans wanted.  They don't want to become a Theocracy.  They want access to abortion.  They want freedom from the religious right.  If Trump had provided what Americans wanted he would not have lost so badly in 2020.  He provided what his base wanted, and what the evangelicals wanted, but not what America wanted.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

Basic disagreement here.  I'm not going to say Trump did a great job on something I don't agree with but his base does.  If you ask me to comment on his record I'm going to do so based on my views.  Biden pushed for student loan forgiveness.  Do you think that's good because his base wanted it?  I don't.

I think if he'd run on that and been elected on that and pushed it through then that would be strong leadership. I think it would have been a horrible idea but the two are different.

If you're going to speak intelligently comparing one presidential term to another you have to learn to set aside personal bias and compartmentalize it.  It's fine to say "I didn't like his agenda" but if you can't get past that, you can never really analyze them. It would be like being so blinded by dedication to your home team that you couldn't appreciate that the other team played a good game.  That would pretty much rule you out from being a sports commentator

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

I don't believe Trump provided what Americans wanted. 

He did. But they didn't want the drama that went with it.

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

They don't want to become a Theocracy. 

They didn't become one or even remotely close to it. So no problem there.

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

 

They want access to abortion. 

They have access to abortion. And that was a judicial decision not a trump decision.

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

They want freedom from the religious right. 

They have freedom from the religious right and that was never threatened.

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

If Trump had provided what Americans wanted he would not have lost so badly in 2020.  He provided what his base wanted, and what the evangelicals wanted, but not what America wanted.

Well again - not quite true.  I was very careful to seperate his 'performance' show from the results he got. Americans liked the results, they didn't like the show.

Which is why biden is getting slagged so badly. They MISS what trump gave them in that regard - low inflation low gas prices stable economy good job growth good stock and real estate growth which is what their pensions are based on, etc etc.

They don't miss the absolute crazy stuff.  But look at your own 'dislikes' -  theocracy? That never even came  close to happening. Abortion?  Wasn't even an issue during the 2020 election so your claim there is just silly.  What happened is that his antics allowed the left to convince a lot of people that a lot of things were happening that just weren't true and people hoped biden could bring stability in that area without ruining the things they DID like.

But he didn't - the economy is trashed horribly now and biden is becoming as unstable as trump, just in a different way.

So if the us gets biden v trump next election, they're going to have to decide if they want a good economy etc and live with the crazy, or if they want a crap economy and to live with the incompetence. 

It's not a great choice is it. Hard to think that it's come to this for that once great country.

[Americana Antifa]

7 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I think the reason he lost in 2020 was because he was elected in 2016.  People got to know him. 

I wish I could agree, but the average American doesn't follow politics that closely. Trump's attempt at blackmailing Zelenskyy so he could cheat in an election was one of the worst things he did, but most people are either unaware or don't fully understand what happened there. The average person just cares about what's happening in their day to day life.

7 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Herschel Walker, Dr Oz, and Kari Lake were Trump's choices, in some cases so bad that the Dems campaigned for them. 

True, but Trump simps are more likely to get out and vote if they care about the actual person. It's not enough to just know that Trump endorsed them.

7 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I agree that anything can happen.  As I said above, if I gambled, I would not put more money than I can afford to lose on my prediction for 2024.

But where's the arguing in that?

We agree that anything can happen, so what really matters is that we vote. I just don't think the threat of Trump is gone yet. We need to treat this like the enormous threat to democracy that it is.

[CdnFox]

8 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

I wish I could agree, but the average American doesn't follow politics that closely. Trump's attempt at blackmailing Zelenskyy so he could cheat in an election was one of the worst things he did, but most people are either unaware or don't fully understand what happened there. The average person just cares about what's happening in their day to day life.

True, but Trump simps are more likely to get out and vote if they care about the actual person. It's not enough to just know that Trump endorsed them.

We agree that anything can happen, so what really matters is that we vote. I just don't think the threat of Trump is gone yet. We need to treat this like the enormous threat to democracy that it is.

So you're saying dem voters are lazy and stupid?

Ok - well, there you go i guess.

[Americana Antifa]

8 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So you're saying dem voters are lazy and stupid?

Ok - well, there you go i guess.

People in general are lazy and uninformed.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Americana Antifa said:

People in general are lazy and uninformed.

Reading your posts, it's hard to argue.

 

[Americana Antifa]

6 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Reading your posts, it's hard to argue.

 

You literally argued that Big Tech is biased against conservatives. Stop proving the Dunning-Kruger effect.

[Rebound]

22 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Or that they feel he will not be formally charged. That they know they're under the microscope. That this is one of the few things that have galvanized republicans, and likely did to his base as well.

If he gets off with no charges or jail, he can still run for president, and many of his supporters know that they can be loud with their votes, vs their rioting.

He’s already been formally charged.

Edited April 2, 2023 by Rebound

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

You literally argued that Big Tech is biased against conservatives.

You literally failed to prove otherwise while i proved it is.

5 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

Stop proving the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Stop projecting your failings on others.

[Americana Antifa]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You literally failed to prove otherwise while i proved it is.

Stop projecting your failings on others.

 

[CdnFox]

52 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

 

 

Edited April 2, 2023 by CdnFox

[Guest]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I think if he'd run on that and been elected on that and pushed it through then that would be strong leadership. I think it would have been a horrible idea but the two are different.

If you're going to speak intelligently comparing one presidential term to another you have to learn to set aside personal bias and compartmentalize it.  It's fine to say "I didn't like his agenda" but if you can't get past that, you can never really analyze them. It would be like being so blinded by dedication to your home team that you couldn't appreciate that the other team played a good game.  That would pretty much rule you out from being a sports commentator

He did. But they didn't want the drama that went with it.

They didn't become one or even remotely close to it. So no problem there.

They have access to abortion. And that was a judicial decision not a trump decision.

They have freedom from the religious right and that was never threatened.

Well again - not quite true.  I was very careful to seperate his 'performance' show from the results he got. Americans liked the results, they didn't like the show.

Which is why biden is getting slagged so badly. They MISS what trump gave them in that regard - low inflation low gas prices stable economy good job growth good stock and real estate growth which is what their pensions are based on, etc etc.

They don't miss the absolute crazy stuff.  But look at your own 'dislikes' -  theocracy? That never even came  close to happening. Abortion?  Wasn't even an issue during the 2020 election so your claim there is just silly.  What happened is that his antics allowed the left to convince a lot of people that a lot of things were happening that just weren't true and people hoped biden could bring stability in that area without ruining the things they DID like.

But he didn't - the economy is trashed horribly now and biden is becoming as unstable as trump, just in a different way.

So if the us gets biden v trump next election, they're going to have to decide if they want a good economy etc and live with the crazy, or if they want a crap economy and to live with the incompetence. 

It's not a great choice is it. Hard to think that it's come to this for that once great country.

Strong leadership does not a decent POTUS make, if it leads in the wrong direction.  Trudeau said he was going to introduce a carbon tax, and he did.  I doubt you'll find many Trump supporters on here willing to concede that that was just strong leadership.

Americans didn't vote for Biden by such large numbers in 2020 because they "liked the results, they didn't like the show". They voted that way because they did not like the direction the country was taking under Trump and they wanted a more liberal government.  It's not all Trump's fault.  I imagine Mitch McConnell's perfidy regarding when nominations to the SCOTUS are allowed must have turned off a lot of middle of the road types.

To imagine that abortion wasn't an issue is silly, as it assumes that no-one gave it a thought until the SCOTUS actually killed Roe v Wade in 2022.   Those who voted on the issue in the 2022 midterms would certainly have considered it in 2020. Basically, the US electorate likes its freedoms, and have no desire to abrogate those freedoms to a religious, conservative Supreme Court.

You say they have access to abortion, and freedom from the Supreme Court, but that's being disingenuous.  They have much reduced access to abortion, with every chance of further reductions, and increasing indication that the Supreme Court is going to look into gay marriage.  I am vehemently opposed to any kind of religious influence on lawmaking and from the midterm results, it looks like a lot of US voters are too.  I don't think those voters are going to turn the whole thing back over to Trump again next year.

Trump inherited a pretty good economy from Obama and falling unemployment, which continued, granted, but such is usually the case.  Once COVID hit it's unfair to comment on either the economy or unemployment as the pandemic was a unique situation.  

His performance regarding the pandemic itself is generally regarded as being very poor, and might have swayed some voters.  

The current state of the economy is something that is being experienced worldwide, and cannot be said to be Biden's responsibility.  I understand there will be those who don't see it that way.

So I don't buy that Trump's antics alone were the reason for his failure in 2020.  His antics after that failure could well be responsible for the Republicans' current reluctance to have him within a country mile of the nomination in 2024.  They might not have a choice though.  On their own heads be it.

That said, I do agree that Biden is becoming less and less electable, and his performance in the run up is likely to be poor.  It would be good if the Democrats could come up with a viable alternative.  But who?  I remember in the run up to 2020 I asked whether Mario Cuomo would be a good choice.  So much for my ideas.

At least the Republicans have a field, and can afford for Trump to be defeated in the nominations.

Edited April 3, 2023 by bcsapper

[Michael Hardner]

28 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

   Those who voted on the issue in the 2022 midterms would certainly have considered it in 2020.  

Some interesting numbers.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/exit-polls-president.html

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Some interesting numbers.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/exit-polls-president.html

There is some very obvious polarization there.  More than I thought.

[Michael Hardner]

13 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

There is some very obvious polarization there.  More than I thought.

Those making under $100K voted for Biden above his median margin of victory.

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Strong leadership does not a decent POTUS make, if it leads in the wrong direction. 

Well again - you're conflating what YOU feel good policy is with 'good leadership'. And that leads to issues - basically your definition of a good potus would wind up being 'someone who does stuff i like" and that's just way to personal to be a useful tool for comparing or evaluating them.

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Trudeau said he was going to introduce a carbon tax, and he did.  I doubt you'll find many Trump supporters on here willing to concede that that was just strong leadership.

well i would say they were wrong if that's the only issue we're talking about. But - overall he has broken more promises than just about every other prime minister ever including his father and he's been caught at corruption many times specifically for his job.

And he said the carbon tax would be neutral which it turns out it isnt

So thats where we start to run into issues.

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Americans didn't vote for Biden by such large numbers in 2020 because they "liked the results, they didn't like the show". They voted that way because they did not like the direction the country was taking under Trump and they wanted a more liberal government. 

Hogwash. They liked the employment situation. They liked the strong economy. they liked a lot of it.

But they didn't like the drama and that was clear from the polling and biden said he'd do a better job with covid (which he didn't).  Biden seemed pretty safe and a return to sanity - but they wanted to keep all that other stuff too. Which is why biden is in the tank right now

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

To imagine that abortion wasn't an issue is silly, as it assumes that no-one gave it a thought until the SCOTUS actually killed Roe v Wade in 2022.   Those who voted on the issue in the 2022 midterms would certainly have considered it in 2020.

I doubt it.

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

You say they have access to abortion, and freedom from the Supreme Court, but that's being disingenuous. 

No, it isn't.

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

They have much reduced access to abortion, with every chance of further reductions, and increasing indication that the Supreme Court is going to look into gay marriage. 

THe gay marriage thing is a complete joke. Don't even bother. I don't have time to go make myself a tinfoil hat. 

As to abortion, They don't have a 'much reduced' access for the most part. The vast majority of states didn't change anything. And those that did are a 2 hour drive from those who didn't. That would be a relatively minor inconvenience.

The thing is legal experts have been saying for many years roe vs wade was a shakey ruling and could well be overturned. It probably should have been with the states all along.

So - easy enough, just add it to the constitution. It's not like there aren't a hell of a lot of amendments already - add one more.

But biden doesn't want to try.

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I am vehemently opposed to any kind of religious influence on lawmaking

May i remind you that during the debates nancy stood up and stated clear as a bell she would appoint judges that would rule in favor of her political agenda (guns, etc) at the same time trump said he would and NOBODY BATTED AN EYE in the public or the media.

If you're opposed to it then you're talking about the wrong country because both sides are just fine with it.

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Trump inherited a pretty good economy from Obama and falling unemployment, which continued, granted, but such is usually the case.  Once COVID hit it's unfair to comment on either the economy or unemployment as the pandemic was a unique situation.  

He turned an "ok" economy into a very solid performer. Stocks radically improved, jobs did, most of the economic markers underwent a dramatic and noticeable improvement the timeline of which can be lined up with various policies.

Obama lead a very slow and sluggish recovery at best. Trump did much better.

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

His performance regarding the pandemic itself is generally regarded as being very poor, and might have swayed some voters.  

Which is a lie, pure and simple. IT's the kind of thing democrats propose. He did far better than most and the only reason we got vaccines when we did was project lightspeed.

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

The current state of the economy is something that is being experienced worldwide, and cannot be said to be Biden's responsibility.  I understand there will be those who don't see it that way.

It is biden. It's not worldwide at all, many countries are no where near as bad as the states and the ones who come close made the same mistakes. But the US is just about top of the list in the developed world. It is ABSOLUTELY biden's fault.

you cannot dump billions and billions of unearned dollars into the economy WITHOUT that happening. 

If biden had done the right things then they would have an inflation rate perhaps 2 percent above target at its max and only have been above target for a  year max. That is vastly different than what happened. And now they'll head into a recession shortly.

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

So I don't buy that Trump's antics alone were the reason for his failure in 2020.  His antics after that failure could well be responsible for the Republicans' current reluctance to have him within a country mile of the nomination in 2024.  They might not have a choice though.  On their own heads be it.

I think not wanting him within a country mile is 100 percent about teh antics. For sure. They know he did fine with the real issues - but they know people are sick to death of "the election was stolen" and fights with the press and telling little rocket man his button is bigger than his, etc etc etc.

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

That said, I do agree that Biden is becoming less and less electable, and his performance in the run up is likely to be poor.  It would be good if the Democrats could come up with a viable alternative.  But who?  I remember in the run up to 2020 I asked whether Mario Cuomo would be a good choice.  So much for my ideas.

Lol - well it's a problem isn't it. Right now i'm not seeing ANY white hats on either side.  Bernie sanders? What a disaster that would be,  Desantis is kind of just like trump light - he'll do almost but not quite as good with the economy and cause almost but not quite as many drama shows. What's the point? Might as well go for full fat trump instead.

I'm not seeing that moderate leader who can just step in and do  a solid job with a few policies that tick off one side or another a little but not 'burn the cities or storm the capital' levels of pissed off. And nobody terribly strong.

 

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

At least the Republicans have a field, and can afford for Trump to be defeated in the nominations.

 

[Guest]

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Well again - you're conflating what YOU feel good policy is with 'good leadership'. And that leads to issues - basically your definition of a good potus would wind up being 'someone who does stuff i like" and that's just way to personal to be a useful tool for comparing or evaluating them.

Yeah, I think we've established that we have different opinions of what a good leader is.  Leading down a path to crap might be good leadership to you, but it's still crap to me.

 

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

well i would say they were wrong if that's the only issue we're talking about. But - overall he has broken more promises than just about every other prime minister ever including his father and he's been caught at corruption many times specifically for his job.

And he said the carbon tax would be neutral which it turns out it isnt

So thats where we start to run into issues.

Sure, I didn't say I was a fan.  Trump probably told more lies than all his predecessors combined.  With regard to the corruption, I'm not arguing the point, just wondering if he's been charged?

 

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Hogwash. They liked the employment situation. They liked the strong economy. they liked a lot of it.

But they didn't like the drama and that was clear from the polling and biden said he'd do a better job with covid (which he didn't).  Biden seemed pretty safe and a return to sanity - but they wanted to keep all that other stuff too. Which is why biden is in the tank right now

Hogwash.  Of course people like jobs, but if that were the only factor Trump's antics wouldn't have got him canned.   According to the chart I post below, his jobs record was pretty average up until COVID, when all bets came off.

 

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I doubt it.

 

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

No, it isn't.

 

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

THe gay marriage thing is a complete joke. Don't even bother. I don't have time to go make myself a tinfoil hat. 

As to abortion, They don't have a 'much reduced' access for the most part. The vast majority of states didn't change anything. And those that did are a 2 hour drive from those who didn't. That would be a relatively minor inconvenience.

The thing is legal experts have been saying for many years roe vs wade was a shakey ruling and could well be overturned. It probably should have been with the states all along.

So - easy enough, just add it to the constitution. It's not like there aren't a hell of a lot of amendments already - add one more.

But biden doesn't want to try.

Why is it a joke?  The SCOTUS sent abortion back to the states and they could well do it with gay marriage too.

Abortion should be freely available to all women in all states all the time.  The right to marry a person of the same sex should too.  Basic freedom stuff.  I agree that a president with enough power should add it to the constitution.  Good luck with that these days. Biden doesn't want to try to turn water into wine either.

 

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

May i remind you that during the debates nancy stood up and stated clear as a bell she would appoint judges that would rule in favor of her political agenda (guns, etc) at the same time trump said he would and NOBODY BATTED AN EYE in the public or the media.

If you're opposed to it then you're talking about the wrong country because both sides are just fine with it.

I'm opposed to religious control, not political control.  Obviously both political parties are going to push their agendas.  I oppose agendas with a God bent.

 

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Which is a lie, pure and simple. IT's the kind of thing democrats propose. He did far better than most and the only reason we got vaccines when we did was project lightspeed.

No it's not.  Don't bring up tinfoil hats in a response to me if you are going to say stuff like this.

 

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

He turned an "ok" economy into a very solid performer. Stocks radically improved, jobs did, most of the economic markers underwent a dramatic and noticeable improvement the timeline of which can be lined up with various policies.

Obama lead a very slow and sluggish recovery at best. Trump did much better.

According to this chart from just after Trump left office his jobs record was average in most sectors.  I don't think he turned anything into a solid performer.  Stocks went up, but a massive corporate tax cut will do that.  The economy was slowing down before COVID hit, and his overall performance prior to COVID doesn't seem to be anything special.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/01/08/trump-jobs-record/

EDIT>  I posted the chart, and though it shows up in my response while I am writing it, it disappears when I post it.  I tried adding it with an edit but no luck.  It's in the link under the heading:

Trump against all other modern presidents, by industry

 

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

It is biden. It's not worldwide at all, many countries are no where near as bad as the states and the ones who come close made the same mistakes. But the US is just about top of the list in the developed world. It is ABSOLUTELY biden's fault.

you cannot dump billions and billions of unearned dollars into the economy WITHOUT that happening. 

If biden had done the right things then they would have an inflation rate perhaps 2 percent above target at its max and only have been above target for a  year max. That is vastly different than what happened. And now they'll head into a recession shortly.

I'm not an economist, so policies to deal with worldwide inflation are beyond my understanding, but the latest data shows the US is fairly well situated in the middle or better of all comparable countries.

https://www.officialdata.org/countries

 

The rest of your points we seem to agree on.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 3, 2023 by bcsapper

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Yeah, I think we've established that we have different opinions of what a good leader is.  Leading down a path to crap might be good leadership to you, but it's still crap to me.

"Crap" is subjective. You can't measure the success of a leader on subjective grounds. There is no common 'crap-o-meter' we can use to make an apples to apples comparison   In your world a bad leader who does something you like s a good leader.  In mine one who leads well and achieves their stated goals and is a good steward is a good leader even if he does crap i don't like.

 

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 

Sure, I didn't say I was a fan.  Trump probably told more lies than all his predecessors combined.  With regard to the corruption, I'm not arguing the point, just wondering if he's been charged?

Trudeau? Yes and found guilty a few times now. Unfortunately the ethics commissioner is the only one who has authority there, the cops litearlly said they were sure he broke the law but they didn't charge because the prime minister can give himself permission to do that.

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 

Hogwash.  Of course people like jobs, but if that were the only factor Trump's antics wouldn't have got him canned.   According to the chart I post below, his jobs record was pretty average up until COVID, when all bets came off.

They wanted to lose the drama and though that they'd still get the jobs and the economy would be solid and the covid response would be better with biden.  Of course - none of that has turned out to be true. But they DID lose a lot of the drama - so, score on that front.

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Why is it a joke?  The SCOTUS sent abortion back to the states and they could well do it with gay marriage too.

No they can't .  Did you even read the decisions and the rationale? Gay marriage has a very solid case in the constitution for SEVERAL solid reasons, any one of which would be enough to say it's covered.  Abortion is a medical procedure - and it was simply never enshrined in the constituton. There's a section of the constituion that basically is a catch all for things that didn't exist in their day that would come up later - gay marriage totally fits that but abortion doesn't any more than a colonoscopy would.

It was always VERY contentious law. Gay marriage is not. THat's just a fear tactic.

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Abortion should be freely available to all women in all states all the time. 

well that's your opinion - but that's not a constitutional right and nor is it any kind of 'freedom stuff'.  It's a medical treatment. There is no constitutional right to free medical treatment.

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

The right to marry a person of the same sex should too. 

That IS protected by the constitution.  So different story. Well... actually to be precise it basically says you either allow it for everyone or scrap it for everyone. But - basically same thing.

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Basic freedom stuff.  I agree that a president with enough power should add it to the constitution.  Good luck with that these days. Biden doesn't want to try to turn water into wine either.

So you're saying the people don't want it. Well...  sorry, but ...

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 

I'm opposed to religious control, not political control.  Obviously both political parties are going to push their agendas.  I oppose agendas with a God bent.

I see no difference between those who pray to the bible and those who  pray to the church of the left.

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 

No it's not.  Don't bring up tinfoil hats in a response to me if you are going to say stuff like this.

It absolutely is. Neither pfizer nor moderna could have done it without trump's plan. Sorry - but that is fact and history.

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 

According to this chart from just after Trump left office

Look at it more closely. He did better than almost every other president in his first term. Covid aside.

Quote

I'm not an economist, so policies to deal with worldwide inflation are beyond my understanding, but the latest data shows the US is fairly well situated in the middle or better of all comparable countries.

That is because it was so bad for so long. You can't look at it one month at a time. It started early, rose to incredible hights and stayed there for a long time, and is now beginning to drop because the damage has already been done to their economy and high interest rates are helping bring that under control. The cost will be a recession.

THere was nothing we were going to do to avoid higher than target inflation. But - biden's policies undoubtedly accounted for several points of that inflation. it was far higher and far longer than it needed to be, which means interest rates had to climb higher to address it, and that will hurt the economy more over time.

It's the same in canada - the BoC acknowledges that there is a DIRECT inflation increase of 1.5 percent directly due to trudeau's finacial policy and carbon tax and then you have to start looking at the very potent indirect effects which add up ot somewhere in the realm of 3 percent more at various times. So - instead of hitting 8 percent inflation we should have been closer to 4 or the like, must lower.  And food was hit worst by his nonsense and we're STILL seeing insane inflation there.

Here's the simple version of inflation, which milton said is 'always and everywhere a monetary issue'.  You CANNOT put 'unearned' dollars into the economy without creating inflation.  You simply can't.

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

"Crap" is subjective. You can't measure the success of a leader on subjective grounds. There is no common 'crap-o-meter' we can use to make an apples to apples comparison   In your world a bad leader who does something you like s a good leader.  In mine one who leads well and achieves their stated goals and is a good steward is a good leader even if he does crap i don't like.

 

Trudeau? Yes and found guilty a few times now. Unfortunately the ethics commissioner is the only one who has authority there, the cops litearlly said they were sure he broke the law but they didn't charge because the prime minister can give himself permission to do that.

No, I'm sure if he broke the law there would be more people with authority than the Ethics Commissioner.  I can't see why the opposition would not call him out when he gives himself permission to be a crook. 

Trump missed a trick there though, eh?  Give yourself permission to be a crook.  "Why didn't I think of that?"

I'm sure if he wins in 2024 he'll pardon himself.

 

39 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

No they can't .

Yes they can.

It is important to remember that a Supreme Court decision overturning Obergefell would not make same-sex marriage illegal. It would simply leave it to states legislatures to determine whether to allow gay marriages in their state.

https://www.nilesbarton.com/news-insights/is-same-sex-marriage-in-jeopardy

 

39 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

well that's your opinion - but that's not a constitutional right and nor is it any kind of 'freedom stuff'.  It's a medical treatment. There is no constitutional right to free medical treatment.

39 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So you're saying the people don't want it. Well...  sorry, but ...

So you think 50% +1 works in this situation?  I thought not.

 

39 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I see no difference between those who pray to the bible and those who  pray to the church of the left.

One is a work of fiction that should have no bearing on how a country is run and the other is a political leaning, not a church.  Unless you think it is, of course.

 

39 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It absolutely is. Neither pfizer nor moderna could have done it without trump's plan. Sorry - but that is fact and history.

Yeah, because lets face it, the last thing any other president would have done would be to try and fast track a vaccine.  Trumps record on COVID is a bad one. It's pretty well established that America did worse than most comparable countires, and that was down to Trump.

 

39 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Look at it more closely. He did better than almost every other president in his first term. Covid aside.

Closely doesn't change anything.  Average at very best.  Poorer in most cases, with the exception of retail and warehousing being areas where he did well.  Looking at it through very rose tinted glasses would allow a supporter to say low side of average.

 

39 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

That is because it was so bad for so long. You can't look at it one month at a time.

I'm not looking at it one month at a time.  I'm looking at it now.  You said the US was doing worse than the rest of the comparable countries in the world.  They are not.

Edited April 3, 2023 by bcsapper