The Trump Card...

[dalscott]

View attachment 18311



Do you realize that President Trump focused on improving our Economy and status in the world for the last 2 years because he had the House and Senate.

Now that Democrats have the House, and have made their #1 agenda impeachment, it’s going to be hit back time, and the Democrats that have been walking on thin ice are breaking through.

Do you mean the upswing that began under Obama and Trump inherited? I’ll give him credit for keeping it going although it looks like it may be starting to turn around. I sincerely hope not. I’m also behind him on the trade situation. We should never have lowered tariffs and restrictions against imports like we did 40 years ago.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[dalscott]

Do you mean the upswing that began under Obama and Trump inherited? I’ll give him credit for keeping it going although it looks like it may be starting to turn around. I sincerely hope not. I’m also behind him on the trade situation. We should never have lowered tariffs and restrictions against imports like we did 40 years ago.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

Another thing. We are turning into the laughing stock of the world under him.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[muttly]

View attachment 18311



Do you realize that President Trump focused on improving our Economy and status in the world for the last 2 years because he had the House and Senate.

Now that Democrats have the House, and have made their #1 agenda impeachment, it’s going to be hit back time, and the Democrats that have been walking on thin ice are breaking through.

Do you mean the upswing that began under Obama and Trump inherited? I’ll give him credit for keeping it going although it looks like it may be starting to turn around. I sincerely hope not. I’m also behind him on the trade situation. We should never have lowered tariffs and restrictions against imports like we did 40 years ago.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

That was one heck of an upswing under Obama.

 

[Turtle]

Another thing. We are turning into the laughing stock of the world under him.

That's not even a little bit true. If it were true, countries wouldn't be scrambling to rework trade deals and North Korea would still be testing missiles and nuclear weapons.

 

[ATeam]

Another thing. We are turning into the laughing stock of the world under him.

That's not even a little bit true. If it were true, countries wouldn't be scrambling to rework trade deals and North Korea would still be testing missiles and nuclear weapons.

Trump is not without his accomplishments as president. Just like I prefer to talk about the investigations and allegations against Trump in terms of hard facts, I believe it is best to talk about his accomplishments in hard-fact terms. Debating whether the U.S. became a laughingstock under Trump is unproductive because "laughingstock" is not a well defined term. Noting hard-fact developments and their clear consequences is more informative.

For example, it is a hard fact that Trump and the Republican majorities in the House and Senate implemented a big tax cut. It appears that the justice reform bill will soon become law. That is another hard-fact development attributable to Trump. It is a hard fact that Mexico has not yet paid for the wall. It is a hard fact that trillions of dollars in corporate money can now be repatriated at the lower tax rate of 10%. While it remains to be seen how much of that money will actually be brought home, Trump promised to do effect this tax change and he kept that promise (part of the larger tax bill).

If you want to have a hard-fact discussion about the success of failure of the Trump presidency, this promise tracker is a useful reference. I like this web site because it is kept current and it does a reasonable job of objectively quantifying what happened and what did not.

 

[Turtle]

Keep in mind that The Washington Post Fact Checker had reasonably and objectively determined that Trump has broken his promise to make Mexico reimburse the US for the wall, even though the wall has yet to be built and there is nothing to date to reimburse.

And the very same Washington Post Fact Checker has reasonably and objectively determined that, because the wall wasn't built by a date of their choosing, that's a broken promise, too.

Trump promised 3 percent GDP by the end of his first term, and said it might go as high as 4 percent. To the Washington Post Fact Checker that immediately became a hard 4 percent promise, and because it's not there yet z it's a promise broken

But they are excellent, just masterful, at straw man fact chrcking. They can't wait to see if Trump creates 10 million jobs over 10 years, so they're gonna prorate it, despite the fact that job creation, employment and unemployment have never been linear enough to prorate.

There's a lot of "compromise" determinations that are clearly promises kept, but because WaPo didn't like how they were done they just can't bring themselves to give it up. For example, Trump promised a freeze on federal hiring and to reduce the federal workforce through attrition. He did precisely that. He froze hiring and has reduced (and is continuing to reduce) the federal workforce. But the freeze wasn't permanent, so even though he fulfilled his promise, he didn't rreeeaaaallllyyy fulfill his promise enough to satisfy WaPo.

Same with the middle class tax cut. Even though he did exactly what he said he would do, Mister Straw Man says "Weeeeellll, eventhough he didn't promise that it would be permanent, and it's not permanent, and because there's no blood-oath guarantee that Congress will extend it after 10 years, he didn't entirely, not exactly, not totally fulfill the promise we think he should have made, so it's a compromise."

Fact Checkers are a joke. And if you read them as being a joke you'll get much more out of them

Now if you want to make fact checker, or a big fact checker fan explode, go all" Yeah, but! Yeah, but!" on 'em and point out that in Trump's Contact with the American Voter, the only thing he promised to do was to look into, explore, pursue, and start the process on everything on the list. And he's done that.

 

[ATeam]

Keep in mind that The Washington Post Fact Checker had reasonably and objectively determined that Trump has broken his promise to make Mexico reimburse the US for the wall, even though the wall has yet to be built and there is nothing to date to reimburse.

Trump did not say Mexico would reimburse us for the wall. He said Mexico would pay for the wall. No public official in his or her right mind would appropriate billions to build a wall with the expectation that Mexico would pay for it by us simply presenting the bill. And, thankfully, no public official has (Trump the possible exception). The wall promise may yet be fulfilled but it remains broken to date.

I did not say the fact checker was perfect. I said it is useful. It presents a good compilation of campaign promises made and a reasonable discussion of their score. Additional discussion can certainly occur. The page is not a conversation ender, it's a conversation starter. It starts with hard facts (documented promises made by Trump), which is a good thing, I think.

I prefer this approach over meaningless debates over whether or not Trump has turned the country into a laughingstock.

 

[Turtle]

Trump did not say Mexico would reimburse us for the wall. He said Mexico would pay for the wall.

Yes, I'm aware, thank you. I merely chose to use WaPo's term for the purpose of consistency

No public official in his or her right mind would appropriate billions to build a wall with the expectation that Mexico would pay for it by us simply presenting the bill.

Which is why WaPo, Trump and everyone else assumes that if Mexico is to pay for the wall, it will be paid after the wall is built, in some type of reimbursement. No one, Trump in particular, ever said that Mexico must pay for the wall up front, or when presented with a bill after completion In fact, Trump listed on his website several of the various and sundry potential ways in which Mexico would pay for the wall. Among them were diverting financial aid from Mexico to the wall, taxing remittances to Mexico, and increased border crossing fees.

The wall promise may yet be fulfilled but it remains broken to date.

Horse hockey. It remains unfulfilled to date, which is not the same as broken. Trump never promised to build a wall by today's date. The time frame for his promise is his time in the presidency, or until he announces (or it becomes self-evident) the wall will not be built.

 

[ATeam]

It remains unfulfilled to date, which is not the same as broken.

You are correct. I should have chosen my words more carefully.

 

[Moot]

It remains unfulfilled to date, which is not the same as broken.

You are correct. I should have chosen my words more carefully.

So should the MSN. Oh, wait, they do choose their words more carefully. They have an agenda. Signature, hand crafted, artisan words help the MSN journalists fulfill their agenda.

 

[Solar]

View attachment 18311



Do you realize that President Trump focused on improving our Economy and status in the world for the last 2 years because he had the House and Senate.

Now that Democrats have the House, and have made their #1 agenda impeachment, it’s going to be hit back time, and the Democrats that have been walking on thin ice are breaking through.

Do you mean the upswing that began under Obama and Trump inherited? I’ll give him credit for keeping it going although it looks like it may be starting to turn around. I sincerely hope not. I’m also behind him on the trade situation. We should never have lowered tariffs and restrictions against imports like we did 40 years ago.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

The biggest problem with this vision of Obama is he followed GWBush. I could have followed GWBush and turned the economy around by doing nothing. GWBush set up the Bailouts, and Obama did exactly what Bush set up.

The end.

Saying Obama had an improving economy, from what? GWBush? He didn’t improve it over Reagan, GHWBush, or Clinton. Obama only beat the worst since the Great Depression.

Obama did better than the Great Recession.

Trump, on the other hand, is setting records, having record low unemployment that beats EVERYBODY.

The ONLY way Obama is in the same comparison, economically, with Trump is by forgetting every other President that ever lived.

Obama is in GWBush’s League, not Trumps.

 

[dalscott]

The biggest problem with this vision of Obama is he followed GWBush. I could have followed GWBush and turned the economy around by doing nothing. GWBush set up the Bailouts, and Obama did exactly what Bush set up.

The end.

Saying Obama had an improving economy, from what? GWBush? He didn’t improve it over Reagan, GHWBush, or Clinton. Obama only beat the worst since the Great Depression.

Obama did better than the Great Recession.

Trump, on the other hand, is setting records, having record low unemployment that beats EVERYBODY.

The ONLY way Obama is in the same comparison, economically, with Trump is by forgetting every other President that ever lived.

Obama is in GWBush’s League, not Trumps.

Riiiiggggghhhhhttttt!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[Turtle]

Obama didn't do this, sorry. He had everything set up for stagnant unemployment, wages, and a rock-solid 2 percent annual GDP for the foreseeable future.

 

[muttly]

When he took over, the economy was about at the point of bottoming out. Nowhere to go but up at that point. Except the economy under Obama was a slow burn upward. But it could have been much better and quicker; more jobs and more economic activity. It seemed as if he wasn't too interested in creating an environment of high economic growth. Like he didn't believe he could. Magic wand or not.
With Trump, it's like he's looking for every avenue in the economy to make it flourish and create jobs. Tax cuts, deregulation, renegotiating trade deals, drilling for oil, etc.
If Obama did back then what Trump is doing now, he would have had similar results.
But he didn't, mostly because he was controlled by the extreme progressives in his party that were anti growth.

 

[coalminer]

Obama didn't do this, sorry. He had everything set up for stagnant unemployment, wages, and a rock-solid 2 percent annual GDP for the foreseeable future.

If he didn’t set it up this way we would already be in a recession by now.

Slow and steady, it’s the way a good expediter drives and it should be the way our economy works.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[ATeam]

Trump Wins Delay in Emoluments Lawsuit by D.C. and Maryland

This case is likely to make its way all the way up to the Supreme Court as the opposing sides make their appeals. On Dec 20, it was stayed and moved up to a federal appeals court, where it will be argued in mid-March.

 

[Grizzly]

Doesn't pulling out of Syria so suddenly basically hand the country over to Assad, Russia & Iran?

What did the US get in return? What did the self proclaimed greatest deal maker get for this withdrawal?

Russia's invasion of Ukraine has not improved. Now Trump just put Iran back in business on Israel's doorstep.

Trump looks clumsy and sloppy to me ..

 

[Turtle]

Obama didn't do this, sorry. He had everything set up for stagnant unemployment, wages, and a rock-solid 2 percent annual GDP for the foreseeable future.

If he didn’t set it up this way we would already be in a recession by now.

Right. Obana set things up not for a recession, but for 2% GDP and low employment for the foreseeable future. Trump rolled back the regulations that would have ensured that.

 

[Turtle]

Doesn't pulling out of Syria so suddenly basically hand the country over to Assad, Russia & Iran?

Well, it's not that sudden. He's been talking about it for 2 years, and wanted to do it 8 months ago. We only have 2200 troops in Sytia, the vast majority of whom aren't even in combat positions, but are rather in support operations. We weren't there to do regime change anyway

What did the US get in return? What did the self proclaimed greatest deal maker get for this withdrawal?

The US is getting 2200 troops home, where they belong, and we stop wasting money over there. It's not really a deal from a deal maker as much it is a decision to reverse the bad decision that put troops there in the first place.

 

[Turtle]

Trump Wins Delay in Emoluments Lawsuit by D.C. and Maryland

This case is likely to make its way all the way up to the Supreme Court as the opposing sides make their appeals. On Dec 20, it was stayed and moved up to a federal appeals court, where it will be argued in mid-March.

I also think it will make its way to the Supreme Court, and the Court will rule that the Constitution clearly states who can and cannot grant the president permission under the Emoluments Clause, and that the Constitution doesn't once mention the state of Maryland or the District of Columbia as having such authority.