The Trump Presidency
- Thread starter The Tariff King
- Start date
he's a career criminal. nothing surprising here to those with even half a brain.
57Brave
Well-known member
remember when he was being touted as an astute businessman ?
wonder where those guys are now ?
Just like them to create a mess and walk away.
but, they will come back - like they did after Iraq and the collapse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDd09Lnykdo
wonder where those guys are now ?
Just like them to create a mess and walk away.
but, they will come back - like they did after Iraq and the collapse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDd09Lnykdo
Trump has come to the realization he's not going to get that money for the wall.
He's desperate for any political victories now. Glad McConnell, with all the money he gets from the prison lobby, finally agreed to let it come to the floor for a vote.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Why?
weso1
<B>Clique Leader</B>
This is too much of resistance take. I have zero surprise that this bill passed under a Trump presidency. This is his kind of bill. Lots of other wins for the left out there with Trump as president if they are willing to leave the resistance.
weso1
<B>Clique Leader</B>
I can answer that. Trump is a liberal. If the left gets over the stupid resistance crap they can get a lot of stuff they want to get done.
acesfull86
Well-known member
Setting aside the issue of whether Trump overstepped his bounds on the bump stock ban (I think so), it’s good politics. Quick win for something that will probably have widespread support on both sides of the aisle. It’s not going to make a bit of a difference when it comes to gun violence, but I guess it makes people feel good.
sturg33
I
I don't think he has the constitutional authroity to do it. I don't think it will matter at all. I don't like any aytenpts to disarm citizens. And I'm not sure what this means for owners of bump stocks today (haven't looked if they set a plan for that)
As Weso noted - If the Left would stop this childish 'Resistance' movement we could get some real change in this country that would benefit all. All the things the left stood for on Immigration 10 years ago is trying to be implemented now by the Trump administration. There is no logical thought from either side right now and the people of this country are the ones paying.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Most of Trump’s policy pronouncements are this same kind of sugar rush. It feels good for a minute, and then, if you’re lucky, it goes away. If you’re not lucky, you get a stomach ache.
The First Steps act is an exception to this That’s one are where I’ve thought there is room to work, because there are enough Senate Republicans who are ok on the issue. It’s modest, yes, but I’m glad they did it. The WH needed a win, and they got it.
Syria? I dunno. I’m generally all for the idea that declaring victory and going home is probably the sane choice in all of our current ME conflicts. But I’m a little concerned by what appears to be the complete lack of process here, because of the precedent it sets for Trump. I don’t like the idea of his making foreign policy by whim, because I don’t trust his judgement. And short-circuiting the process may very well lead to some bad outcomes. So I’m gonna withold judgement.
The First Steps act is an exception to this That’s one are where I’ve thought there is room to work, because there are enough Senate Republicans who are ok on the issue. It’s modest, yes, but I’m glad they did it. The WH needed a win, and they got it.
Syria? I dunno. I’m generally all for the idea that declaring victory and going home is probably the sane choice in all of our current ME conflicts. But I’m a little concerned by what appears to be the complete lack of process here, because of the precedent it sets for Trump. I don’t like the idea of his making foreign policy by whim, because I don’t trust his judgement. And short-circuiting the process may very well lead to some bad outcomes. So I’m gonna withold judgement.
sturg33
I
Which specific policies have you disliked?
I'll go ahead and assume immigrqtion (broad brush) and tax cuts.
But has he really been that crazy from any other president if you move away from the rhetoric?
I've given up on trying to solve the middle east with troop presence. There is no satisfying the people of that region. Our best bet is to run shadow ops with the aid of Israel and hopefully Saudi Arabia while pushing modernization through MBS. That is why the Khashogi murder is such a delicate situation. Our whole strategy for the ME is based on MBS actually willing to enter the modern world.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Muslim ban, tax cut, family separation policy (yes, also broad-brush immigration policy) neutering the CFBP, opening up millions of acres of federal land to extractive industries, about a zillion other exectutive orders and Congressional Review Act legislation relating to the environment (really, too many to mention individually), Dept of Ed rule-making, withdrawal from Iran deal, repeal of the individual mandate as a means to undercut ACA, supporting court challenges to ACA, withdrawal from Paris Climate accord...I dunno, that’s just off the top of my head.
And no, it’s not “crazier,” necessarily, in the current context of mainstream republican politics. Much of this stuff—the legislative pieces—would have happened under another Republican president. Probably not the hardcore immigration stuff, maybe not the Iran deal withdrawal. The trade piece, too.
Cabinet agencies would be in the pocket of industry, sure, but I doubt there’d be the flagrant corruption of Price, Pruitt, Zinke, et al. That’s part of a tone set at the top. I know you’re of the opinion that government is necessarily corrupt, but you’d have a hard time convincing me that it’s not more corrupt with a clueless and disinterested executive who is personally corrupt in the bargain.
I will concede your basic point that to someone like me, most of the Republican contenders would have been doing stuff that I considered intolerable. But I also think that Trump’s added some special sauce.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
That seems like, to put it mildly, a dumb place to predicate “our whole strategy for the ME.”
What are your thoughts on the Mexican people that don't want migrants from central America? Are they racist as well? Could it be that the people who have to deal with this influx realize that a large portion (I consider 5-10% large) are not here with good intentions. Remember when it was women and children? Then it was evident that we were dealing with mostly young to middle aged men.
The Paris Accord is one of your options? The same one where the US was the only one to actually meet their obligations? Want to guess who will continue to reduce their emissions in excess of all other developed nations even without the Paris Accord?
Oooff- The Iran deal. The single most disruptive force in the world outside of China. How anyone could support dealing with them is beyond me. They have caused more unrest in the region than any other entity in the world (aside from us sadly).