Trump runs for POTUS / Trumped Up! Part V

[Skeptic Ginger]

I'm starting to get really worried about Trump becoming President.

I go to 538 every day to make myself feel better, but even that isn't helping anymore.

Somebody make me feel better and tell me he's not going to win..

He's not going to win. But you should do something, even if small like planting a yard sign, to help Clinton get elected.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

If ISIS is out of Mosul before inauguration day, which is looking increasingly likely, they're done. Fini. No Trump required.

Or, that will be countered by yet another serious terrorist attack in the EU or US.

 

[NoahFence]

The ones blaming Obama for leaving Iraq are making it clear, what he should have done is go back on our agreement.

Seriously, they think that the US should back out of our agreements. That's the party of "responsibility"

Also the party of "Family Values"

 

[NoahFence]

Or, that will be countered by yet another serious terrorist attack in the EU or US.

That's the ideology, not the organization.

AKA "ISIS Inspired"

 

[sunmaster14]

He's not going to win. But you should do something, even if small like planting a yard sign, to help Clinton get elected.

How does planting a yard sign help your candidate to get elected? All it amounts to is virtue signaling.

 

[NoahFence]

How does planting a yard sign help your candidate to get elected? All it amounts to is virtue signaling.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

That's the ideology, not the organization.

AKA "ISIS Inspired"

That wasn't my point, at all.

 

[The Don]

How does planting a yard sign help your candidate to get elected? All it amounts to is virtue signaling.

There are some people who really are insecure enough in their political beliefs and/or voting intentions for this to influence them. If I'm an "undecided" voter living in a neighbourhood I like, surrounded by people that I like then knowing that they are supporting a candidate may influence my decision.

Heck there are some people who may simply vote for the person on the most or the last sign they have seen (hence the ban on political advertising outside polling stations).

It is probably the very least a person could to (tied with wearing a pin or applying a bumper sticker I suppose) and it would be much better to get actively involved in the campaign but not everyone is comfortable doing that or has the time necessary - YMMV.

 

[sunmaster14]

A good piece on presidential economic performance since WW11

Even by this standard President Obama is at least above average.

It's a simplistic standard. You have to look at things a President actually did. There's obviously going to be a lot of factors that the President had no control over. The fact is that our recovery from a very deep recession should have been much quicker. Particularly a recession caused by a financial crisis rather than genuine overcapacity. Fixing a financial crisis is the simplest thing in the world for a country with a fiat currency. As for the performance of the stock market, that has far more to do with the Federal Reserve holding interest rates at zero for six years and driving investors into riskier assets. I saw no policies of Obama's which helped to improve corporate profits. He hasn't accomplished all that much on free trade, although, to be fair, his heart has generally been in the right place on that.

<snip>

The one thing people who criticize President Obama for leaving Iraq will never discuss is the reason why President Bush negotiated the with drawl plan that that he did.

The Iraqi government refused to protect our soldiers from prosecution under their domestic laws. President's Bush and Obama saw what this could lead to, American soldiers locked up in Iraqi jails being prosecuted under their laws in a very corrupt system. We had two choices - leave or risk the lives our soldiers at the mercy of the Iraqi court system. What would you do?

The SOFA negotiated under Bush was expected to be renegotiated and renewed before it expired under a new President. Although the military and the Iraqi government were clamoring to start negotiations long before, Obama did not start talking in earnest about an extension until less then six months before expiration. The main sticking point was in fact extraterritoriality for US troops, but Prime Minister al-Maliki was willing to grant that by executive order. He was not willing to go to parliament for approval. Obama refused to accept that. I guess for Obama having the executive bypass the legislature is legitimate for him to do himself, but not for our allies. No, the agreement was scuttled because Obama had no interest keeping US troops in Iraq. He had made an ill-considered campaign pledge, and he followed up on it with an ill-considered fulfillment of that pledge.

 

[sunmaster14]

There are some people who really are insecure enough in their political beliefs and/or voting intentions for this to influence them. If I'm an "undecided" voter living in a neighbourhood I like, surrounded by people that I like then knowing that they are supporting a candidate may influence my decision.

Heck there are some people who may simply vote for the person on the most or the last sign they have seen (hence the ban on political advertising outside polling stations).

It is probably the very least a person could to (tied with wearing a pin or applying a bumper sticker I suppose) and it would be much better to get actively involved in the campaign but not everyone is comfortable doing that or has the time necessary - YMMV.

Equally likely, in my opinion, is that an undecided vote gets annoyed at seeing yard signs and votes against the most ubiquitous ones out of spite. That's what I would do probably, if I were ever undecided about anything.

 

[tyr_13]

A good piece on presidential economic performance since WW11

World War Eleven? How long was I asleep?

 

[Crossbow]

The ones blaming Obama for leaving Iraq are making it clear, what he should have done is go back on our agreement.

Seriously, they think that the US should back out of our agreements. That's the party of "responsibility"

I have noticed that as well.

And just recently, Trump Turd said that the real problem with the Iraq War was the fact that the USA did not steal all of the Iraqi oil before leaving Iraq. But at the same time, these sorts of people often get so very miffed when they see other nations not honoring the committments that they have made with the USA.

Ugh!

I do not even think that Alice could fall down a rabbit hole that is this deep.

 

[NoahFence]

The SOFA negotiated under Bush was expected to be renegotiated and renewed before it expired under a new President.

Expected by whom? Sources, please. In all my time having to dig into patently false statements from ODS/HDS Sufferers, I've not seen anything that would indicate that it was "expected" to be renegotiated.

No, the agreement was scuttled because Obama had no interest keeping US troops in Iraq. He had made an ill-considered campaign pledge, and he followed up on it with an ill-considered fulfillment of that pledge.

He was taking his cues from an exhausted American public. You know, the one he serves?

 

[TubbaBlubba]

How does planting a yard sign help your candidate to get elected? All it amounts to is virtue signaling.

GOD, I am sick of this term. Here's the things - some people have actual values, and consider some of those values so central that they experience genuine moral outrage when they see those values objected to or violated. This bit of newspeak is intended to do one thing and one thing only - to dismiss manifestations of moral concern as some quest for social approval. To dismiss concern for the welfare of disadvantaged groups as cynical piggybacking. To dismiss decency and integrity as a self-serving charade, even when standing up for others is disadvantaging.

This casual usage of 'virtue signalling' by many conservatives and anti-PC crusaders reminds me of a sociopath trying to explain empathy.

 

[acbytesla]

All the closing line does is provide strong evidence that the speaker is close-minded and refuses to listen to alternative ideas. I have already given many rational reasons to support Trump. An additional one is that if and when Trump is elected President, it will prove to all the Chicken Littles that the world will keep turning, and life will go on mostly as usual. It's rather hard for me to believe that he could do more damage than Obama has done, frankly. In part because the media will become a watchdog again rather than a lapdog.

There are no rational reasons to support Trump, only stupid ones. Even Trump's infrastructure proposal, the only one I somewhat like is bs since NO ONE in CONGRESS supports it. The man is beyond ignorant and stupid when it comes to foreign policy and the military. He is a pathological liar and embraces dictators. The hey Trump will "shake" things up is like letting a 4 year old pilot an 747. Yes the 4 year old fly a 747 filled with passengers probably will shake it up and probably cause the deaths of everyone.

Yes, it's possible that Trump doesn't get us into a nuclear war or crash the economy but the idea he couldn't do worse than Obama is absurd when you consider the damage that Obama's predecessor did.

When Bush took over, America had extremely low unemployment, three straight budget surpluses and was on a path to eliminate the National Debt in 5 years. Instead, Bush chose to lower taxes on the rich as Trump wants to, started 2 massive wars, lost thousands of soldier's lives, exploded the debt and oversaw the biggest economic meltdown since the Great Depression.

So the idea, that Trump can do no damage ignores both history and reality. Especially when you hear all the stupid arrogant things that Trump says. Face it. Trump may know how to generate ratings and cause a controversy but he's an IDIOT when it comes to the government.

 

[sunmaster14]

GOD, I am sick of this term.

Wow, I can see that.

Here's the things - some people have actual values, and consider some of those values so central that they experience genuine moral outrage when they see those values objected to or violated. This bit of newspeak is intended to do one thing and one thing only - to dismiss manifestations of moral concern as some quest for social approval. To dismiss concern for the welfare of disadvantaged groups as cynical piggybacking. To dismiss decency and integrity as a self-serving charade, even when standing up for others is disadvantaging.

This casual usage of 'virtue signalling' by many conservatives and anti-PC crusaders reminds me of a sociopath trying to explain empathy.

Meh, your post strikes me as a meta-type of virtue signaling.

 

[Crossbow]

... snipped for relevance ...

The SOFA negotiated under Bush was expected to be renegotiated and renewed before it expired under a new President. Although the military and the Iraqi government were clamoring to start negotiations long before, Obama did not start talking in earnest about an extension until less then six months before expiration. The main sticking point was in fact extraterritoriality for US troops, but Prime Minister al-Maliki was willing to grant that by executive order. He was not willing to go to parliament for approval. Obama refused to accept that. I guess for Obama having the executive bypass the legislature is legitimate for him to do himself, but not for our allies. No, the agreement was scuttled because Obama had no interest keeping US troops in Iraq. He had made an ill-considered campaign pledge, and he followed up on it with an ill-considered fulfillment of that pledge.

If Obama actually got the USA out of Iraq by not forcing some sort of renegotiation of the SOFA, then I am glad that he did so.

After all, considering just how corrupt and brutal Iraq is, then by keeping the USA in Iraq would have been a further waste of blood and treasure in order to support a completely unnecessary war that was started by a group of stupid, idiotic, lying Republicans.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

Wow, I can see that.



Meh, your post strikes me as a meta-type of virtue signaling.

What an unexpected, creative and novel reply

 

[sunmaster14]

There are no rational reasons to support Trump, only stupid ones. Even Trump's infrastructure proposal, the only one I somewhat like is bs since NO ONE in CONGRESS supports it. The man is beyond ignorant and stupid when it comes to foreign policy and the military. He is a pathological liar and embraces dictators. The hey Trump will "shake" things up is like letting a 4 year old pilot an F-15. Yes the 4 year old fly a 747 filled with passengers probably will shake it up and probably cause the deaths of everyone.

Running the government is not like operating a sophisticated piece of machinery. It's like operating an infinitely complex system that no one person, or even group of people, could possibly understand. It is better to have a know-nothing in there than somebody who thinks he knows what he's doing and has the political support to do almost anything he wants.

Yes, it's possible that Trump doesn't get us into a nuclear war or crash the economy but the idea he couldn't do worse than Obama is absurd when you consider the damage that Obama's predecessor did.

We obviously have different views of damage. I think Obama's the long-term damage done by Obama is very bad. The main damage Bush did was facilitating the election of Obama by handling the marketing of the Iraq War badly.

When Bush took over, America had extremely low unemployment, three straight budget surpluses and was on a path to eliminate the National Debt in 5 years.

Your statement is beyond ignorant and stupid. Actually, no, it's just ignorant and stupid. The budget surpluses are what caused the recession which Bush inherited. It is impossible to eliminate the National Debt, nor would you ever want to in a fiat currency system. The National Debt is equal to the net financial savings of the private sector. Do you really want to wipe out all the savings of the private sector? What would that do to aggregate demand? It couldn't happen anyway because as we entered a recession due to budget surpluses siphoning away financial wealth from the private sector, economic activity would fall, and tax revenue would dry up. These are the natural automatic stabilizers which prevent morons like Robert Rubin from destroying our economy. Anyhoo, the Bush tax cuts saved us from a more severe recession, especially after 9/11 happened, and the wars were mostly fought with zero opportunity cost because the economy was operating well below capacity, so the real productive capacity devoted to the war was essentially free.

 

[Arcade22]

I hope Trump wins cause the only way that America is going to reform is worthless and broke political system, more worthy of a failed African state than the a super power, is through a massive disaster.