The Trump Presidency

[Belz...]

It was about what the nature of compromise for the past 40 years has been in the US. Shifting to the right.

That doesn't make compromise itself bad, and it sure doesn't make endless pendulum shifts any better.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

That is what it means for the past 40 years in the US. That is why we are finally getting to levels of wealth inequality that the right wing really wants, as shown by their policies.

If and when that inequality focuses the attention of the electorate, they're free to elect a left-leaning president who is then free to appoint left-leaning judges.

And the pendulum will swing left again, until the unintended consequences of a liberal court become apparent, and then that will itself correct.

And so on...

 

[The Don]

If and when that inequality focuses the attention of the electorate, they're free to elect a left-leaning president who is then free to appoint left-leaning judges.

Only if the Senate allows it.....

As I understand it, that's one of the complaints, that a Republican-led Senate not only failed to approve Obama's nominee to replace Scalia but furthermore were explicit that they wouldn't consider any Obama nominee, regardless of his or her merits.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Only if the Senate allows it.....

As I understand it, that's one of the complaints, that a Republican-led Senate not only failed to approve Obama's nominee to replace Scalia but furthermore were explicit that they wouldn't consider any Obama nominee, regardless of his or her merits.

It does seem the right outmaneuvered the left on that one.

Again, I think the Democrats rolled over so easily on that one because they assumed Hillary would win.

 

[phiwum]

It does seem the right outmaneuvered the left on that one.

Again, I think the Democrats rolled over so easily on that one because they assumed Hillary would win.

What, precisely, should they have done? Far as I can tell, they were limited to complaining and publicizing the dirty tactic.

 

[ponderingturtle]

If and when that inequality focuses the attention of the electorate, they're free to elect a left-leaning president who is then free to appoint left-leaning judges.

And the pendulum will swing left again, until the unintended consequences of a liberal court become apparent, and then that will itself correct.

And so on...

Yea right. Look at trump he managed to focus that broadening inequality on immigrants thus preventing any reform. As long as you have enough targets top paint as the perpetrators for it you can keep going a long time. I figure russia is pretty much the dirrection this nation is heading. Putin for example really is very popular. As long as you have enough people to shift the blame to you can keep going for a very long time.

 

[WilliamSeger]

It does seem the right outmaneuvered the left on that one.

Again, I think the Democrats rolled over so easily on that one because they assumed Hillary would win.

What, precisely, should they have done? Far as I can tell, they were limited to complaining and publicizing the dirty tactic.

They were "outmaneuvered" by a brick wall, then "rolled over" by a steamroller.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

If and when that inequality focuses the attention of the electorate, they're free to elect a left-leaning president who is then free to appoint left-leaning judges.

And so on...

We had a Democratic POTUS and he couldn't get a middle of the road justice nominated. The GOP cheats.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It does seem the right outmaneuvered the left on that one.

Again, I think the Democrats rolled over so easily on that one because they assumed Hillary would win.

Care to explain what Obama's options were?

 

[TraneWreck]

In our system, the public is supposed to hold elected officials accountable for ******** like that. The GOP made a bet that they could get away with it. They were right.

It's tragic and disgusting, but they wagered on the ignorance and indolence of the American populace and won.

 

[logger]

Uh, oh, fellow humans!

It's like you have no respect for anyone's life, happiness or values but your own.

Its interesting how we have the same opinion of each other's side.

 

[logger]

Trump has the right to nominate judges, though of course McConnell's partisanship is to blame for why there are so many vacancies. The Senate dragged their feet in the last year of Obama's presidency, purposely failing to have votes on many of his nominees in the hopes that they would win the presidency.

It worked. It was a dirty tactic in my book, but it worked. As a result, Trump will leave quite a mark on the judiciary.

(I believe I heard about this tactic on Morning Edition or All Things Considered, but am not certain.)

By labeling it a dirty tactic, does that somehow help you get over it?

Do you think whoever wins a chess game somehow did a dirty tactic?

 

[TraneWreck]

By labeling it a dirty tactic, does that somehow help you get over it?

Do you think whoever wins a chess game somehow did a dirty tactic?

Winning doesn't prove the tactic was dirty, neither does it prove it wasn't.

 

[logger]

The pendulum isn't the solution. It's the moderation; the compromise.

When you can get the left to abide by moderation and compromise, you'll have it.

First you may want to elect some moderates.

 

[logger]

Winning doesn't prove the tactic was dirty, neither does it prove it wasn't.

Ahh the master of obvious. I'm more interested in why his opinion goes to "dirty tactic" instead of political skill. I thought Obama was quite good at "politics" and I gave him credit for it.

 

[TraneWreck]

When you can get the left to abide by moderation and compromise, you'll have it.

Define moderation. Pick any issue - immigration, health care, taxes... - and describe what a moderate position looks like.

First you may want to elect some moderates.

Barack Obama advanced the following positions:

• George H.W. Bush's tax policy.
• Mitt Romney's health-care policy.
• John McCain's climate-change policy.
• George H.W. Bush's foreign policy.
• Bill Clinton's spending policy.
• Dwight Eisenhower's Federal Reserve policy.
• George W. Bush's education policy.

When you say "moderate" you mean something far right. Offer some specifics, both in terms of policy and in terms of individuals who advocate those views.

 

[logger]

What, precisely, should they have done? Far as I can tell, they were limited to complaining and publicizing the dirty tactic.

Moderate so they can win elections?

 

[TraneWreck]

Ahh the master of obvious. I'm more interested in why his opinion goes to "dirty tactic" instead of political skill. I thought Obama was quite good at "politics" and I gave him credit for it.

There was no game or strategy. The GOP bet on a plan that was contrary to 225 years of American governmental practice. There was no explicit rule against it, but it was a flagrant bit of obstructionism unprecedented in American history. It was ******, but it worked.

Whether you want to call it dirty or not, I don't care. You know as well as I that if it happened with the parties reversed your side would whine for a thousand years.

 

[Belz...]

Its interesting how we have the same opinion of each other's side.

Oh, I was only refering to you personally, not the right.

 

[Belz...]

When you can get the left to abide by moderation and compromise, you'll have it.

First you may want to elect some moderates.

Are you seriously suggesting that Clinton and Obama were extremists?