The Trump Disaster

[calamity]

What do you call giving in on budgets, and not following through on their campaign promises? For all intents and purposes they were Democrats. Boehner needed to go, and Ryan may need to also.

Uh, keeping the country from defaulting and the checks flowing to tens of millions of employees, retirees, services like the FAA and military personnel who count on them. Are you people really that disconnected from reality that you fail to understand the basics of government?

Maybe you really are. I should probably consider that.

 

[American]

Uh, keeping the country from defaulting and the checks flowing to tens of millions of employees, retirees, services like the FAA and military personnel who count on them. Are you people really that disconnected from reality that you fail to understand the basics of government?

Maybe you really are. I should probably consider that.

None of that money would have stopped, since budgets are tied to the following fiscal years. The money to pay those bills was already approved, LIKE IT ALWAYS IS.

 

[VanceMack]

Trump had 18 challengers. The best of the bunch was Kasich. Media did not tell voters not to pick him. The people did not like him.

Hillary's rise has more to do with control of the party than the media. She also served herself well by destroying the Benghazi morons in hearings broadcasted during prime time. That's why she is winning.

Kasich ran the weirdest campaign ever. His whole approach was "well...I'm going to sit back, do nothing, and in the end they will come running". by the time he stepped out of the race no one still knew who he was or what he was running on or for.

 

[CanadaJohn]

I agree with your conclusion, but I don't see the GOP as the party to blame. The media made and promoted Trump from the moment he announced. The GOP tried to stop the media campaign, but were defenseless against the massive free media provided to Trump.

The media waged a brilliant campaign to boost Trump's profile while hiding Clinton in a closet and now that their two preferred candidates have the nomination, they will savage Trump and pimp for Clinton.

From a distance, it's almost comical how your media manipulates the "democratic" process and so few of you even recognize it happening. QUOTE


Good morning, CJ! :2wave:

:agree: How the GOP could be at fault here is mystifying - they did everything they could to stop him, but the media, and those who voted for him, won! I am a Kasich girl, and you see how much difference that made :lol: but when people like Nate Silver from FiveThirtyEight came out early saying, "Pay attention To Kasich, he's the real thing" I agreed! His resume of accomplishments dwarfed all the other candidates in either party, but he is not flashy or bombastic - and it looks like that's what sells these days - so sadly, to me at least, I accept that such is life in politics! :shrug:

Good morning Lady P - hope all is well with you.

As you know, I was and am a strong supporter of Governor Bush and believe had he been the choice of primary voters he would be primed to win the election and carry a lot of Republicans with him down ticket. I would have supported any of the Governors who were in the race since being successful at running a State is about as close as you can come to being qualified and likely successful as President - no other background is as important and as predictive as actually leading a large government. But today, both in your country and mine, competence in government is pushed on the back burner while flash and "celebrity" are pushed to the forefront as qualities desired in leadership. I call it the "spokesmodel" syndrome. We elected (not me) a spokesmodel as our Prime Minister last year and it makes me sick.

 

[cpwill]

What do you call giving in on budgets, and not following through on their campaign promises? For all intents and purposes they were Democrats. Boehner needed to go, and Ryan may need to also.

On the contrary, Republicans stopped a number of disasters, from card check to universal pre k, to the attempted gun-grab, to Obama's illegal immigration executive orders.

They can't overturn the Supreme Court. The President serves as a check on them, and they need his signature to get a budget passed. That's how our Constitutional system is SUPPOSED to work. Gridlock (which is what we've had) when the two sides won't compromise. The fact that it takes both the Executive and the Legislature to get things done isn't a bug, it's a feature (this is a point that talk radio, who isn't responsible for anything other than keeping listeners riled up or entertained enough to stay tuned in, is very poor at grasping). If we don't like that, then our beef isn't with the GOP (who I agree could have and should have done more), but with James Madison.

 

[iguanaman]

This campaign is making it extremely difficult to keep my tin foil hat locked away. I'm sure even the most staid of us has entertained the notion, however briefly, that Trump is a poe with the purpose of reinforcing negative Republican stereotypes and handing the White House to a Democrat.

It seems that way at first but if you think about Trump's birther beginnings you realize that it was the GOP that brought him on themselves. There was nothing but crickets from the GOP when Trump was making all those wild accusations abut the President. Had they done the right thing then there would be no Trump. Trump's like a vampire, you have to welcome him inside or he can't get in.

 

[American]

On the contrary, Republicans stopped a number of disasters, from card check to universal pre k, to the attempted gun-grab, to Obama's illegal immigration executive orders.

They can't overturn the Supreme Court. The President serves as a check on them, and they need his signature to get a budget passed. That's how our Constitutional system is SUPPOSED to work. Gridlock (which is what we've had) when the two sides won't compromise. The fact that it takes both the Executive and the Legislature to get things done isn't a bug, it's a feature (this is a point that talk radio, who isn't responsible for anything other than keeping listeners riled up or entertained enough to stay tuned in, is very poor at grasping). If we don't like that, then our beef isn't with the GOP (who I agree could have and should have done more), but with James Madison.

So you're calling me a talk radio listener? Really? If the House had kept their promises, Boehner would still be there and I wouldn't be in this thread.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Trump had 18 challengers. The best of the bunch was Kasich. Media did not tell voters not to pick him. The people did not like him.

Hillary's rise has more to do with control of the party than the media. She also served herself well by destroying the Benghazi morons in hearings broadcasted during prime time. That's why she is winning.

Saying there were 18 candidates in the race ignores and dismisses the fact that Trump received 10s if not 100s of $millions in free, national media exposure that none of the other candidates received. If any of the other candidates was interviewed, they were simply asked to comment on Trump, not on their own campaigns.

You can't ignore the facts of this race. The media decided early on that Trump as the GOP candidate virtually assured that their candidate, Clinton, would be elected. And so they provided obscene exposure to Trump on a daily basis, basically narrowing the GOP race to Trump and whichever unacceptable lightweight they put up in contrast to him. Once Iowa, the worst barometer of national sentiment you could find, chose to support Cruz, the media latched onto Cruz as their second in the race and all others were ignored. The media loved the idea that it was either Trump or the totally disgusting Cruz as the Republican nominee. How could their darling Hillary lose to either of those despicable idiots.

 

[iguanaman]

None of that money would have stopped, since budgets are tied to the following fiscal years. The money to pay those bills was already approved, LIKE IT ALWAYS IS.

You are upset that Republicans only got one credit downgrade for the U.S? You wanted more? Who's side are you on?

 

[American]

You are upset that Republicans only got one credit downgrade for the U.S? You wanted more?

Don't blame the Republicans, it happen under Obama. Own your **** for a change.

 

[calamity]

Saying there were 18 candidates in the race ignores and dismisses the fact that Trump received 10s if not 100s of $millions in free, national media exposure that none of the other candidates received. If any of the other candidates was interviewed, they were simply asked to comment on Trump, not on their own campaigns.

Well, the media quoting someone making outrageous statements usually results in that person not getting votes. Of course, that's assuming the voters in that group are not completely off the hook nuts.

Don't blame the media. They did their job. The voters did not. They voted for the biggest clown in the car.

You can't ignore the facts of this race. The media decided early on that Trump as the GOP candidate virtually assured that their candidate, Clinton, would be elected. And so they provided obscene exposure to Trump on a daily basically narrowing the GOP race to Trump and whichever unacceptable lightweight they put up in contrast to him. Once Iowa, the worst barometer of national sentiment you could find, choose to support Cruz, the media latched onto Cruz as their second in the race and all others were ignored. The media loved the idea that it was either Trump or the totally disgusting Cruz as the Republican nominee. How could their darling Hillary lose to either of those despicable idiots.

Nonsense. Serious media had been touting Kasich as the best of the best in the GOP since early Winter.

 

[iguanaman]

Saying there were 18 candidates in the race ignores and dismisses the fact that Trump received 10s if not 100s of $millions in free, national media exposure that none of the other candidates received. If any of the other candidates was interviewed, they were simply asked to comment on Trump, not on their own campaigns.

You can't ignore the facts of this race. The media decided early on that Trump as the GOP candidate virtually assured that their candidate, Clinton, would be elected. And so they provided obscene exposure to Trump on a daily basically narrowing the GOP race to Trump and whichever unacceptable lightweight they put up in contrast to him. Once Iowa, the worst barometer of national sentiment you could find, choose to support Cruz, the media latched onto Cruz as their second in the race and all others were ignored. The media loved the idea that it was either Trump or the totally disgusting Cruz as the Republican nominee. How could their darling Hillary lose to either of those despicable idiots.

Your man Bush had no traction from the very beginning. Being a Canadian you obviously did not feel the hurt the last one brought. You are feeling it now from your own dalliance with Canadian Conservatives. Do you want them back too?

 

[polgara]

Good morning Lady P - hope all is well with you.

As you know, I was and am a strong supporter of Governor Bush and believe had he been the choice of primary voters he would be primed to win the election and carry a lot of Republicans with him down ticket. I would have supported any of the Governors who were in the race since being successful at running a State is about as close as you can come to being qualified and likely successful as President - no other background is as important and as predictive as actually leading a large government. But today, both in your country and mine, competence in government is pushed on the back burner while flash and "celebrity" are pushed to the forefront as qualities desired in leadership. I call it the "spokesmodel" syndrome. We elected (not me) a spokesmodel as our Prime Minister last year and it makes me sick.

I have an idea! If our candidates started talking and acting more like the Kardashians, or some of the other media darlings, they'd be a shoo-in for any job they wanted! The world already thinks the people of the US are weird sex-obsessed screwballs who run roughshod over any who disagree with them, so no harm done... :lamo

 

[CanadaJohn]

Nonsense. Serious media had been touting Kasich as the best of the best in the GOP since early Winter.

Bull****

 

[calamity]

Kasich ran the weirdest campaign ever. His whole approach was "well...I'm going to sit back, do nothing, and in the end they will come running". by the time he stepped out of the race no one still knew who he was or what he was running on or for.

No money, no organization and he was always behind the big 3: Rubio, Cruz and Trump. I didn't think he had much of a chance, but I thought Rubio would be the winner and John his VP.

 

[calamity]

Bull****

John Kasich: A Jeb Bush In Jon Huntsman Clothing | FiveThirtyEight

It reads like a dream résumé for a Republican presidential candidate: nine-term congressman, six-year Fox News host and now twice-elected governor of a crucial swing state. His record puts him snugly in the mainstream of the Republican Party. Oh, and he won re-election as governor in 2014 by 31 percentage points...

It isn’t just what Kasich said, but how he said it. As Politico detailed, this type of reaction is fairly typical for Kasich. He likes to yell and to tell people, “You don’t know what you’re talking about.”

The press, of course, loves it. In April, The Atlantic said Kasich “could be 2016’s most interesting candidate.” Vox called Kasich “the most interesting GOP presidential contender.”

...it’s too early to dismiss Kasich. He’s a serious candidate (unlike Donald Trump) whose actual record isn’t too liberal to win a primary and who can make a real case that he’s among the most electable Republican candidates.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Your man Bush had no traction from the very beginning. Being a Canadian you obviously did not feel the hurt the last one brought. You are feeling it now from your own dalliance with Canadian Conservatives. Do you want them back too?

Absolutely, I'd take the Harper Conservatives back in a heartbeat here in Canada. They were the most competent and respected government in the G7, as witnessed by their superb handling of the financial crisis of 2007/2008 and once the Canadian people gave them a majority government in 2011, they were able to reduce and eliminate the deficits that were required with the Liberals and NDP held parliamentary power in their minority governments.

Bush got no traction with the media only after Trump entered the race and the media latched on to him as their Clinton savior. Jeb Bush was and still is the most qualified to lead your country at this time and would be a terrific President, period.

 

[iguanaman]

Don't blame the Republicans, it happen under Obama. Own your **** for a change.

LOL It happened under a Republican Congress and they were specifically pointed out as the reason for the downgrade.

"The downgrade," S&P said, "reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics."

In particular, Standard & Poor's added, it grew more pessimistic about U.S. debt because of the bitter political fight over raising the debt ceiling.

"The political brinksmanship of recent months," the company said, "highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed."

The agency pointed to political reluctance to make cuts to entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security, and Republicans' refusal even to consider increasing revenues by, for instance, ending the Bush tax cuts.
"Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place," the company said. "We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the [debt ceiling deal]."

Standard & Poor's Downgrades US Credit Rating From AAA to AA+ - ABC News

 

[Fearandloathing]

Saying there were 18 candidates in the race ignores and dismisses the fact that Trump received 10s if not 100s of $millions in free, national media exposure that none of the other candidates received. If any of the other candidates was interviewed, they were simply asked to comment on Trump, not on their own campaigns.

You can't ignore the facts of this race. The media decided early on that Trump as the GOP candidate virtually assured that their candidate, Clinton, would be elected. And so they provided obscene exposure to Trump on a daily basis, basically narrowing the GOP race to Trump and whichever unacceptable lightweight they put up in contrast to him. Once Iowa, the worst barometer of national sentiment you could find, chose to support Cruz, the media latched onto Cruz as their second in the race and all others were ignored. The media loved the idea that it was either Trump or the totally disgusting Cruz as the Republican nominee. How could their darling Hillary lose to either of those despicable idiots.

I seriously doubt that a conscious decision was made to promote Trump over the other candidates. I have no doubt, that the 'clown factor' drove the coverage. As a reporter, given a choice of a candidate saying the same old in the same old way, or a whack job who can't control his urges, the whack job gets the press. Remember Rob Ford? Same thing

The blame/credit has to go first to Trump, to be able to say and do the stupid **** he has done and STILL lead is a major achievement in adverting. If there is blame, than its the American people who see a messiah where there's simply a mess.

 

[Fearandloathing]

At least you're not blaming the GOP, but it is their fault indirectly that Trump exists; because the establishment is too stupid to see the conservatives and most Republicans are tired of their broken promises and siding with the Democrats. But they didn't want Trump, they just made him possible.

American voters are tired of broken promises. Why do you think Bernie is doing so well?

 

[iguanaman]

Absolutely, I'd take the Harper Conservatives back in a heartbeat here in Canada. They were the most competent and respected government in the G7, as witnessed by their superb handling of the financial crisis of 2007/2008 and once the Canadian people gave them a majority government in 2011, they were able to reduce and eliminate the deficits that were required with the Liberals and NDP held parliamentary power in their minority governments.

Bush got no traction with the media only after Trump entered the race and the media latched on to him as their Clinton savior. Jeb Bush was and still is the most qualified to lead your country at this time and would be a terrific President, period.

So the fact that the Cons went all in on the Tar Sands and completely missed the danger of a oil price crash doesn't bother you one bit? How is your economy doing now? Are you comfortable with the Canadian Dollar in the mid 70's ?

 

[CanadaJohn]

John Kasich: A Jeb Bush In Jon Huntsman Clothing | FiveThirtyEight

That was what you represented as "serious" media touting Kasich since the winter? Seriously? I'd bet only a handful of Americans know of, let alone read, The Atlantic, VOX, and/or FiveThirtyEight.

Tell me who and what the major networks and the major cable outlets were talking about - Trump, Trump, Trump and when they got tired of Trump for a couple of minutes, it was Cruz on Trump or Kasich on Trump or Clinton on Trump. All you had to do was watch any of the major debates - every one was prefaced on what Trump said leading up to the debate or Trump's weird or outrageous policy position.

It's not a serious argument to try and portray this election cycle as anything but what it was - full media assault on the consciousness of Americans with Donald Trump 24/7. And now that he has the nomination, they will savage him relentlessly until Clinton is assured an easy win.

 

[OrphanSlug]

I know the Trumpettes are all proud of their candidate's lack of political experience. But, in a way, that is a bit like being proud that your dentist doesn't know squat about teeth.

This campaign season is going to be a blast.

Sort of true, and the MSNBC article makes the same mistake you are.

What the Trump supporters are proud of (and note, I am *not* a Trump supporter) is that he is anti-establishment. Like Trump or not, the whole idea that made Trump even plausible was the level of distrust and dislike of what establishment Republicans have been doing going back to Bush 43's time in office. Trump supporters want someone who would do things differently as a President, say things without a PC filter no matter the audience, and operate in a manner as to upset how DC operates today.

For you and me, it may be rather frightening at the thought of Trump acting as President as he acts so often on the trail. But the article misses the point, if political strategy in a party sense meant all that much to Trump just about everything mentioned would have been addressed by now. Organization, staff, appealing to the typical Republican voter, visiting the right places at the right times, saying the right things, dealing with our nation's allies, etc.

You have to admit the whole idea is an unorthodox path to the Presidency, that if Trump is successful at will become a history book moment. We will be talking about his abusive tone, divisive nature, and his characterizations of entire demographics, fear mongering, arrogance, etc.

The campaign season is going to be entertaining, but also upsetting to those of us that look at both Hillary and Trump as extremely dangerous to this nation. I've been arguing for a long time now that no matter who wins... we lose. The article only points out half the reason from the wrong point of view.

 

[Fearandloathing]

I agree with your conclusion, but I don't see the GOP as the party to blame. The media made and promoted Trump from the moment he announced. The GOP tried to stop the media campaign, but were defenseless against the massive free media provided to Trump.

The media waged a brilliant campaign to boost Trump's profile while hiding Clinton in a closet and now that their two preferred candidates have the nomination, they will savage Trump and pimp for Clinton.

From a distance, it's almost comical how your media manipulates the "democratic" process and so few of you even recognize it happening. QUOTE


Good morning, CJ! :2wave:

:agree: How the GOP could be at fault here is mystifying - they did everything they could to stop him, but the media, and those who voted for him, won! I am a Kasich girl, and you see how much difference that made :lol: but when people like Nate Silver from FiveThirtyEight came out early saying, "Pay attention To Kasich, he's the real thing" I agreed! His resume of accomplishments dwarfed all the other candidates in either party, but he is not flashy or bombastic - and it looks like that's what sells these days - so sadly, to me at least, I accept that such is life in politics! :shrug:

Some of you are forgetting the "idiot" factor that comes as a result of 'low information voters', or more correctly the "stupid voter".

I figure that if people are that stupid as was shown over Obamacare, then they also have a tentative if not non existent idea of the issues. The result is everything becomes over-simplified. Illegal aliens are a seriously complex issue, but Trump capped it and owed it by promising a wall which one, will do nothing about the real problem, the ones who are already here, and two, it will never be built.

But, it has become an icon of the dis-enfranchised, the under employed; the angry of the country who are bitter over the economics and apparent unfairness, all of the issues get loaded into one barrel, and in this case it's a icon made of mist

 

[CanadaJohn]

So the fact that the Cons went all in on the Tar Sands and completely missed the danger of a oil price crash doesn't bother you one bit? How is your economy doing now? Are you comfortable with the Canadian Dollar in the mid 70's ?

The Conservatives didn't go "all in" on the oil sands although as any good Canadian government, they did all they could to promote resource development. That's a major part of Canada's economy, no matter which party is in government. Maybe you should ask your own government under Obama about going "all in" on oil and natural gas, flooding the world markets, building up massive infrastructure in the energy field, that is mainly sitting idle after you precipitated a massive drop in the price of oil.

Part of the Canadian dollar being in the mid-70s is related to the massive structural deficits that the new Liberal government has put in place that have dampened the rebound the dollar would have felt as the price of oil has rebounded to $50.

The fact remains that for much of the past decade, following the financial crisis your country caused throughout the world - funny how your country is responsible for a lot of the financial troubles in the world - the Canadian government, under the Conservatives, was the envy of the world because of its management of Canadian banks, the Canadian economy, and its fiscal prudence during those times.

But hey, your country is terrific and will survive whichever fool you elect in November.