The Third Year of the Trump Presidency

Jack Walsh

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
9,613
Didn't say they weren't. In what way does it invalidate the claim that they "make this a difficult election for the Dems to win" ?
As for 2. : consult the historical record.
He was handed an economy growing at 4% and looks as if he will have 1% in his final year.
I don't need to trawl history to know that is not a positive for him

"We were top of table when I was appointed and I have managed to keep us out of relegation zone"
 


Jack Walsh

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
9,613
Incumbency is stitched in. The presidency is a 'bully pulpit' as Teddy Roosevelt said all those years ago.

Trump is faring poorly in all the battleground states and that's before the signs of weakness in the economy show up on high street. Either way, there isn't going to be a continuing boom.

He's attempting to postpone the affect of the tariff war on China by postponing the tariffs on consumer electronics until after Christmas. All that does is have them hit during election season.

So far, the Democratic nominees have been unfailingly polite to each other and the one time a candidate does hit out, it affects that candidate and not the target. In reality there are four realistic candidates: Biden; Warren; Sanders and Harris and Harris tried having a pop at Biden and failed. This time round the DNC have been ridiculously fair in their application of the rules to make sure that everyone has a go at the debates to keep their supporters on board.

As I said above PUMA and Bernie Bros are no more. That's a luxury people can't afford any more. It's like third party voting - voting for Jill Stein so Trump can strip the Endangered Species Act - an unaffordable luxury in the age of Trump.

'Tacking left' could mean taking on issues that Americans support in opinion polls. In any event, the leader in the polls ever since he announced his candidacy is Joe Biden, the most moderate, reasonable man you'll find and he's not tacking left for anyone because that's not where his vote lies.

There are risks and nothing is guaranteed, but unless Trump convincingly changes his ways to attract centrist voters, he is in trouble.
100% correct, but tbh the longer his supporters have their heads up their holes thinking he is skating to reelection the better
Trump feeds off these dolts and whatever they are telling him he will keep giving it to them, oblivious that it wont win him a single vote he doesn't already have.

Trump simply will not listen to anything except the sound of someone slurping on his dick and praising him
Even if there is someone in the room smart enough and balls enough to tell him he is likely going to lose if he keeps on doing what he is doing, he will not listen to them, he will listen to the 10,000 hyenas at rallies imagining they are in fact representative of the American electorate
 

Jack Walsh

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
9,613

Nice to see Pelosi school arsewipe Bolton and Trump's ongoing plans to try to destroy the EU

The Irish vote is not as material as it once was but the Dems out there with a "Trump tore the Good Friday agreement to shreds" message will hurt him badly next year
 

silverharp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
16,126
He was handed an economy growing at 4% and looks as if he will have 1% in his final year.
I don't need to trawl history to know that is not a positive for him

"We were top of table when I was appointed and I have managed to keep us out of relegation zone"
that's a bit like a dumb thing CNN put out which President had the best stock market rises, not really recognising that the best increases happen from the bottom.
 

Paddyc

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
9,747

Nice to see Pelosi school arsewipe Bolton and Trump's ongoing plans to try to destroy the EU

The Irish vote is not as material as it once was but the Dems out there with a "Trump tore the Good Friday agreement to shreds" message will hurt him badly next year
The most important word in that statement is 'bipartisan'. Apart from this being the only time Nancy Pelosi and Peter King agree on anything, there are enough (stage) Irish around Fox News and the Trump Administration to take this point on board.
 

Paddyc

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
9,747
that's a bit like a dumb thing CNN put out which President had the best stock market rises, not really recognising that the best increases happen from the bottom.
No,

It means that the Democrats can say quite plausibly that Trump inherited the Obama boom and squandered it on tax cuts for the rich and willy waving trade wars.
It's all about perception.
 

Jack Walsh

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
9,613
No,

It means that the Democrats can say quite plausibly that Trump inherited the Obama boom and squandered it on tax cuts for the rich and willy waving trade wars.
It's all about perception.

The utterly imbecilic point he is trying to make is that Obama got into office when the stock market was at its "bottom"
You see, when the Dow was at 8,000 and the world was literally collapsing a decade ago, it was in fact the "bottom", the Dow could not go any lower than that.
So Obama got a stock market that could only go one way, upwards

Jesus wept, but Trump fans are thick
 

A Voice

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
7,345
He was handed an economy growing at 4% and looks as if he will have 1% in his final year.
I don't need to trawl history to know that is not a positive for him

"We were top of table when I was appointed and I have managed to keep us out of relegation zone"
But voters won't apply that calculus. (Even assuming it's 1%).
 

A Voice

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
7,345
Incumbency is stitched in.
And it's a problem for Dems.

So far, the Democratic nominees have been unfailingly polite to each other and the one time a candidate does hit out, it affects that candidate and not the target. In reality there are four realistic candidates: Biden; Warren; Sanders and Harris and Harris tried having a pop at Biden and failed.
My read is that Harris got a big bounce after her attack on Biden, and was damaged after Tulsi's attack on her.

I very much doubt that this primary process will be free of further mudslinging.

'Tacking left' could mean taking on issues that Americans support in opinion polls.
But mostly not.

At times Trump seems to be doing his best not to get re-elected but the obstacles to the Dems remain substantial.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,453
And it's a problem for Dems.

My read is that Harris got a big bounce after her attack on Biden, and was damaged after Tulsi's attack on her.

I very much doubt that this primary process will be free of further mudslinging.

But mostly not.

At times Trump seems to be doing his best not to get re-elected but the obstacles to the Dems remain substantial.
It's a pretty basic truism that the party challenging an incumbent has certain difficulties.

Trump's problem is that despite those difficulties, he is still not performing where you'd expect an incumbent cruising to reelection to be at this point in the cycle. He is losing significantly in almost all polls to Biden, and losing more narrowly or coming even with most other Dems. But the bigger problem is that his vote against other Dems doesn't grow - he stays around 40% against allcomers - it's just that many of the folk saying they'd vote for Biden say, instead, that they don't know against others. That is understandable for folks with lower profiles than Biden.

The other thing that should worry his supporters is that Trump seems addicted to making campaigns about immigration rather than the one area where he (for now, at least) enjoys positive ratings: the economy. But polling consistently shows that voters prefer the Democrats on immigration than the GOP. Trump's big play in the mid-terms was the nonsense about the caravan, and the GOP lost the House election by 8% and the Senate election by 20%.
 

A Voice

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
7,345
It's a pretty basic truism that the party challenging an incumbent has certain difficulties.

Trump's problem is that despite those difficulties, he is still not performing where you'd expect an incumbent cruising to reelection to be at this point in the cycle. He is losing significantly in almost all polls to Biden, and losing more narrowly or coming even with most other Dems. But the bigger problem is that his vote against other Dems doesn't grow - he stays around 40% against allcomers - it's just that many of the folk saying they'd vote for Biden say, instead, that they don't know against others. That is understandable for folks with lower profiles than Biden.

The other thing that should worry his supporters is that Trump seems addicted to making campaigns about immigration rather than the one area where he (for now, at least) enjoys positive ratings: the economy. But polling consistently shows that voters prefer the Democrats on immigration than the GOP. Trump's big play in the mid-terms was the nonsense about the caravan, and the GOP lost the House election by 8% and the Senate election by 20%.
Broadly agree, but the mid-terms were not bad for an incumbent. Compare Clinton's and Obama's 1st term carnage. If anything, they argue that he'll be a resilient enough incumbent in 2020. The crazy stuff is baked in; people are less shockable now. So it'll probably come down to the economy.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,453
Broadly agree, but the mid-terms were not bad for an incumbent. Compare Clinton's and Obama's 1st term carnage. If anything, they argue that he'll be a resilient enough incumbent in 2020. The crazy stuff is baked in; people are less shockable now. So it'll probably come down to the economy.
Umm, were you looking at the same results.

In the House election, the GOP lost by a larger margin (8.6%) than the Dems in either 2010 (6.8%) or 1994 (also 6.8%).

In terms of the Senate, where the GOP lost by a margin of nearly 20%, 2010 isn't really a valid comparator because it was a different cohort of Senate seats - but the Dems lost by only 5.3%. The 1994 Senate election is a decent comparator because it was the same class of seats as 2018 -and the Dems lost by 5.9%.

So in both Senate and House races, the GOP results in terms of vote share (which is what matters when we're assessing whether a party's message is landing well with the public or not) the 2018 results were quite a bit worse than previous blowouts like 2010 and 1994.
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
47,323

As ABC News reported Wednesday, there’s a growing fraternity of Americans who have committed acts of violence, threatened acts of violence, or committed assault in the name of Trump.
ABC News could not find a single criminal case filed in federal or state court where an act of violence or threat was made in the name of President Barack Obama or President George W. Bush.
 

Jack Walsh

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
9,613

Trump never wastes an opportunity to brag about a milestone especially when it comes to the stock market so maybe he will acknowledge that he now owns the 5 largest one day point drops of the Dow in its history.

And as usually remind us how he is "only getting started"

The idiot has really ballsed up here, starting a ludicrous trade war at the very moment when the world economic growth cycle was ticking downwards after an 8 year expansion.

The Chinese will now tear him asunder and his own party may well too.
He will mercilessly attack the Fed now, but it is futile (other than making a fool of himself and further destabilise markets), even his own party know gutting the Fed of its independence could spell carnage.

Edit
Oops, he's at it already in last hour
THANK YOU to clueless Jay Powell and the Federal Reserve. Germany, and many others, are playing the game! CRAZY INVERTED YIELD CURVE! We should easily be reaping big Rewards & Gains, but the Fed is holding us back. We will Win!

Absolute braindead fu*kwit who sees his reelection hopes dwindling and wants control of monetary policy to try to buy the election.
 
Last edited:

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,928

Nice to see Pelosi school arsewipe Bolton and Trump's ongoing plans to try to destroy the EU

The Irish vote is not as material as it once was but the Dems out there with a "Trump tore the Good Friday agreement to shreds" message will hurt him badly next year
The most important word in that statement is 'bipartisan'. Apart from this being the only time Nancy Pelosi and Peter King agree on anything, there are enough (stage) Irish around Fox News and the Trump Administration to take this point on board.
Agreed. Pelosi also masters the obvious regarding the US-Ireland trade interests and most especially the larger US-EU trade interests and First World power and influence benefits it mutually provides.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,928
Umm, were you looking at the same results.

In the House election, the GOP lost by a larger margin (8.6%) than the Dems in either 2010 (6.8%) or 1994 (also 6.8%).

In terms of the Senate, where the GOP lost by a margin of nearly 20%, 2010 isn't really a valid comparator because it was a different cohort of Senate seats - but the Dems lost by only 5.3%. The 1994 Senate election is a decent comparator because it was the same class of seats as 2018 -and the Dems lost by 5.9%.

So in both Senate and House races, the GOP results in terms of vote share (which is what matters when we're assessing whether a party's message is landing well with the public or not) the 2018 results were quite a bit worse than previous blowouts like 2010 and 1994.
GOP gerrymandering of House seats stunted further Dem House gains as intended.

The Clinton Dems and Obama Dems also took a major bugbear of an issue by the nose: comprehensive health care reform. The Clinton Dems failed to accomplish it, and under Obama they accomplished the compromise ACA within their own party with no GOP support at great political cost.

Health care is one of those important issues that's always radioactive and easy to troll and demagogue upon by political opponents, hence why lesser and more self-serving politicians also make 'pie in the sky' empty promises and/or play the coward with improving such systems.

Does anyone know of a First World nation where people don't regularly bitch and complain about their health care system no matter its positives and dynamics? The Second and Third World nations don't get to that 'privilege problem' because they mostly have 'Rosarycare'.
 
Last edited:

Pyewacket

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
2,458
GOP gerrymandering of House seats stunted further Dem House gains as intended.

The Dems in the 90s and Obama in 2010 also took a major bugbear of an issue by the nose: comprehensive health care reform. The Clinton Dems failed to accomplish it, and Obama accomplished the compromise ACA within his own party with no GOP support at great political cost.

Health care is one of those important issues that's always radioactive and easy to demagogue upon by political opponents, hence why lesser and more self-serving politicians often make 'pie in the sky' empty promises and/or play the coward with improving such systems.

Does anyone know of a First World nation where people don't regularly bitch and complain about their health care system no matter its positives and dynamics? The Second and Third World nations don't get to that 'privilege problem' because they mostly have 'Rosarycare'.
Yeah, I am glad I live in Europe. There is no way my elderly parents with their health conditions could ever have afforded the treatment they got, or the after care, in the States.

And I am also glad I can live in the EU, I own property in another EU country and divide my time there, and I get excellent care through that other EU's national health system.

The USA cannot deliver that for its people, so as far as I am concerned, the country does not work. Couldn't give a shit what else it does, it cannot do the real things.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,928
Yeah, I am glad I live in Europe. There is no way my elderly parents with their health conditions could ever have afforded the treatment they got, or the after care, in the States.

And I am also glad I can live in the EU, I own property in another EU country and divide my time there, and I get excellent care through that other EU's national health system.

The USA cannot deliver that for its people, so as far as I am concerned, the country does not work. Couldn't give a shit what else it does, it cannot do the real things.
It's a demerit IMO for sure given the level of GOP Robber Baronism and Social Darwinism on the topic, and the nature of how the federal/state system works further complicates comprehensive approaches to the topic.

That certainly creates a 'winners and losers' dynamic. Like in so many other things, the US can and will provide you the best and quickest health care to be found...if you can afford access to it. The US provides availability to the best of everything...it's accessibility that's the issue.

The approach also permits people to be irresponsible more than it should. The poorer irresponsible types also bear responsibility there, including health care issues.

For example, the Trump Party, for spite and creating legal arguments to challenge the ACA, removed the requirement that people obtain health coverage or face a tax penalty. The penalty was slight, and the ACA provides things like expanded Medicaid and income assessed prorated subsidies for poorer families for obtaining private plan coverage. Yet, some people simply won't get off their arse, be responsible for themselves and to others, and get coverage.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top