Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

banie01

The prestigious Trump honor roll!!!

Seriously! About as prestigious as a degree from Trump University I'd bet :pac:

PropJoe10

Penn wrote: »

I recently had to access an old email address I use for spam-type things. Forgot I'd signed it up to Trump's election campaign newsletter during the first election.

The things they're putting out on those are insane. They're thirsty as hell for how many they're putting out, most of which asking for money or selling tat. It actually seemed to have been quiet a few weeks ago and now they're sending out several a day. Most of them are written even worse than his tweets, don't know if that's because someone is trying to emulate him and failing, or emulate the real him and succeeding.

An example from yesterday:

That is really really embarrassing.

Retr0gamer

Leroy42 wrote: »

We all knew that Trump would revert to calling the election rigged

Funnily it's one of the few things he is correct about. Massive amounts of voter suppression and gerrymandering by the GOP in Republican held states.

Quin_Dub

pixelburp wrote: »

I imagine it'd only be easier to stall the (postal vote) counts, or call them into question entirely, necessitating legal action: maybe the more likely scenario we've been missing. A repeat of the 2000 election, rather than some militant action by extremists; another variation of the dirty tricks (such as the "Brooks Brothers Riot") played by the GOP to effectively steer the recount. Roger Stone is out of the picture, but whoever picks up the mantle may have disruption tactics planned for this more Postal Vote heavy election.

Arguably, we're seeing the narrative going in that direction already, albeit via the Foghorn of Trump's inability to play it cool. Let the election go ahead, and at centres with close numbers - oh, we must recount to ensure democracy is actioned (or indeed, we must stop this recount. To arms brothers, we must protect democracy!)

That's a key point - Post Election , the early count of in-person votes in Michigan or Nevada shows Trump with a small lead and Fox News calls it for Trump , then the postal votes come in a day or two later and swings it back to Biden for the final result.

Chaos ensues as Hannity et al accuse the Democrats of Stealing the election etc. and Trump goes mental on Twitter.

This is exactly the scenario that Trump is building the back story for right now.. "Mail in voting is dodgy , not to be trusted" , "they are trying to steal the election".

We know that mail-in voting areas are typically slower to declare the result and Trump will use this to sow discord and distrust in the result.

pixelburp

Quin_Dub wrote: »

That's a key point - Post Election , the early count of in-person votes in Michigan or Nevada shows Trump with a small lead and Fox News calls it for Trump , then the postal votes come in a day or two later and swings it back to Biden for the final result.

Chaos ensues as Hannity et al accuse the Democrats of Stealing the election etc. and Trump goes mental on Twitter.

This is exactly the scenario that Trump is building the back story for right now.. "Mail in voting is dodgy , not to be trusted" , "they are trying to steal the election".

We know that mail-in voting areas are typically slower to declare the result and Trump will use this to sow discord and distrust in the result.

Yup, in fact I might be so bold as to predict / speculate right here and now: this election will go to the Supreme Court. It'll be a full-on repeat of the 2000 election, recounts n' all. Just no way November passes in "peace".

As you say, the postal votes will be 11th hour electoral grenades - potentially, assuming it's not a washout before then - and there's just no way in hell Trump & his acolytes will take this election lying down. A huge victory margin ala Reagan might keep Hannity and other barking dogs silent, but anything less and the screaming will be heard all the way to the courts.

wassie

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I saw an article yesterday that kinda summed up Trump for me really.

They made the point that a Presidential Election should be about "Vote for me because this is what I've done and/or this is what I will do if I get Elected"....

Biden just needs to use the message Ronald Reagan used against Jimmy Carter in their final debate.

Are you better off than you were four years ago? Is there more or less unemployment…than there was four years ago?

Blueshoe

wassie wrote: »

Biden just needs to use the message Ronald Reagan used against Jimmy Carter in their final debate.

Are you better off than you were four years ago? Is there more or less unemployment…than there was four years ago?

Pre covid the Us unemployment rate was the lowest in 60 years.

wassie

Wont count for anything come November I would of thought.

Cody montana

wassie wrote: »

Wont count for anything come November I would of thought.

What will he run on?

Economy in tatters.
Millions unemployed
Deficit exploding
Little of the wall built
Hillary free

Igotadose

Blueshoe wrote: »

Pre covid the Us unemployment rate was the lowest in 60 years.

Pre Covid, people I know were alive and now they're not. And I'm a US citizen.

Blueshoe

Igotadose wrote: »

Pre Covid, people I know were alive and now they're not. And I'm a US citizen.

Pre Covid ,people I know were alive and now they're not. And I'm a (enter any country on the planet) citizen.

The post was relating to Joe Biden potentially using unemployment against Trump. That is not a possibility as precovid unemployment was at its lowest in 60 years.

wassie

I think your missing the point - people wont vote on how their circumstances were 6 months ago.

pixelburp

Blueshoe wrote: »

Pre Covid ,people I know were alive and now they're not. And I'm a (enter any country on the planet) citizen.

The post was relating to Joe Biden potentially using unemployment against Trump. That is not a possibility as precovid unemployment was at its lowest in 60 years.

"It would have been good if it weren't for CoVid" is a wheedling excuse that would only drive the conversation quicker towards Trump's record during the crisis. Which hasn't been good, to say the least. A year is a long time in politics and Trump can't glory in an economy he inherited. The record unemployed won't care what used to be.

wassie

Combined with the carnage of the decimated oil shale industry....

FrostyJack

Cody montana wrote: »

What will he run on?

Economy in tatters.
Millions unemployed
Deficit exploding
Little of the wall built
Hillary free

He was just saving those hits for the next 4 years obviously. Please let Biden have a decent running mate and make it a landslide for him.

moon2

Blueshoe wrote: »

Pre Covid ,people I know were alive and now they're not. And I'm a (enter any country on the planet) citizen.

The post was relating to Joe Biden potentially using unemployment against Trump. That is not a possibility as precovid unemployment was at its lowest in 60 years.

Are you saying that employment numbers have no bearing on the government's performance and so cannot be used as part of an election campaign? If so, why are historical employment figures ok to use?

It seems odd that you're implying Trump can take credit for December's employment figures but is in no way responsible for April's figures.

Blueshoe

pixelburp wrote: »

"It would have been good if it weren't for CoVid" is a wheedling excuse that would only drive the conversation quicker towards Trump's record during the crisis. Which hasn't been good, to say the least. A year is a long time in politics and Trump can't glory in an economy he inherited. The record unemployed won't care what used to be.

Makes zero sense. Being blamed for high unemployment yet ignoring the reason for the unemployment and also ignoring the rate before a global pandemic.

Holds no water with anyone in possession of a rational brain

Blueshoe

moon2 wrote: »

Are you saying that employment numbers have no bearing on the government's performance and so cannot be used as part of an election campaign? If so, why are historical employment figures ok to use?

It seems odd that you're implying Trump can take credit for December's employment figures but is in no way responsible for April's figures.

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/trumps-numbers-january-2020-update/

moon2

Blueshoe wrote: »

Makes zero sense. Being blamed for high unemployment yet ignoring the reason for the unemployment and also ignoring the rate before a global pandemic.

Holds no water with anyone in possession of a rational brain

Your argument is that government policies to handle covid have no impact on unemployment?

Luckily we have objective measures to this. The current US unemployment rate is 14.7%. The irish unemployment rate is 4.9% and UK is 5.4%

We all faced covid in the same way so we can rule that out as the cause of the discrepancy.

Edit: not sure what your previous post is trying to say.

pixelburp

Blueshoe wrote: »

Makes zero sense. Being blamed for high unemployment yet ignoring the reason for the unemployment and also ignoring the rate before a global pandemic.

Holds no water with anyone in possession of a rational brain

Who said American elections are rational? Trump will be judged on his response to the pandemic. Or the status of the economy at the time of election. If you protest rationalism when you know full well the electorate are demanding and jumpy - demographics won't care that the economy was a soaring eagle a year go, they want to know why the economy is in the toilet now. And it absolutely is, relative to other Developed Countries. 15% unemployment can't be waved away.

No politician ever got elected on pleading things "used to be better".
That's just how it is, for him and every other world leader at the moment. While some have seen their support increase, others have seen it drop - Trump being one of the latter. So why is that? His polling hasn't gone anywhere near a net positive.

Blueshoe

moon2 wrote: »

Your argument is that government policies to handle covid have no impact on unemployment?

Luckily we have objective measures to this. The current US unemployment rate is 14.7%. The irish unemployment rate is 4.9% and UK is 5.4%

We all faced covid in the same way so we can rule that out as the cause of the discrepancy.

Edit: not sure what your previous post is trying to say.

The Irish rate is 4.9% yet 598k people receiving Covid19 payment. Doesn't add up

duploelabs

pixelburp wrote: »

Who said American elections are rational? Trump will be judged on his response to the pandemic. Or the status of the economy at the time of election. If you protest rationalism when you know full well the electorate are demanding and jumpy - demographics won't care that the economy was a soaring eagle a year go, they want to know why the economy is in the toilet now. And it absolutely is, relative to other Developed Countries. 15% unemployment can't be waved away.

No politician ever got elected on pleading things "used to be better".
That's just how it is, for him and every other world leader at the moment. While some have seen their support increase, others have seen it drop - Trump being one of the latter. So why is that? His polling hasn't gone anywhere near a net positive.

Eh Make America Great Again?

pixelburp

duploelabs wrote: »

Eh Make America Great Again?

True, but that was a boisterous broad-strokes appeal to return to some mythological version of 1950s America; nebulous. Blueshoe is proposing that the electorate might give Trump a pass because the 15% unemployed will find succour in the soaring pre CoVid economy from 12 months ago. Rather than Trump's CoVid response, or noted policy failures. It flies in the face of every electoral impulse the voting public continuously demonstrates.

If Trump wins in November, then the die is cast but right now, no set of numbers points towards a population happy with present circumstances that are as bad as they've been since the Great Depression.

Herbert Hoover didn't get re-elected, and I daresay didn't run a platform of "but look how good you had it during the Roaring 20s! Forget your Grapes of Wrath, remember how you used to have a job??"

moon2

Blueshoe wrote: »

The Irish rate is 4.9% yet 598k people receiving Covid19 payment. Doesn't add up

Sure it does! Jobs and businesses are being protected while they are required to remain closed.

Will the US see a surge of re-employment when businesses reopen - nearly definitely.

Deciding which approach is best short/medium/long term in terms of employment figures is a tough call. However the short and medium term benefits of income stability are pretty clear - people can afford rent and food.

However, I'd love you to answer the question I've been posing: why can trump claim credit for employment numbers when they're low, but is not responsible in any way when the numbers are high?

He's looking at having in the direction of two hundred thousand deaths by November. Their testing to date has been the low numbers, also likely to be many undeclared deaths. The debates are largely going to be focused on his response to the virus and the question of if he has the ability to bring back a crashed economy.

He got a healthy and booming economy when he entered office. I'd suspect people may have their doubts of him dealing well with an actual economic crisis.

trashcan

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I saw an article yesterday that kinda summed up Trump for me really.

They made the point that a Presidential Election should be about "Vote for me because this is what I've done and/or this is what I will do if I get Elected"

If you go to the Joe Biden campaign website , that's mostly whats there - "Here are the polices will enact , here are the things we'll do and here is why I'll be good at doing them" - You can read them and either agree or disagree.

Go to the Trump campaign website and once you manage to wade your way through all of the Trump/MAGA branded tat for sale you won't find a single thing about Policy - It's basically a list of people/groups that Trump hates and how only his election will destroy them.

It's Obama this or Radical Extreme Libs that.

Trump has nothing but hate and fear as his campaign message.

Yeah, but hate and fear can work quite well, unfortunately.

Foxtrol

Blueshoe wrote: »

Makes zero sense. Being blamed for high unemployment yet ignoring the reason for the unemployment and also ignoring the rate before a global pandemic.

Holds no water with anyone in possession of a rational brain

Makes as much sense as Trump spending the last 3 years bragging about the strong economy that he inherited from Obama.

Trump can point to COVID and though he has some point the problem is that the situation is now so much worse than it could have been because of how inept his administration dealt with it and how they continue to deal with it (and they have plenty of video evidence to back it up).

Even this week Trump admitted on camera that they have no plan to improve employment aside from reopening the economy and hoping everything sorts itself out.

Foxtrol

Roanmore wrote: »

The United States Postal Service is in trouble, may run out of money in August.

What's the betting that if Trump can't stop Postal voting he'll just not fund the PS and let it collapse?

Letting it collapse would likely hurt his base more than anyone else.

I wouldn't be surprised if he did something like that because it is the exact type of move that hurts himself more than helps, like saying he'd cut support for swing states or getting into arguments with governors that are polling 20 points ahead of him.

Penn

Foxtrol wrote: »

Letting it collapse would likely hurt his base more than anyone else.

I wouldn't be surprised if he did something like that because it is the exact type of move that hurts himself more than helps, like saying he'd cut support for swing states or getting into arguments with governors that are polling 20 points ahead of him.

It used to be the case that he'd just threaten to do something like that, then get told he can't, then feign benevolence and say he could, but doesn't want to.

Given what the GOP & his base have let him get away with, I don't think there's anything he believes he won't get away with. So even if it hurt his base and more red-states, he'll do it, be praised for it, be challenged on it, stonewall any investigations about it, and won't give a sh*t.

Foxtrol

Penn wrote: »

It used to be the case that he'd just threaten to do something like that, then get told he can't, then feign benevolence and say he could, but doesn't want to.

Given what the GOP & his base have let him get away with, I don't think there's anything he believes he won't get away with. So even if it hurt his base and more red-states, he'll do it, be praised for it, be challenged on it, stonewall any investigations about it, and won't give a sh*t.

I think he could do it but it would hurt him electorally more than help. Cutting off the USPS will hurt republican leaning rural and older folk more than democrats.

Forcing folks to vote in person isn't going to swing any independents to your side and again older republican leaning voters are impacted worse. We already saw what happened in Wisconsin, when they blocked wider mail in voting, and the republican incumbent lost.

It might be another thing where some people say 'Trump is playing 4D chess' but is actually shooting himself in the foot.