Author Topic: Trump not running?  (Read 3076 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #45 on: July 01, 2020, 04:16:26 AM »

Offline tenn_smoothie

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2773
  • Tommy Points: 320

- Who becomes the Rep nominee?  Is it automatically Pence?  Do the Reps try to get someone in Trump's orbit to try to keep his cult supporting their candidate? 


Trump's Cult ?

Uh, he won the election.

A cult following is more like Bernie Sanders.
The Four Celtic Generals:
Russell - Cowens - Bird - Garnett

The Four Celtic Lieutenants:
Cousy - Havlicek - McHale - Pierce

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #46 on: July 01, 2020, 05:39:29 AM »

Offline gouki88

  • Global Moderator
  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13391
  • Tommy Points: 764
  • 2019 CS Historical Draft Champion

- Who becomes the Rep nominee?  Is it automatically Pence?  Do the Reps try to get someone in Trump's orbit to try to keep his cult supporting their candidate? 


Trump's Cult ?

Uh, he won the election.

A cult following is more like Bernie Sanders.
Him winning the election has literally nothing to do with the fact that he has a cult of personality like no other president ever. Pretty weak attempt at whataboutism about a guy who isn’t even a candidate
Denver: Jokic, Nurk, MPJ, Cancar, Barton, Craig, Harris, Lavine, Morris, Poku (21), Crowder, ET, Hernango

Utah: Allen, Jordan, Bradley, Smith(24), Ingles, Bojan, Niang, Paul, Mitchell, LeVert, Moore, Mudiay, Korkmaz, Claxton

Portland: Vuce, Brown, Collins, Stewart (30), Avdija (14), Ariza, Little, Melo, Dame, Hield, Trent, Kanter, Bembry, Hood

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #47 on: July 01, 2020, 08:20:35 AM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4782
  • Tommy Points: 412
Sure, most Democrats would disagree on policy.  But, some Democrats, many independents, and the overwhelming majority of Republicans would get behind Trump’s policy successes.

It’s not the policies that are the issue to America, it’s the personality and the unhinged rants.

Roy has every right to support or not whatever policy Trump has offered or supported.  I disagree with nearly all of Trump's "policy" in addition to agreeing that Trump is a Jack Ass (I think that was the term used).  But Roy is just speculating or offering an opinion when he says that if he wasn't such a Jack Ass, all these people would support his policies.  I have a different opinion on that.

In today's partisan environment, it is very hard to split the policy from the source of the policy.  Case in point was a poll where they asked people first if they support Obama Care, there was much negative response.  Then they asked if people support the Affordable Care Act, much more positive response from the same people.

This goes both ways.  If you were to poll on say Trump's trade policies with China, party affiliation would be the dominant factor in determining if people agree or disagree with the policy.  But to me, that is more about supporters not being willing to go against Trump at least as much as it is about anit-Trumpers going the other way.

About the only policy action by Trump that I agree with was justice reform (First Step Act).  He supported that, signed that, I don't know all the details but seems to be good legislation.  The rest of it is all smoke and mirrors in my opinion.  See how tough I am on immigration.  See how tough I am on China.  But no actual policy.   And my view of the unnecessary tax cut was that it was just debt spending to goose the economy a little for a few months.  To me, this was bad policy. 

Roy's theory is that I feel this way because Trump is a Jack Ass and that if he wasn't, I would like this policy.  Hard to prove either way but can you imagine if Trump wasn't a republican (Jack Ass or not), how many republicans would support his "policies"?  Roy will simply write me off as a flaming liberal Trump hater that would hate any policy with Trump's name on it.  Those types do exist, but I am not one of them. 

Also there are those that support any policy that Trump puts forth and hate anything that Obama did.  Of course Roy does not feel he is one of those, nobody thinks they are.  But at least we agree that Trump is a Jack Ass.

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #48 on: July 01, 2020, 08:57:04 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41687
  • Tommy Points: -27138
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Quote
Roy's theory is that I feel this way because Trump is a Jack Ass and that if he wasn't, I would like this policy.

No, that’s not what I’m saying.  I said he’d be popular, and suggested his approval numbers would be near 60%.  That still leaves 40% or more who would disagree.  And remember, I’m talking pre-2020.

And, we’re removing the rhetoric.  So, he reads “the right things” after Charlottesville, for instance. 

A booming economy (including record low unemployment and actual wage growth), tax cuts, increased border security, criminal justice reform, favorably renegotiated NAFTA, improves export deals with Europe, killed several major terrorists, has not gotten us involved in foreign wars, has gotten NATO to commit $70 billion extra to joint defense, has repaired ties with Israel, has appointed two excellent Supreme Court justices.

Without the ridiculous rhetoric, twitter rants, etc., that’s a strong record to run on. 



Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat. CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012.

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #49 on: July 01, 2020, 11:53:19 AM »

Online slamtheking

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23043
  • Tommy Points: 9340
Quote
Roy's theory is that I feel this way because Trump is a Jack Ass and that if he wasn't, I would like this policy.

No, that’s not what I’m saying.  I said he’d be popular, and suggested his approval numbers would be near 60%.  That still leaves 40% or more who would disagree.  And remember, I’m talking pre-2020.

And, we’re removing the rhetoric.  So, he reads “the right things” after Charlottesville, for instance. 

A booming economy (including record low unemployment and actual wage growth), tax cuts, increased border security, criminal justice reform, favorably renegotiated NAFTA, improves export deals with Europe, killed several major terrorists, has not gotten us involved in foreign wars, has gotten NATO to commit $70 billion extra to joint defense, has repaired ties with Israel, has appointed two excellent Supreme Court justices.

Without the ridiculous rhetoric, twitter rants, etc., that’s a strong record to run on. 
Those are some real rose-colored glasses you've got on there Roy.

Let's break down that 'strong' record shall we?
- A booming economy (including record low unemployment and actual wage growth) --> Obama handed over a booming economy after digging the country out of the great recession.  Nothing from Trump here other than corporations could now count on no new regulations or oversight of what they were doing (which is what led to the crisis in the first place thanks to reckless practices in the financial sector)
- tax cuts --> unnecessary tax cuts that have heavily favored the already-rich and corporations.  the much-ballyhooed trickle down effect was non-existent.  Those $1000 bonuses given out by some companies to 'share the wealth' with their employees were a scam.  if the intent was to really share the wealth those one-time bonuses would have been salary raises which would carry over every year and be subject to any annual salary increase people receive.  Also, this tax cut blew up the deficit.  remember when Reps cared so much about cutting the deficit?  yeah, not so much when their boy is running them up.  only care when it comes to passing bills to help out those out of work during the pandemic -- can't just give out the money to people who need it but god forbid there be any oversight of the money that was approved so that people know where that money went.
- increased border security --> the wall's been a failure -- can't get any funding for it and he's been blocked from taking it from appropriated military spending.  For a number of years prior to Trump the number of people coming into the country has been decreasing.  Where's the effort to stop people overstaying their visas?  that's been a well-documented method of illegals getting into the country but because the majority aren't hispanic, no muss no fuss about them apparently.  Big dog whistle topic that still needs to be verified as a real issue.  everyone wants people to come here legally.  solution is not building a wall.
- criminal justice reform - yup, this was a good move
- favorably renegotiated NAFTA -- how so?  what benefits are we now reaping exactly?  hasn't stopped manufacturing jobs from leaving the country and it sure as hell isn't bringing any back
- improves export deals with Europe -- again, how so?  what benefits are we reaping now?
- killed several major terrorists -- as did Bush and Obama.  it's what he's supposed to be doing.  actually, it's not him doing it, it's the military doing it -- just like Bush and Obama.
- has not gotten us involved in foreign wars -- Syria may not be a foreign war we're in but he made a mess of it.  pulls out troops to protect oil fields and in the process leaves our allies the Kurds wide open to attack from Turkey and Russia. 
- has gotten NATO to commit $70 billion extra to joint defense -- that's good but where's the corresponding drop in our defense budget?  what are we getting for their increased spending?  I have no issue with getting more financial input from allies but that was supposedly going to help us reign in our defense budget but hasn't.  Also managed to pretty much tick off all our allies while making buddies with our enemies
- has repaired ties with Israel -- moved the embassy which made them happy but doesn't hold them accountable for how they treat Palestinians.  All for strong relations with Israel but there's got to be work towards a real peace in the Middle East and not a bulldozing of all their opposition without human rights considerations.
- has appointed two excellent Supreme Court justices -- appointed one seat unconscionably stolen from Obama by Mcconnell and appointed another guy with a questionable past.  not a win.  I also prefer my Supreme Court to be more liberal since that tends to better protect people's rights as do the majority of Americans.

Overall, a pretty weak record.

Let's not overlook his other 'accomplishments' which you've omitted:
- He colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election.  he may not have gone to them first for help but he openly accepted it once he knew what they were doing.  How can anyone find that acceptable? 
- He tried extorting Ukraine to manufacture dirt on Biden to try to win the 2020 election,  Again, how can anyone find that acceptable?
- He's now been exposed as courting China for help in winning the 2020 election.  How's that acceptable?
- The trade tariffs with China have significantly hurt the farming industry yet he's trying to buy their votes by trying to get massive financial relief for farmers which are a significant part of his base.  Sure, China's getting away with stealing patented material and intellectual properties that need to be dealt with but it's been exposed that his primary (sole) concern is getting a deal to make him look good for reelection, not helping the American public.
- The backing out of the Paris accords. Why?  Finally, the world comes together to recognize the need to address climate change and the health of the planet and he drops out.  Big, big black eye for this country.
- Backing out of the Iran deal.  Why?  Every other intelligence source, including our own intelligence sources, said Iran was sticking to the deal.  No one other than Trump has said they aren't.  What was the point of giving Iran the excuse to now go back to developing nuclear capabilities?  if there was anyone else with credibility saying Iran was not sticking to the deal, especially in our intelligence agencies, I'd give the benefit of the doubt to Trump on it but that wasn't the case.
- Pandemic response has been a complete disaster.  If ever there was a situation that called for national leadership, this was it.  The country needed a coordinated effort to address the PPE shortages, the testing shortages, the equipment shortages, the medical staff shortages, etc....   There's been NO national leadership on this from an elected official.  NONE.  Fauci and Birx are the only ones stepping up on the national stage to try to help people know what they need to do to get through this.  Trump's punted to the Governors and Mayors for any resolutions and handling of the problems but once the economy started tanking, he was all about having the authority to force everything open.  Now he's just not even acknowledging there's an ongoing pandemic that's growing more out of control every day thanks to his pressuring of governors to open the economy.
- Racial protests - he's been producing racist commentary and support since taking office and it's become more open as he nears election day.  screams law and order but willfully ignores what's causing the protests in the first place.  Rioting just draws threats of military violences from him.  no practical solutions.   At least he did put out an exec order with some of the good ideas that have come out of this disaster but how's that going to be put into practice?   Where's the real plan to deal with the causes of police misusing their authority?  it's not something I would have seen as a POTUS responsibility under normal circumstances but considering the significance of the protests, this is at a national level in terms of recognizing the issues and crafting a way forward that benefits everyone.  instead, he's harping on the 'defund' phrasing to turn people against each other instead of focusing on the idea of rethinking what the police should be handling as opposed to having a different agency handling a situation.
- Bounties on US military -- another issue now exposed that he says he knew nothing about yet has been confirmed by several sources as being in his daily briefing materials.  what kind of jackass doesn't inform himself of what's going on with what he's charged with managing?   hell, playing devil's advocate and say he legitimately didn't know -- where's the response now?  he knows now, what's he saying or doing about it regarding Russia?  not a [dang] thing.  Thought Reps promoted themselves as the party that supported the military?  Not so much as wagging his finger at his idol Putin.  disgraceful.


There's other issues obviously but if you're thinking the majority would support Trump based on what he's done if he just got off twitter and refrained from ranting, you'd be mistaken. 
« Last Edit: July 01, 2020, 12:00:33 PM by slamtheking »

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #50 on: July 01, 2020, 12:07:18 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41687
  • Tommy Points: -27138
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Quote
Obama handed over a booming economy after digging the country out of the great recession

Honestly, I stopped reading there.  Obama's economy was somewhere between tepid and steady; nobody would consider it "booming".  Your post is just more of the same partisan talking points.

I get it.  You’re in the 40% that lean most leftward.  However, Americans like peace and prosperity.  A more civil Trump would have delivered that.  Even with the personality-disordered narcissist we have, he’s been approval numbers in the mid- to high-40s until recently.  Take away his ego and his rants, and he’d easily have had a majority for much of his term.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2020, 12:21:31 PM by Roy H. »
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat. CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012.

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #51 on: July 01, 2020, 01:12:59 PM »

Offline keevsnick

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3287
  • Tommy Points: 324
Quote
Obama handed over a booming economy after digging the country out of the great recession

Honestly, I stopped reading there.  Obama's economy was somewhere between tepid and steady; nobody would consider it "booming".  Your post is just more of the same partisan talking points.

I get it.  You’re in the 40% that lean most leftward.  However, Americans like peace and prosperity.  A more civil Trump would have delivered that.  Even with the personality-disordered narcissist we have, he’s been approval numbers in the mid- to high-40s until recently.  Take away his ego and his rants, and he’d easily have had a majority for much of his term.

I mean if Obama wasn't booming than neither was Trumps, even before this whole fiasco.

I mean by a lot of economic measurements the two economies are not that different. GDP growth was slightly higher in Trumps first three years than Obama's last three, but Obama actually created more jobs per month than Trump has so far. Wages have increased a little faster under trump, but so has inflation to the point that real wage growth increased faster under Obama.

Now to be fair Obama started at a lower point than trump,, but also in fairness he was coming off the greatest economic downturn since the great depression so it was an unprecedented time. And republican's certainly didn't do him any favors his last six years in office. Remember when they cared about deficit spending? Trump is on pace for a similar if not greater deficit spending.

I guess in short if it feels like Trump is presiding over a better economy than Obama thats mostly because he inherited a better economy than Obama.

Granted to you point Obamas economy was enough to get him reelected.

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #52 on: July 01, 2020, 01:25:56 PM »

Online slamtheking

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23043
  • Tommy Points: 9340
Quote
Obama handed over a booming economy after digging the country out of the great recession

Honestly, I stopped reading there.  Obama's economy was somewhere between tepid and steady; nobody would consider it "booming".  Your post is just more of the same partisan talking points.

I get it.  You’re in the 40% that lean most leftward.  However, Americans like peace and prosperity.  A more civil Trump would have delivered that.  Even with the personality-disordered narcissist we have, he’s been approval numbers in the mid- to high-40s until recently.  Take away his ego and his rants, and he’d easily have had a majority for much of his term.
your tactic of labeling anyone who disagrees with you as a liberal or being wrong still in effect I see.

The economy was recovering under Obama at a pretty good clip.  bury your head in the sand on that point if you so choose but I notice you couldn't be bothered to refute the rest of it because basically you can't and you know it.

you don't have to be a liberal or your hated '40%' to realize Trump has made a mess of things. 

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #53 on: July 01, 2020, 03:33:30 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16208
  • Tommy Points: 1751
Quote
Obama handed over a booming economy after digging the country out of the great recession

Honestly, I stopped reading there.  Obama's economy was somewhere between tepid and steady; nobody would consider it "booming".  Your post is just more of the same partisan talking points.

I get it.  You’re in the 40% that lean most leftward.  However, Americans like peace and prosperity.  A more civil Trump would have delivered that.  Even with the personality-disordered narcissist we have, he’s been approval numbers in the mid- to high-40s until recently.  Take away his ego and his rants, and he’d easily have had a majority for much of his term.

Weird though Roy -- take away what got him elected and who he is to his core and he'd be just right?

OK - I have an easier one.  Take away the Monica Lewinsky affair and his penchant for adultery and possible aggression toward women, and I'd probably like Bill Clinton.  But I actually can't take that away and it feels wrong to even try. 

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #54 on: July 01, 2020, 03:34:04 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4992
  • Tommy Points: 818
Quote
Obama handed over a booming economy after digging the country out of the great recession

Honestly, I stopped reading there.  Obama's economy was somewhere between tepid and steady; nobody would consider it "booming".  Your post is just more of the same partisan talking points.

I get it.  You’re in the 40% that lean most leftward.  However, Americans like peace and prosperity.  A more civil Trump would have delivered that.  Even with the personality-disordered narcissist we have, he’s been approval numbers in the mid- to high-40s until recently.  Take away his ego and his rants, and he’d easily have had a majority for much of his term.

The 'Trump economy' was juiced by a massive dose of artificial sweetener in the form of a massive tax break for corporations and the wealthy.  That is not sustainable because (a) it eventually has to be paid for and (b) it will be rolled back as soon Dems re-assert control over the government.

Your assertions about percentages that 'lean left' or what is really popular are dubious - since they ignore that the _popular_ vote has gone Democratic in 6 of the last 7 national elections and that when people are polled on policy issues (sans reference to party or personage) folks in the USA lean very, very heavily towards progressive policies.  It's not really close.

Finally, the fact of the reality that we live in IS that Trump is in fact, a Jack Ass scumbag.  We do not live in some hypothetical alternate reality where he is not. 
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #55 on: July 01, 2020, 03:41:11 PM »

Online blink

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10667
  • Tommy Points: 752
Quote
Obama handed over a booming economy after digging the country out of the great recession

Honestly, I stopped reading there.  Obama's economy was somewhere between tepid and steady; nobody would consider it "booming".  Your post is just more of the same partisan talking points.

I get it.  You’re in the 40% that lean most leftward.  However, Americans like peace and prosperity.  A more civil Trump would have delivered that.  Even with the personality-disordered narcissist we have, he’s been approval numbers in the mid- to high-40s until recently.  Take away his ego and his rants, and he’d easily have had a majority for much of his term.

The 'Trump economy' was juiced by a massive dose of artificial sweetener in the form of a massive tax break for corporations and the wealthy.  That is not sustainable because (a) it eventually has to be paid for and (b) it will be rolled back as soon Dems re-assert control over the government.

Your assertions about percentages that 'lean left' or what is really popular are dubious - since they ignore that the _popular_ vote has gone Democratic in 6 of the last 7 national elections and that when people are polled on policy issues (sans reference to party or personage) folks in the USA lean very, very heavily towards progressive policies.  It's not really close.

Finally, the fact of the reality that we live in IS that Trump is in fact, a Jack Ass scumbag.  We do not live in some hypothetical alternate reality where he is not.

thumbs up to the bolded part. 

to me when you spout obviously partisan talking points and then you complain about someone spouting what you think are obviously partisan talking points it just doesn't mean anything.

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #56 on: July 01, 2020, 03:45:51 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4992
  • Tommy Points: 818
Trump also apparently knew about the Russian bounties on US servicemen as far back as early 2019:

https://apnews.com/425e43fa0ffdd6e126c5171653ec47d1

Quote
Top officials in the White House were aware in early 2019 of classified intelligence indicating Russia was secretly offering bounties to the Taliban for the deaths of Americans, a full year earlier than has been previously reported, according to U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the intelligence.

The assessment was included in at least one of President Donald Trump’s written daily intelligence briefings at the time, according to the officials. Then-national security adviser John Bolton also told colleagues he briefed Trump on the intelligence assessment in March 2019.

NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #57 on: July 01, 2020, 03:58:20 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41687
  • Tommy Points: -27138
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Trump also apparently knew about the Russian bounties on US servicemen as far back as early 2019:

https://apnews.com/425e43fa0ffdd6e126c5171653ec47d1

Quote
Top officials in the White House were aware in early 2019 of classified intelligence indicating Russia was secretly offering bounties to the Taliban for the deaths of Americans, a full year earlier than has been previously reported, according to U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the intelligence.

The assessment was included in at least one of President Donald Trump’s written daily intelligence briefings at the time, according to the officials. Then-national security adviser John Bolton also told colleagues he briefed Trump on the intelligence assessment in March 2019.

Wasn’t Bolton saying this past Sunday that he wasn’t aware of those reports himself?
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat. CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012.

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #58 on: July 01, 2020, 04:11:14 PM »

Offline GreenFaith1819

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14507
  • Tommy Points: 2673
Trump also apparently knew about the Russian bounties on US servicemen as far back as early 2019:

https://apnews.com/425e43fa0ffdd6e126c5171653ec47d1

Quote
Top officials in the White House were aware in early 2019 of classified intelligence indicating Russia was secretly offering bounties to the Taliban for the deaths of Americans, a full year earlier than has been previously reported, according to U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the intelligence.

The assessment was included in at least one of President Donald Trump’s written daily intelligence briefings at the time, according to the officials. Then-national security adviser John Bolton also told colleagues he briefed Trump on the intelligence assessment in March 2019.

Wasn’t Bolton saying this past Sunday that he wasn’t aware of those reports himself?

You trust Bolton? lol
Augustus Freeman IV is AWESOME. Read Milestone Comics.

Re: Trump not running?
« Reply #59 on: July 01, 2020, 04:29:03 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41687
  • Tommy Points: -27138
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Trump also apparently knew about the Russian bounties on US servicemen as far back as early 2019:

https://apnews.com/425e43fa0ffdd6e126c5171653ec47d1

Quote
Top officials in the White House were aware in early 2019 of classified intelligence indicating Russia was secretly offering bounties to the Taliban for the deaths of Americans, a full year earlier than has been previously reported, according to U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the intelligence.

The assessment was included in at least one of President Donald Trump’s written daily intelligence briefings at the time, according to the officials. Then-national security adviser John Bolton also told colleagues he briefed Trump on the intelligence assessment in March 2019.

Wasn’t Bolton saying this past Sunday that he wasn’t aware of those reports himself?

You trust Bolton? lol

Nope.  The guy lies constantly. 
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat. CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012.