Obama’s Legacy Has Already Been Destroyed

Okay for one Everyone in Washington has met with the Russian ambassador at one time or the other it is after all sort of the man's job to meet with as many movers and shakers within the government as he can. There is nothing wrong per se with meeting with the Russian ambassador. Especially when, as in the case of Flynn, you are doing so as part of the incoming president's team. And please note that McCabe and/or Comey rewrote the initial investigator's report of the conversation with Flynn as he did not believe Flynn was lying.

 

History has shown that if someone dislikes a candidate, normally they won't for for that candidate. What one's does when they dislike both major party candidates, is choose the lesser of two evils or go with the candidate they least want to lose. Or they take my option which 8 million others did in 2016, they vote against both by voting third party or stay home.

If you go by which candidate had the highest favorable rating, they win most of the time. The like factor. 2016 was an exception, but not much of one
2016 Trump 36% favorable, Clinton 38% Trump won the electoral college, Clinton the popular vote
2012 Obama 57% Romney 51% Obama won both the popular vote and electoral college
2008 Obama 61% McCain 57% Obama won both
2004 Bush 53% Kerry 51% Bush won both
2000 Bush 58%, Gore 55% Gore won a very close popular vote, Bush the electoral college
1996 Clinton 56%, Dole 51% Clinton won both
1992 Clinton 51% Bush 46% Clinton won both.
1988 No data
1984 Reagan 65%, Mondale 61% Reagan won both
1980 Reagan 61% Carter 56% Reagan won both
and so it goes.

Having the higher favorable doesn't guarantee victory, but it doesn't hurt.

 

Things change as circumstances change. I bet Trump would easily win "both" now.

Research by Pew (May 14) indicates that traditional views of left - right are becoming populist versus establishment views and therefore polling is getting more difficult to predict election outcomes.

Steve

 

Obama "led from behind" and followed the European nations. Trump is leading and without us both the Paris agreement and the iran deal are pointless and everyone knows it.

 

Who's fault is that? Hillary's, why would someone running for the presidency let their opponent out campaign and out work them by a 116-71 campaign stops/visits from 1 Sep to 8 Nov 2016. I'm sure no other Democratic candidate would ever let something like that happen. Not Sanders, not Biden, not, O'Malley or anyone else. Hillary was the lazy one.

Bigotry. If that applied one would expect Trump to receive more white votes than Romney did against Obama. 57% of whites voted for Trump, 59% for Romney. Unless you consider Romney a bigot also. You probably do since being a bigot is the only reason someone would vote against a Democratic candidate. Not having a different political ideology or having a differing point of view on the world.

The fact of 2016 is a majority of Americans didn't want Trump or Hillary to become their next president. In fact 54% of independents disliked both candidates. 2016 was an election in which most Americans, not avid Trump or Clinton supporters, but most Americans voted for the candidate they least wanted to lose. Not for the one they wanted to win, they didn't want either one.

But when both major parties nominate candidates in which 60% of all Americans dislike Trump and 60% dislike Clinton including 25% of all Americans who disliked and have a very negative of both, that paves the way for a Trump presidency.

I myself did all I could to defeat both by voting third party. There's no way I wanted either Trump or Hillary to become our next president. I vote the same third party ticket today knowing what I do now. Those two really disgusted me. But it was the republicans right to nominate Trump and the Democrats right to nominate Clinton. Both did and we have what we have.

 

You would have voted Cruz ? Talk about lack of standards Cruz is almost (not quite but close) the Republican mirror of Hillary.

 

This writer deals in hyperbole and makes empirical statements he cannot prove. In this respect, he is much like all far right wing pundits who are trying desperately to support Trump. It is an uphill battle since Trump is his own worst enemy. They speak only in generalized characterizations that benefit Trump. Reality is to be avoided at all costs.

I speak from experience. I and others like me deal almost entirely with reality and conclusions based on fact. I and others like me deal with real events, real statements, real tweets, and real decisions made by Trump and others. We also deal with the consequences of those decisions, statements, and tweets.

These are things writers like Wehrwolfen avoid. They don't dare actually deal with what Trump says and his decisions. While there are some excellent exceptions, most Trump fans who dare to enter these threads in a vain attempt to discredit them offer wisecracks, cartoons, and really lousy excuses for not being able to handle the issues. They attack the messenger, not the message.

So, until Wehrwolfen and others begin dealing with what is actually happening, real statements, real decisions, and real consequences, it doesn't really matter what they say. Hyperbole and vague characterizations are totally meaningless.

 

Trump is now the state, the establishment. You ever think of that? So you don't think all those independents are true independents. That they perhaps lied and in reality Republicans and Democrats?

 

I don't know. I'm not concerned with Obama's legacy or Bush's or Bill Clinton's or G.H.W. Bush's or Reagan or on back. Any president's legacy will be determined by history. What one views as a positive or negative legacy when a president leaves office, 20-30 years down the road, that president legacy may be just the opposite. Truman is a great example of that. When he left office, he was in the pits. Now he is considered a near great president.

 

Please tell the bureaucrats that work for Trump.

Steve

 

Putting forward straw men I see.

First at no time had anyone on my side of the issues that I am aware of had claimed that just talking to the Russian ambassador is wrong but asking the Russian ambassador if a secret and secure communication link between the Russian Government and the Trump campaign could be set up using their hardware is beyond strange and should be look into as a matter of course by our intelligence agencies.

 

Why would they be pointless as if the EU refused to cut off Iran from trade or banking ties with the West it does not matter what the US does or does not do by ourselves.

Next if the EU and the other advance nations keep their agreements to reduce the adding to the atmosphere co2 loading all the US can do is to be consider an international villain in the climate change fight.

 

I'm sure he meant "pointless" is sort of like your post. The EU can ignore the call to stop doing business with Iran, but they also want to continue doing business with the largest consumer on the planet, the USA. The EU certainly benefits more with US trade than with Iranian trade and it may come to choosing one or the other.

Trump has authority of national security concerns and is also backed up by the Trade Act of 1974 to fast track his efforts.

Steve

 

No a secret and secure link between the Russians and the Trump presidency. It was post election.

 

Trump's is opposed by the ruling elites that fight him at every turn. He is the opposite of the establishment and you never Trumper need to get over it. A new era is here and us true independents are moving on without you and your "way of doing things".

 

In Iran the deal is pointless because the US will impose sanctions that damage irans economy and if they start up their nuke program they will be obliterated.
The Paris agreement was all about punishing the US so when we pull out the other countries have no incentive to participate. It exist in name only.

 

So you think that the US have the will to go into an economic war with the rest of the planet???

Sorry the EU and China and Japan and so on is going to tell Trump to go pound sand it need be and all the Federal government could do is set up food lines for Trump supporters and everyone else in the US.

Oh how is forcing Mexico to paid for the border wall going? LOL so we do not have the power to force a simi-third world nation to our will but we are going to force the whole advance world to break their words to another nation at Trump whim!!!!!!!!

 

50 years from now I suspect Obama will be looked upon as one of the better presidents this country has seen in decades.

The alt-right viewpoint is nothing more then a Chaplinesqe fueled opinion, which has the equated value of a pile of Limburger cheese left out on the counter for six months. Trump will definitely leave a legacy, however it won't be as flattering as the conservative apologists make it out to be. If nothing else, it'll make the Teapot Dome Scandal look like a walk in the park.

 

You are only showing your own brainwashing by the lying liberal media.

As far as Mexico paying for the wall, it's economics! They are paying for it in MANY WAYS in terms of economics.

You have been duped by the lying liberal media. The end game is when dems can't even get a local dog catcher elected to office.

Steve

 

True independents oppose Trump which I provided the number to prove that.

 

I managed to read the original article several days ago without throwing up.

When he started talking about Obama's fiscal conservatism I laughed so hard I almost choked up a lung.

 

Sure Mexico is paying for the wall at least in your Trump supporters strange universe.

That wall is the wonder of the world for sure

 

Spygate.

 

Spygate meet criminal mob gate as in the Trump family white house criminal enterprise.

 

Steve, if Mexico is paying for the wall as you maintain, then why did Trump ask for billions dollars to build the wall?

During the campaign he was very specific that not one penny of American money would be spent on the wall; that Mexico would cough up the money and there would be no outlay of US funds to build the wall. Of course once elected he starts his famous backpedalling and claims Mexico will eventually pay for it; just they don't know that yet; In fact the Mexican president confirmed that he told Trump that Mexico would not pay for the wall under any circumstances..

I think you've been duped by the conservative media who'll stoop to new lows to convince the American people that Trump is a paragon of virtue.



https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/751014/Donald-Trump-Mexico-pay-border-wall-immigration