What would it take for you to switch?

lol

 

The plan was to increase spending, revitalize the economy, capitalize on the growth then work on the deficit. If at the end of his term, 4-8 years, he has not worked to reduce the debt, then it will be fair to criticize. But up until then, he still has time and hopefully a solid plan.

Clinton got the internet boom, the full brunt of it. An economic windfall. Clinton also benefited of a Reagan/Bush military that he didn't have to pour money into and he could extract money from to reduce debt and use in other areas. Big difference. The military really felt the Clinton years. Obama desecrated the military and still put us $10 trillion in debt.

 

No, it is perfectly fair to criticize now. He has no workable plan now. Talk to me when he creates one. His "plan" involved consistent 3-4% GDP growth, which isn't happening and won't happen, plus he's taken a lot of measures that blunt growth . . . aka all of his tariffs, all of which by the way circumvent the Constitution.

I was talking about Hillary Clinton. Bill was definitely more economically conservative than Trump. Trump is highly, highly protectionist. The only person I can think of that compares to him is Buchanan. Protectionism is inherently anti-capitalist.

 

Until his work is done, it's not. How do you know what the next 2-6 years will hold? You are already bashing him nonstop and he hasn't left office.

Trump is smart to rework trade deals, that has been something that should have been done decades ago.

Bill didn't have to rebuild the military and had the internet boom. Big difference. Reagan and Bush paved the way to economic prosperity for Bill.

 

Lol, "You can't criticize Trump's presidency until he isn't president anymore." Hilarious. No, I'm not buying that crap. His actions have consequences now and he's provided nothing to show how he will achieve the results he has claimed he will. Pro tip: never trust numbers from a guy who has specifically written about how he thinks it is okay to lie about numbers so long as it promotes the image you desire. Trump is dumb when it comes to trade deals because he doesn't even understand what trade deficits are or how tariffs work. Dude has taken the most anti-capitalist position possible on the subject and treated trade as a zero-sum game. He's the anti-Adam Smith. Wealth of Nations was specifically written to correct this BS.

 

Not when it comes to reducing the deficit, no. He is barely into his full plan, wait until he is out of office. Same goes for any President. You are wrong, Trump is far from stupid when it comes to business and trade deals. His family is incredibly well versed in business and extremely hard working to get to where they are now.

You started off with a nice sane, calm discussion and then your true colors come out. In any discussion, your hatred always shines through and it gets reduced down to "Trump is just so dumb" style of commentary.

 

I'll cover the rest later, but the dude thinks trade deficits are net losses and exporting countries pay all of our tariffs. For all of his supposed business genius (greatly exaggerated, by the way) he's dumb when it comes to econ 101. These are objectively false beliefs that he appeals to all of the time. Also, again, when it comes to numbers, maybe don't trust the guy who thinks that lying about numbers doesn't count as lying.

 

Not really, he dealt with countries and business on a scale you (or I or 99% of all businessmen) will never achieve.

I sit in the middle and watch his policies and who objects to them and why. I can make my own mind up on what is best and who is looking out for our best interests.

 

a brain transplant... my own with one from a jar marked empty

 

Trump's plan to bring down deficits and debts is a failure.

Absolutely no indicators demonstrate anything is going according to plan.

 

He's had a lot of successes (mostly when Cohn was helping run the show) and tons of failures. And he's objectively ignorant on economics. I've given you two examples. Hell, the dude has actually claimed we'd be a wealthier nation if we hadn't traded with anyone at all. This is probably the most economically ignorant (and anti-capitalist to boot) statement made by any modern President.

 

Similar. I dont have much of a problem with Trumps mouth. Idc much what ppl say, i care what they do. Trumps policies will make him the greatest president in at least a generation if he stays the course. It would be better if he didn't piss folks off so easily...

I would happily vote for any D/democrat that supported:

-gun rights as defined by the 2A
-individual rights over the 'collective good'
-Americans over non-Americans

So basically a liberal of the JFK sort.

 

Trump's administration has been a farce, a failure.

 

Nope, it hasn't.

 

Oh, yes, it has. His "tax" cut has cost the middle class billions.

The border problem is an incredible mess, and his Wall is a folly of the greatest follies.

His hatred for people of colors is obvious.

His hatred of women is obvious.

 

Wrong on all counts.

Your hatred of trump however is obvious.

 

I was a real big Jim Webb fan.

Any man who uses his precious moments of nationally broadcasted debate time to brag about how his greatest enemy is the commie he butchered has my vote.

 

So you believe in the modern age that non citizens should be worth less than slaves?

 

JakeStarkey said: Oh, yes, it has. His "tax" cut has cost the middle class billions.

The border problem is an incredible mess, and his Wall is a folly of the greatest follies.

His hatred for people of colors is obvious.

His hatred of women is obvious.

I am of course correct on all accounts.

Your adoration of Trump is obvious.

 

JakeStarkey said:

1. Support logical gun laws.

2. Make sure that LGBTQ rights are the same as religious rights of people. Business does not have moral rights.

3. Vow not to nominate reactionary rightist judges.

4. Vow to raise taxes on the wealthy.

5. Make the constitution work in the modern age, including the Electoral College.

What a strange reply by you.

 

Eliminating the Electoral College eliminates proportional Federal representation. The Electoral College exists solely because at the birth of our nation voting rights were restrictive, but without it only voters would count.

Under the EC an immigrant counts as a person, but without it they count as nothing.

 

Logic fallacy. By that thinking, voters would count as nothing without the EC.

 

If you think that you must have missed or ignored lots of my posts.

 

You apparently need a history lesson.

When the Constitution was ratified, Virginia was the most populous state, and the largest number of extremely prominent politicians on the nation stage.

Washington, Jefferson, and Monroe, to name a few.

To be eligible to vote in Virginia one had to be a white male, a member of a particular church, and own at least 500 acres of cultivated farmland. Kinda makes it difficult to convince the largest state to completely give up it's power by basing elections, and Federal representation, on the number of people eligible to vote.

The EC exists because everyone living in the US, even illegal immigrants, count towards Federal representation. If the EC was eliminated, only voters would count.

 

No without the electoral college New York and California would rule the country with an iron fist. Which is exactly why some Democrats want the EC gone.
Nothing but an America hating power grab.