• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

Planit said:
Betsy DeVos has stated that the School Safety Commission, which was founded after the Parkland school shooting, won't be looking into the role guns have played in making schools less safe.

WTF! :-c:-{:-@
Click to expand...

michaelskis said:
What will it be looking into?
Click to expand...

The article I read did not go into depth with that question - it was more about if this was not the main issue it should be one of the solutions but its not being considered at all.

speculation tells me it - arming teachers & locking doors but I don't know exactly. It was just astonishing to me that guns were completely discounted by this administration.
 
Any early predictions on the results of the Trump-Kim summit? Trump has already strengthened NK's hand considerably and foolishly/unintentionally given them respect and credence they don't deserve by even agreeing to the head of states face to face to begin with, but can he pull an 11th hour save out of this?
My prediction is Trump will talk a few hours with Kim and immediately afterwards make some sweeping proclamation like 'the two Koreas have agreed to formally end the war. And I prefer my Nobel peace prize to be hung on a gold ribbon, thank you' and deliberately speed himself away from the bargaining table with great haste and leave the little people behind to work out all those niggling little details like how they're going to eliminate the DMZ and verify asset withdrawals etc. Then when the wheels inevitably fall off - because the details in this instance are the very essence of any peace agreement - he will spin around and blame either the NK's for bad faith or even his own State Dept's incompetence for causing the failure, rather than accepting any responsibility like an actual leader would do.
 
I was reading something about how the Japanese translators actually need to change words Trump says because they are afraid if they translate verbatim people won't believe they actually know English. I wonder how the NK translators did....
 
Maister said:
Any early predictions on the results of the Trump-Kim summit? Trump has already strengthened NK's hand considerably and foolishly/unintentionally given them respect and credence they don't deserve by even agreeing to the head of states face to face to begin with, but can he pull an 11th hour save out of this?
My prediction is Trump will talk a few hours with Kim and immediately afterwards make some sweeping proclamation like 'the two Koreas have agreed to formally end the war. And I prefer my Nobel peace prize to be hung on a gold ribbon, thank you' and deliberately speed himself away from the bargaining table with great haste and leave the little people behind to work out all those niggling little details like how they're going to eliminate the DMZ and verify asset withdrawals etc. Then when the wheels inevitably fall off - because the details in this instance are the very essence of any peace agreement - he will spin around and blame either the NK's for bad faith or even his own State Dept's incompetence for causing the failure, rather than accepting any responsibility like an actual leader would do.
Click to expand...

The devil is in the details. Which is pretty much exactly what Trump doesn't do. He does sweeping statements and generalities.

I think that they met is great. I am not in the NK is the winner because Trump went there camp. I think that we shouldn't expect someone to do the right thing just because we ask. Everyone has their own self interests and we have to be willing to talk to them. On their terms sometimes. Overall this was good.

With that said, Kim Jong Un isn't exactly known for keeping his word. He isn't known for being honest. So will he keep whatever agreement they put in place? My hope is that they deal with nukes and their ballistic missile capabilities and find ways to normalize relations with them. Let them open up and have NATO and the UN inspect their country. That opens them up further for questions about human rights. The more open they are, the more we know about what they are doing. That is a good thing.

We shall see though what Trump can do, as he is very high on his negotiation skills, and yet he has not won much in my estimation.
 
So it appears Trump has unilaterally agreed to suspend US-ROK joint exercises in exchange for......essentially nothing.:wall:

What an effing statesman! Kim played that mofo like a freakin Stradivarius. Can't say I'm surprised.:not:
 
Maister said:
So it appears Trump has unilaterally agreed to suspend US-ROK joint exercises in exchange for......essentially nothing.:wall:

What an effing statesman! Kim played that mofo like a freakin Stradivarius. Can't say I'm surprised.:not:
Click to expand...

EXACTLY. The NK dictatorship family have been wanting to meet with any US president over the years to build their reputation. This is the first one to agree and it worked out great for this Kim.

Think back just a few years when the Rs chastised Obama for meeting with the Iranians. Is this not the same thing. F-ing hypocrites.

Go piss off our allies at a major conference (theG7) and leave early to go directly to meet with one of Bushes Axis of Evil counties. Ugh!
 
Planit said:
Think back just a few years when the Rs chastised Obama for meeting with the Iranians. Is this not the same thing. F-ing hypocrites.
Click to expand...

Obama quite literally stated that he was absolutely open to meeting with leaders of Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, or North Korea without preconditions in October of '08. He was blasted by conservative media. Sean Hannity had some real great things to say about it., namely that the premise was "naive" and "disturbing" and "demonstrated a lack of foreign policy expertise".

Flash forward 10 years later, and Hannity stated that Trump's meeting with Kim Jong Un was "a huge foreign policy win for President Trump". Trump had 0 preconditions, hell they didn't even TALK about denuclearization from all the media reports out there, at least in any meaningful way.

I think the meeting was a decent step forward, but it didn't really accomplish anything positive for the United States. All it did was legitimatize the NK regime since THE world power stepped up and sat down with him. I also don't trust Trump's intentions. Why do this? Everything he does is for his own gain in some capacity.

Then again, I also think it's sort of ridiculous that the United States is generally even involved in discussions about denuclearization when we are literally the only country in the world that has ever used them in combat against an enemy. It could be reasonably argued that all other countries want them to protect themselves from us. We don't exactly have the best track record when it comes to nuclear responsibility.
 
Maister said:
So it appears Trump has unilaterally agreed to suspend US-ROK joint exercises in exchange for......essentially nothing.:wall:

What an effing statesman! Kim played that mofo like a freakin Stradivarius. Can't say I'm surprised.:not:
Click to expand...

While I am not I fan of Trump, I am going to call your statement partisan BS.

Both of them made some empty assurances, but if you read the text of what was officially agreed upon, it is very limited on both sides. (LINK)

I think that he will scale back on the visual activity, but I don't think that we will see any decrease in the number of troops in the area and if NK tries something, I would expect a full UN backed coalition to step in.

As for what past presidents have done or did not do, I think the R's are a bunch of hypocrites for supporting Trump meeting with them while opposing past presidents.
 
"And a great place to put a beautiful hotel"

tRump's quote when talking about North Korea. He is working his next real estate deal. Reality TV at best for the sake of our country. 8-!
 
Planit said:
"And a great place to put a beautiful hotel"

tRump's quote when talking about North Korea. He is working his next real estate deal. Reality TV at best for the sake of our country. 8-!
Click to expand...

And that is the answer to my question above: "I also don't trust Trump's intentions. Why do this? Everything he does is for his own gain in some capacity."

In other news, CNN's headline on their webpage right now is "Trump's new world order". That is terrifying.
 
AG74683 said:
[/I]

In other news, CNN's headline on their webpage right now is "Trump's new world order". That is terrifying.
Click to expand...


Even during my aborted "70 Predictions About Trump" thread back in 2016, not even I could have imagined things would be this bad. Kim basically makes Trump look like and ass on the world stage and no one gives a damn.
 
I don't think this is Trump's most embarrassing moment by any stretch. No, that would be more like the time he called white supremacists "fine people" or possibly the time he bragged about the time how he lied to PM Trudeau and then later we learn he lied about lying to him. Nor is this a disaster. But clearly Trump got played; NK signed a vague agreement essentially identical to some earlier agreements NK signed back in the 1990's, The only differences being he ended up appearing to treat Kim as an equal and caved in to one of NK's big demands where his predecessors did not by unilaterally agreeing to halt joint US-ROK exercises. So now Kim not only has nukes with no mechanism for their removal but has succeeded in lowering our military preparedness and become a 'hero' for doing it. Yay Trump.

In terms of the practical impacts on our lives nothing has changed. We have just been treated to a bit of somewhat lowbrow political kabuki theater. The performances in this instance were adequate. We now break for a commercial.
 
This from Daily Show...

Hannity said Trump “deserves a lot of credit for being willing to talk to somebody that everybody thought would be a bad idea.” And yet, after Obama shook hands with Raul Castro for the first time in 2013 at Nelson Mandela’s funeral in South Africa, Hannity asked, “Is it just me or does it look like President Obama is more willing to give his time to our enemies than our allies?”
 
I hear that even fox news made a comment about the two dictators meeting. :lmao:


Let's shift gears for a moment away from Trump's visit with Rocket Man and talk about AT&T and Time Warner. How is this not an antitrust violation and why is the federal trade commission allowing this to go through?
 
Trumpster tweeted that there is no longer a nuclear threat posed by North Korea. Why am I reminded of Neville Chamberlain's "peace for our time"?

+++
AT&T + TimeWarner? The old saying "the rich get richer" applies, I think.

+++
Back to the salt mines for me. Now, who has an electronic version of that rental inspection ordinance I need? Hmmm...
 
Maister said:
I don't think this is Trump's most embarrassing moment by any stretch. No, that would be more like the time he called white supremacists "fine people" or possibly the time he bragged about the time how he lied to PM Trudeau and then later we learn he lied about lying to him. Nor is this a disaster. But clearly Trump got played; NK signed a vague agreement essentially identical to some earlier agreements NK signed back in the 1990's, The only differences being he ended up appearing to treat Kim as an equal and caved in to one of NK's big demands where his predecessors did not by unilaterally agreeing to halt joint US-ROK exercises. So now Kim not only has nukes with no mechanism for their removal but has succeeded in lowering our military preparedness and become a 'hero' for doing it. Yay Trump.
Click to expand...

To me the big thing wasn't just agreeing to stop the training exercises with the ROK (apparently without South Korea's input) but that Trump agreed with NK and called these exercises "provocative". It has been our stance for decades that these are training exercises between the U.S. and South Korea to maintain and improve everybody's readiness and now Trump basically threw that concept out the window. So if these diplomacy efforts break down and we decide to start the exercises back up and then the North again says we are provoking them and preparing to invade do we then agree with them and say that's correct?
 
The simple answer to Trump's actions towards Kim and Putin is that he envies them. All that power and wealth and no one can stop them, that's exactly what he wants for himself.
 
I think the great negotiator and his legions of fans have forgotten how dictators work. It's like people trying to get a permit. Get the other guy to say something and then sound like the hero or victim that he said it. tRump has just given NK the power to say things like, "America recognizes my great leadership" or "America is backing down from our great and powerful military." He'll use the clips to keep holding power over his poor little country. This is part of the reason so many past world leaders never dealt with NK.
 
JNA said:
For all our Cyburbian Veteran's - what do you make of this / are you offended by

Trump returns salute of North Korean general at summit, state media footage reveals
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/14/politics/trump-north-korea-salute/index.html
Click to expand...

I already had roughly no respect for his attitude towards the U.S. military and how he actually treats them. To him, the military is just a tool to bring out and show how awesome and patriotic he is and how little respect and knowledge of the institutions that he has. When I saw this it was just another example of his turdness.
 
WSU MUP Student said:
I already had roughly no respect for his attitude towards the U.S. military and how he actually treats them. To him, the military is just a tool to bring out and show how awesome and patriotic he is and how little respect and knowledge of the institutions that he has. When I saw this it was just another example of his turdness.
Click to expand...

+1 :brofist:
 
JNA said:
For all our Cyburbian Veteran's - what do you make of this / are you offended by

Trump returns salute of North Korean general at summit, state media footage reveals
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/14/politics/trump-north-korea-salute/index.html
Click to expand...

Well that was a stupid thing to do. I can already picture the defense for this. "President Trump saluted the North Korean General because he recognizes the sacrifices that ALL soldiers make for their country, no matter where they call home. He respects all those who lay their life on the line to protect their country".

It reminds me of The Garden Party episode of The Office, where Ryan offers a toast for the troops. "All the troops, both sides".

That said, what is the general opinion of a President saluting a US soldier every day? I've always been incredibly conflicted on it, but I've never served in the military so I don't know what the feelings really are there.
 
It probably doesn't meet protocols, but still it's hard for me to get too worked up about a President saluting soldiers.
 
Maister said:
It probably doesn't meet protocols, but still it's hard for me to get too worked up about a President saluting soldiers.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Our soliders. Maybe the soldiers of allies. But NK's...

If the Korean War isn't technically over, isn't the US still at war with NK?

Maybe I'm missing something.

I think I do recall Roosevelt saluting Herrmann Goering once. :p

Save us baby Jesus, for he knows not what he does.
 
mendelman said:
Yeah. Our soliders. Maybe the soldiers of allies. But NK's...

If the Korean War isn't technically over, isn't the US still at war with NK?

Maybe I'm missing something.

I think I do recall Roosevelt saluting Herrmann Goering once. :p

Save us baby Jesus, for he knows not what he does.
Click to expand...

Guess I was looking at it from the standpoint that when someone shows a sign of respect it's not too far out of line to reciprocate.
 
WSU MUP Student said:
I already had roughly no respect for his attitude towards the U.S. military and how he actually treats them. To him, the military is just a tool to bring out and show how awesome and patriotic he is and how little respect and knowledge of the institutions that he has. When I saw this it was just another example of his turdness.
Click to expand...

Do you think that it is that he has no respect, or is too stupid to understand what he should and should not do?
 
dr-seuss-adolf-the-wolf.jpg

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/dr-seuss-adolf-wolf/
 
Maister said:
Guess I was looking at it from the standpoint that when someone shows a sign of respect it's not too far out of line to reciprocate.
Click to expand...

I don't lose any sleep over it. The guy saluted him first and he returned it. I'll just take it as a sign of respect during a negotiation. My problem is the lack of response from Fox. You bashed previous presidents for shaking hands or bowing or doing some other respectful gesture, but this one is okay? Stupid double standards.

Back room conversation:
Kim: I dare you to salute the president, that would be so funny.
Soldier: I'll totally do it, what will you give me if I do it?
Kim: I'll give you a weeks worth of food and set your wife free from jail.
 
michaelskis said:
Do you think that it is that he has no respect, or is too stupid to understand what he should and should not do?
Click to expand...

Both.

It feels like 99% of what I've seen or read about how he personally interacts with members of the military is just him using them as jingoistic props to show how much of a better American he is than whoever he is trying to denigrate.
 
WSU MUP Student said:
Both.

It feels like 99% of what I've seen or read about how he personally interacts with members of the military is just him using them as jingoistic props to show how much of a better American he is than whoever he is trying to denigrate.
Click to expand...

Yes, all his interactions with military personnel I've seen have had the distinct feeling of posturing for some photo op, never genuine interaction or engagement with a soldier or sailor. It never feels 'real' to me.
 
You'll also notice it's a half assed salute. Not the proper crisp salute any soldier would give.
 
Maister said:
Yes, all his interactions with military personnel I've seen have had the distinct feeling of posturing for some photo op, never genuine interaction or engagement with a soldier or sailor. It never feels 'real' to me.
Click to expand...

Perhaps if he really wants to show respect for the military he would increase funding for mental health and work to prevent the 20 suicides a day instead of seeking photo ops.

Which brings up another point, a bag designer and a tv chef commit suicide in the same week and people lose their freaking minds... but where is the same outcry for the 20 veterans who take their own life every day... or the 105 other people who take their own life every day? Do the lives of celebrities matter more than anyone else's? Think about it for a moment.... a average of 125 people end their life every day and the Government cuts funding for mental health care in the US and has more or less ignored the problem for decades.
 
michaelskis said:
Perhaps if he really wants to show respect for the military he would increase funding for mental health and work to prevent the 20 suicides a day instead of seeking photo ops.

Which brings up another point, a bag designer and a tv chef commit suicide in the same week and people lose their freaking minds... but where is the same outcry for the 20 veterans who take their own life every day... or the 105 other people who take their own life every day? Do the lives of celebrities matter more than anyone else's? Think about it for a moment.... a average of 125 people end their life every day and the Government cuts funding for mental health care in the US and has more or less ignored the problem for decades.
Click to expand...

I have a big issue with the "22 veterans a day" statistic that often gets thrown out regarding veterans suicides.

IIRC, the study that the figure comes from is more than a decade old and was based on suicide rates of veterans who were already seeking mental health services from the VA or other providers. These veterans are already more likely to be suffering from PTSD and/or depression and therefore statistically more likely to attempt suicide. The original study was also weighted very heavily towards Vietnam-era vets who arguably suffered some of the most traumatic experiences while receiving the least support upon their return. When you look deeper at the data longitudinally, WWII and Korea-era vets had relatively low levels of suicide in their cohort while Vietnam vets and those who served in the '70s and into the early '80s have much much higher rates. Those figures decline significantly among those who served in the through the '90s. More recent studies show those who served post 9/11 (and were largely excluded from the original study) have suicide rates considerably less than those who served in the Vietnam-era and if the original study were revisited today and studied a wider universe of veterans (both in terms of dates of service and more than those seeking mental health services) the suicide rates of more recent veterans would be low enough now that it would lower that "22 a day" figure quite a bit. Even one suicide from anybody is too many but my opinion is that somewhere along the line people got ahold of this study, cherry picked out the "22 a day" figure and began to exploit that to help fundraise for their organizations. They may be working towards a good cause but I am generally not a fan of using questionable data to solicit funds for various organizations, especially data that may needlessly stigmatize a big chunk of the population... a chunk of the population that I happen to belong to.

As for the suicides of Kate Spade and Anthony Bourdain making the news... they are celebrities and a lot of what they do/did in their personal life would make the news. Millions of people knew who they were so of course their suicides were newsworthy. Talking about their suicides and keeping it in the newscycle might even be beneficial to those struggling because it focuses the news on resources that are out there and more people will learn about suicide prevention resources. John or Jane Doe may have been a fantastic service member but if they were not famous their suicides would likely be little more than a blip in the local newspaper. They aren't going to make headlines because editors and publishers know most folks will just tune out since they don't recognize the name or face. Of course the lives of celebrities do not matter more than anybody else's but because they are well known of course their lives make headlines. This is just a function of the stupid obsession we have with celebrity in general. (I'll get on my high horse and say I refuse to watch shows like TMZ and generally avoid reading celebrity gossip articles that aren't about the actual acting, music, writing, etc.)

This is similar to anytime there is a big tragedy here in America somebody will claim that our sympathy for the victims is inauthentic because our news channels aren't providing equal airtime to famine in Tajikistan or cyclones ravishing Malaysia or drought and cholera epidemics in Burkina Faso. I made up all of these examples but they all suffer from the same problem: They are in countries with relatively few immigrants here in America, little English-language news in general, and probably which few Americans travel to on an annual basis. If a tragedy were to strike in the UK or Germany or Australia or Mexico it makes more news here in America because more Americans have connections to those places than they do to Tajikistan. Sympathy and empathy don't have to be finite resources. I can be sad for the victims in Sandy Hook or Las Vegas and still feel sorry for victims of violence in Burma or Niger when I hear about them. I can feel sad when I hear about the suicide of Chris Cornell and still have sympathy left to feel if I hear about the suicide of a veteran I never heard of or some woman in the town next door.
 
I like the Manafort judge.

It's not about politics. It's not about the actions of the Office of the Special Counsel. It's about the actions of the accused.
 
I had a nightmare about the 2020 general election this morning. Trump lost but refused to peacefully cede power. Things got predictably ugly.

The sad part is I could see it happening.8-!
 
Gedunker said:
I had a nightmare about the 2020 general election this morning. Trump lost but refused to peacefully cede power. Things got predictably ugly.

The sad part is I could see it happening.8-!
Click to expand...

I honestly don't think he will lose. As an american, our country is going to a path that is tearing us apart based on political ideologies. It's rather sickening.
 
Raf said:
I honestly don't think he will lose. As an american, our country is going to a path that is tearing us apart based on political ideologies. It's rather sickening.
Click to expand...

I'm inherently a positive person, so I had him losing. But I completely agree with you. I could see him refusing to cede power in 2024 also.:-@
 
Hink said:
This is not the Onion....

President Trump directs Defense Department to 'immediately begin the process' of establishing 'space force' as sixth military branch
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/18/pre...ing-space-force-as-sixth-military-branch.html
Click to expand...

This is stupid, mostly from an additional bureaucratic standpoint. Most of our "space force" is under the Department of the Air Force already, and from what I was reading, most folks in the Pentagon really don't want to have a new branch because that just adds needless additional paperwork and red tape. The Air Force Space Command employs more than 38,000 people, well over what NASA employs, and is the primary "space force" of the U.S. Armed Forces. In fact, the AFSPC has always been unofficially referred to as U.S. Space Command.

There is literally NO reason to split them out of the Air Force. That said, I fully believe that Trump has no idea that we already have a standing "space force", but really the average person doesn't really know that either. This is the equivalent of splitting the Marine Corps out of the Department of the Navy.
 
AG74683 said:
This is stupid, mostly from an additional bureaucratic standpoint. Most of our "space force" is under the Department of the Air Force already, and from what I was reading, most folks in the Pentagon really don't want to have a new branch because that just adds needless additional paperwork and red tape. The Air Force Space Command employs more than 38,000 people, well over what NASA employs, and is the primary "space force" of the U.S. Armed Forces. In fact, the AFSPC has always been unofficially referred to as U.S. Space Command.

There is literally NO reason to split them out of the Air Force. That said, I fully believe that Trump has no idea that we already have a standing "space force", but really the average person doesn't really know that either. This is the equivalent of splitting the Marine Corps out of the Department of the Navy.
Click to expand...

My wife's cousin is a Master Sergeant at Space Command out in Colorado and her husband recently retired from the Air Force as a Chief Master Sergeant with his final 8 years within Space Command (mostly at the 460th Space Wing and some sort of secret squirrel stuff in El Segundo) and is now a civilian contractor at the 21st Space Wing. Based on the memes and jokes and gossip group texts we've been exchanging (these group texts have other active and retired and civilian from out there as well) I would bet it's safe to assume that many folks in the Air Force Space Command agree that Trump has no idea what's going on.

In other news, I think the first unit patch has already been designed:
35687007_10102881357773106_1741038591993184256_n.jpg


Unit motto:
Service guarantees citizenship

;)
 
AG74683 said:
This is stupid, mostly from an additional bureaucratic standpoint. Most of our "space force" is under the Department of the Air Force already, and from what I was reading, most folks in the Pentagon really don't want to have a new branch because that just adds needless additional paperwork and red tape. The Air Force Space Command employs more than 38,000 people, well over what NASA employs, and is the primary "space force" of the U.S. Armed Forces. In fact, the AFSPC has always been unofficially referred to as U.S. Space Command.

There is literally NO reason to split them out of the Air Force. That said, I fully believe that Trump has no idea that we already have a standing "space force", but really the average person doesn't really know that either. This is the equivalent of splitting the Marine Corps out of the Department of the Navy.
Click to expand...

My take is more that he is talking about this at all. He is not able to focus on topics. He must move to different things quickly, so no one can question what he is saying.

Trade? What about immigration?

Immigration? What about the space force?

Space Force? What about healthcare?

Etc.
 
Raf said:
I honestly don't think he will lose. As an american, our country is going to a path that is tearing us apart based on political ideologies. It's rather sickening.
Click to expand...

I agree, but I also think that there is a threshold of tolerance and the Trump Administrations decision to separate the children from the parents is not sitting well with much of anyone, regardless of the letter behind their name. If not, I question their compassion.


As for the Space Force, I think I remember that cartoon from the 80's. (LINK)

When I showed the video to my wife she could not believe it was real. It is events like this that the SNL writers wish the show was not on summer break.
 
I love when timelines of quotes are put together concerning an issue. However it is ultimately sad that the administration continues to lie, slant, and contradict itself in the name of saving their own face (or in this case their hides).

These are quotes from the present administration on the immigration / child separation issue over the past month.

May 7 - We have a new policy and your child may be separated from you.
May 11 - It's a deterrent.
June 14 - Our new policy can result in separation.
June 15 - It's not ours, it's the democrats.
June 17 - Yes we definitely have a policy.
June 17 - We do not have a policy.
June 18 - It's not a deterrent.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44536738



...and kudos to hink for a similar observation on changing the subject at hand.
 
How is this possible?

gallup said:
  • Satisfaction rate of 38% is highest since September 2005
  • Second month in a row above 35%, also for the first time since 2005
  • Satisfaction rises among Republicans and independents, not among Democrats
Click to expand...

LINK

Personally, my faith in the direction of the US is at an all time low.
 
michaelskis said:
How is this possible?



LINK

Personally, my faith in the direction of the US is at an all time low.
Click to expand...

So how does gallup do these surveys:
Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 70% cellphone respondents and 30% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods.
Click to expand...

So who the hell responds to them? Probably, older, white, middle / upper middle class folks. I ain't got time for surveys when I am doing single parentdum, making dinner, and cleaning up the house.
 
michaelskis said:
How is this possible?



LINK

Personally, my faith in the direction of the US is at an all time low.
Click to expand...

Those are still incredibly low. Most believe the theoretical all time low for a Republican President's approval rating is 22% using historic trends from Nixon and Bush 2.0. http://time.com/4916675/donald-trump-approval-rating-low/

The lowest support a Republican president has ever had among his own party is 48%, which was Nixon's final days. People forget that Nixon still had nearly 50% approval from Republican voters as he faced down certain removal from office. The lowest figure for Democrats' and independents' approval of a Republican president — 3% and 19%, respectively — came during Bush's low point in October 2008 (when he had 55% from Republican voters).

The only reason I think Trump is still as high as he is results from him being buttressed by strong economic indicators (low unemployment, etc.). This is where we get to say "thanks Obama" in somewhat trite fashion. If you see economic indicators start to fall, Trump will fall with it. Bush is a great example of this--in his second term, his approval rating plummeted due to the combination of an unpopular war (as the truth about the Iraq War came out), Katrina and then the beginnings of the recession as gas prices reached pain points. Bush started his 2nd term at around 57% approval.

So when Trump manages to screw the economy (early evidence is already starting to show up), he has absolutely no cushion of goodwill. That will be the point that his loyalists start looking up and realize they've been had. That will likely manifest first in the heartland due to the revenge tariffs that have targeted agricultural product exports from the U.S. Tack on this crazy immigration stuff that will impact farm labor as well as construction, and you start to realize a ticking time bomb hidden beneath Trump's hair.
 
Back
Top