Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)

[Karl Henning]

[...] Changing a politician with another or a majority with another is not a long-term solution. It's politics and the political system itself which are irredeemably rotten to the core. I vote not because I believe my vote will do any good but because I hope it will limit the evil.

One extremely dark irony about the present situation is, that the current President occupies his office thanks to the sentiment that politics and the political system itself are irredeemably rotten to the core.  His xenophobic, bigoted, white grievance base swears to this;  and of course the success of both Sanders and the President in the primaries testified to the degree to which dissatisfaction with "politics as usual" permeates the US electorate.

So, with open arms, they voted into office possibly the most nakedly corrupt con man US politics has ever known.  And, as you see, there are folks on this thread who continue to rationalize this, and who refuse to face facts which would damn their enabling.

So the US has managed to find a "cure" which is worse than the disease.

[Karl Henning]

Why [El Tupé's] infrastructure plan doesn't pass the straight-face test

By Jennifer Rubin

Bloomberg reports on [El Presidente Tupé's] infrastructure plan:

The 53-page document details how [El Tupé] plans to stimulate at least $1.5 trillion in new investment, shorten project permitting time to two years, invest in rural projects and improve worker training. The newest elements of the proposal include expanding the use of tax-exempt debt, letting states add tolls on interstates and making it easier to lease airports and other public assets.

The plan calls for allowing federal authorities to sell assets to state, local or private entities. Ronald Reagan and Dulles International airports in Washington and the George Washington and Baltimore Washington parkway, as well as some power lines, are among those cited.

The plan's premise is that the government would spend $200 billion to spur states, localities and the private sector to raise the $1.3 trillion balance, giving Congress a blueprint for passing legislation. Since the federal government owns very little infrastructure, the Trump plan aims to create local funding and streamline permitting. The White House rolled out the plan on the same day as it delivered its $4.4 trillion fiscal 2019 federal budget proposal.

This is a joke. For starters, states do not have the money, which is why the federal government (which can do things like raise the federal gas tax) traditionally funds a large percentage of the cost. ("Right now, federally funded highways (that's interstates and other routes) are financed on the basis of an 80-20 federal-state split, and federally funded mass transit projects usually get a 50-50 split," Vox reports. "Trump's proposal is to flip the 80-20 formula on its head and require that states and cities kick in at least $4 for every $1 in federal money they receive.") Moreover, it is not at all clear that $200 billion in new money is actually going to be spent on infrastructure. (The Post reports that "the White House is suggesting that lawmakers cut money from elsewhere in the budget, including some existing infrastructure programs. That prospect seems unlikely given that Congress just last week reached a bipartisan deal to spend significantly more funds over the coming two years.")

To make matters worse, [El Tupé] seems keen on funding this at least in part by a non-starter selling off of  federal assets, including Dulles International and Reagan National airports. ("Efforts to privatize federal assets were discussed early in the administration by Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, National Economic Council director Gary Cohn and other advisers as a preferred way to come up with capital for much needed improvements. But it was also lambasted as irresponsible by opponents.")

Moreover, Republicans who hold most governorships have shown no inclination to spend huge sums of money. Like Trump, they fancy tax cuts and therefore have little left over to finance large infrastructure projects.

And perhaps most important, Trump shows little urgency or even interest in the plan. He declared, "What was very important to me was the military; what was very important to me was the tax cuts; and what was very important to me was regulation. This is of great importance, but it's not nearly of that category because the states will have to do it themselves if we don't do it." Well that's not exactly a ringing endorsement, is it?

There are a few reasons why the infrastructure roll-out is so underwhelming. First, right-wing Republican lawmakers don't want to do it. (After spending on the military and tax cuts, they declare the cupboard is bare.) Second, it is not a divisive issue that is going to rile up his base and create a media firestorm. Unless an issue does that, the president frankly does not care all that much about it. (Axios reports that "with an eye to getting Republicans excited about voting for Republicans in midterms, the president this year will be looking for 'unexpected cultural flashpoints' — like the NFL and kneeling — that he can latch onto in person and on Twitter.") And finally, there is no big push from donors as there was for tax cuts.

In short, an issue that could bring Democrats and Republicans together and do something for the long-term economic benefit of the country holds little attraction for Trump. The only infrastructure he ever has cared about is his wall — a surefire way to gin up his hardcore xenophobic base.

[Florestan]

the success of both Sanders and the President in the primaries testified to the degree to which dissatisfaction with "politics as usual" permeates the US electorate.

I have no sympathy for socialism, democratic or otherwise, but I believe Sanders was more honest and principled than both Trump and Hillary.

[Karl Henning]

And, as to that Russian "nothingburger" . . .

Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats told a Senate panel that he expects Russia will continue to use propaganda, false personas and other tactics to undermine this year's elections. Coats is one of six top intelligence agency heads testifying at a hearing on worldwide threats.

[Baron Scarpia]

Why [El Tupé's] infrastructure plan doesn't pass the straight-face test

By Jennifer Rubin

Bloomberg reports on [El Presidente Tupé's] infrastructure plan:

If you want to see what Trump's infastructure plan is likely to look like, look at the Capital Beltway, the highway that encircles DC. On the blue-state Maryland side it is a simple freeway. If there is traffic everyone is stuck in it. On the redish-state Virginia side, rather than widen the road they did one of those private/public infrastructure things and a private beltway requiring a subscription was built along side the public beltway. They charge to get the private lanes depends on how much traffic is on the public part. The toll has recently gone up to $45 for a trip on the private road at rush hour. Those of modest means are stuck in traffic while the wealthy cruise down an empty highway. That's the red state way.

[Baron Scarpia]

There it is, someone on the Left broadly smearing Trump voters.  The US has a pragmatic need to secure the southern border, doing so is not "anti-immigrant" or xenophobic.  The Left wishes to conflate all non-citizens, no matter how they entered the US, into immigrants - all equal.  Anyone who thinks otherwise is a called a racist xenophobe.

And they either don't care or can't see how their credibility is trashed in the process.  Who is playing to their base now?

Do you think you are giving a fair view of the democratic point of view.

In the first place, no mainstream democrat is for "open borders." The southern border already has various types of fencing or walls where it has been deemed effective, and patrols in areas where the natural environment makes fencing impractical or unnecessary. Border enforcement and deportation of undocumented immigrants who were engaged in criminal activity was robust during the Obama administration. The "build a wall" mantra is bait for xenophobia.

The issue is whether the US will deal with non-citizens with humanity, or with rank cruelty, as the Trump administration has. For instance, the Trump administration tried to implement a policy where Muslim people would be barred from entering the country, even if they held valid permanent resident status. (It was stuck down in the courts.) A permanent resident of the US who had traveled to Iran or another predominantly Muslim country for a visit with family would be barred from returning, cut off from their home, their business, their family. You think that is right?

Being in the US without valid immigration status is not a criminal offense, it is a civil offense. The US should enforce its immigration laws and policy, but with humanity, not with vengeful racist cruelty.

[Baron Scarpia]

Jennifer Rubin is a mainstream Liberal media voice.  You act as if she is on the fringes and does not generally represent the Democrats.

I don't subscribe to the Washington Post and have little awareness of what she says. I pay attention to mainly to what elected officials say.

[Karl Henning]

There you have it:  if you're not in the tank with President Butternut, you ain't really a Conservative.

And yet, it is supposedly unfair to speak of Trump voters as blinkered.

[Karl Henning]

And again:  no argument with the content.  No; because Rubin is allegedly a Liberal (okay to tar them with a broad brush), not even worth reading the article.

Typical Trump voter, really.

[Karl Henning]

I don't subscribe to the Washington Post and have little awareness of what she says. I pay attention to mainly to what elected officials say.

Heck, I just shared the entirety of one Rubin piece, and San Antone has no awareness of what she says.

Isn't it enough that she writes for a mainstream newspaper!  Can't be true, unless it's Fox & Friends (the Trumpkins Safe Space).

[Florestan]

Heck, I just shared the entirety of one Rubin piece, and San Antone has no awareness of what she says.

Ahem... if I may... you quoted Scarpia, not San Antone.

[Karl Henning]

Ahem... if I may... you quoted Scarpia, not San Antone.

Yes?

[Karl Henning]

Meanwhile, outside the bubble in which the White House does not speak falsely, because its speaking falsely is only reported in "the Liberal Media":

FBI director rebuts White House account of handling of ex-aide's security clearance

Director Christopher A. Wray testified to a Senate panel that the bureau completed a partial report on senior aide Rob Porter in March, months before the White House said it was contacted by the FBI. "I am quite confident that in this instance, the FBI followed established" protocols, Wray said. Porter stepped down last week amid accusations of spousal abuse.

But you know, I do not believe there is any depth of sleaze at which the Trumpkins will say, Enough!  But, if this had been a Democratic President . . . .

To quote that flaming Liberal George Will, If it were not for situational ethics, the Republican Party would have no ethics at all.

[Karl Henning]

And, a headline at The Fix column at the Washington Post:

Jeff Sessions's 'Anglo-American' comments, and the danger of the liberal Trump outrage machine

Wait, what is this?—critiquing one's own 'tribe'?   

[Karl Henning]

[...] Presidents are not, in the end, judged primarily by the tax cuts they pass. They are measured by the standards JFK set out in his farewell to the Massachusetts legislature in 1961: "Were we truly men of courage . . . were we truly men of judgment . . . were we truly men of integrity . . . were we truly men of dedication?"

For some presidents, these virtues were a guiding passion; for others a political facade. This president has abandoned even lip service to these ideals, conducting himself like the chief executive of a shady casino company seeking to build his fortune and destroy his competition. Which is exactly what [El Tupé] has always been.

By his conduct, the president (metaphorically, as far as I know) puts his muddy boots up on the Resolute desk and spray paints graffiti on the Roosevelt Room wall. He is vandalizing the one house he cannot buy or own.

[Daverz]

Jennifer Rubin is a mainstream Liberal media voice.  You act as if she is on the fringes and does not generally represent the Democrats.

Jennifer Rubin is a never-Trumper who may have cosmopolitan views on some social issues, but she's not a Democrat or a liberal.

[Karl Henning]

Jennifer Rubin is a never-Trumper who may have cosmopolitan views on some social issues, but she's not a Democrat or a liberal.

A Trumpkin, like his idol, already knows it all.

[kishnevi]

And, a headline at The Fix column at the Washington Post:

Jeff Sessions's 'Anglo-American' comments, and the danger of the liberal Trump outrage machine

Wait, what is this?—critiquing one's own 'tribe'?   

What makes that little brouha piquant is that it came out on the day Sessions was giving a speech in which he noted that the Civil War was about slavery, and nothing else, and that the South's determination to keep slavery made the war inevitable.
He may be named for Confederate heros but he is no neo-Confederate.

[Todd]

Well, at least WaPo hates deficit, period. Without subscription one can't read anything on their website. 

Clear your cache on close and you can read all you want; you'll just have to close intermittently.  Alternatively, use outline.com (https://outline.com/) and copy in the URL.  It even blows by the WSJ paywall.

[kishnevi]

Clear your cache on close and you can read all you want; you'll just have to close intermittently.  Alternatively, use outline.com (https://outline.com/) and copy in the URL.  It even blows by the WSJ paywall.

Also right-click on your browser's "open in incognito/private tab".  Works on WaPo. Don't know about the WSJ.