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

[Florestan]

This is a gamble if ever there was one. If Mitch McConnell has it his way and Trump will not be removed from office then the Democrats have done nothing else than securing his second term.

[ritter]

This is a gamble if ever there was one. If Mitch McConnell has it his way and Trump will not be removed from office then the Democrats have done nothing else than securing his second term.

Indeed. But this does not mean that it wasn't the house's duty to proceed, if the evdience against the President is solid (which, alas, it appears to be).

[Florestan]

Indeed. But this does not mean that it wasn't the house's duty to proceed, if the evdience against the President is solid (which, alas, it appears to be).

It's an interesting situation. If I were into betting, I'd put my money on Trump's not being removed.

[Daverz]

This is a gamble if ever there was one. If Mitch McConnell has it his way and Trump will not be removed

That was already baked into the cake.  Impeachment was still right on the merits.

from office then the Democrats have done nothing else than securing his second term.

The 2018 Democratic turnout was animated by voters wanting a check on Trump.  Not impeaching would have a demoralizing and depressive effect on Democratic turnout in 2020.

Of course, it's not going to keep Trump from cheating in 2020.  Giuliani is still messing around in Ukraine trying to dig up dirt and Russian disinformation.  And who knows what Bill Barr will get up to.  I'm expecting very noisy investigations of Trump's opponents.

[Florestan]

The 2018 Democratic turnout was animated by voters wanting a check on Trump.  Not impeaching would have a demoralizing and depressive effect on Democratic turnout in 2020.

Agreed, but a probable survival of Trump in the office would have pretty much the same effect. Or maybe on the contrary? Who knows. We'll see.

[Daverz]

Agreed, but a probable survival of Trump in the office would have pretty much the same effect. Or maybe on the contrary? Who knows. We'll see.

I'm not sure why you think impeachment makes a Trump win more probable. 

[Florestan]

I'm not sure why you think impeachment makes a Trump win more probable.

Because (1) if he survives, even the anti-Trumpers in the GOP will think twice before acting against him, not to mention that the most opportunistic of them will even rally behind him, and (2) his base will be so enraged by the impeachment that their turnout will be spectacular. Add the demoralizing and depressive effect it will have on Dems and a second term becomes indeed probable. My two cents, anyway. I might be wrong.

Speaking of which, I want to ask what do you Americans think of this paragraph in his letter to Pelosi:

America's extraordinary economy, incredible jobs boom, record stock market, soaring confidence, and flourishing citizens. Your party simply cannot compete with our record: 7 million new jobs; the lowest-ever unemployment for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans; a rebuilt military; a completely reformed VA with Choice and Accountability for our great veterans; ... historic tax and regulation cuts; ... the first decline in prescription drug prices in half a century

Is this complete bullshit or does he have some points?

[Daverz]

Because (1) if he survives, even the anti-Trumpers in the GOP will think twice before acting against him, not to mention that the most opportunistic of them will even rally behind him

I suppose the anti-Trumpers seem impressive because they get on TV a lot, but this is a handful of pundits and retired politicians with no constituency.

The Republicans in Congress were already solidly behind Trump after he was nominated and have not wavered since then.

, and (2) his base will be so enraged by the impeachment that their turnout will be spectacular.

His base is always enraged.  Republican turnout was already at a record high in 2018.  Keeping your head down and hoping things will work themselves out is not the way to fight authoritarians like Trump.

Add the demoralizing and depressive effect it will have on Dems

Ha ha.  OK, I get I'm wasting my time.

Speaking of which, I want to ask what do you Americans think of this paragraph in his letter to Pelosi:

America's extraordinary economy, incredible jobs boom, record stock market, soaring confidence, and flourishing citizens. Your party simply cannot compete with our record: 7 million new jobs; the lowest-ever unemployment for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans; a rebuilt military; a completely reformed VA with Choice and Accountability for our great veterans; ... historic tax and regulation cuts; ... the first decline in prescription drug prices in half a century

Is this complete bullshit or does he have some points?

Seriously, you're impressed by that paragraph?  I suppose he's also made the trains run on time.

[Florestan]

Seriously, you're impressed by that paragraph?

I'm not impressed. I ask whether it's true or not, because I haven't seen it addressed in the link Simon provided above.

[drogulus]

     

     


     One of the most important measures of economic progress is found in the growth in real wages.

     After the '70s policy has been to fight inflation on the assumption that oil crisis inflation would continue to threaten even when no cause of it was present, and that wage growth was the component of inflation that had to be fought hardest. This left us vulnerable to low inflation that was purely subtractive of purchasing power. In effect the losses from oil price inflation were replaced by losses from a wage suppression policy.

     The TrumpObama policy has produced a weak recovery and expansion. For most of the last decade the Fed has not played ball with the fiscal shrinksters who kept up a constant drumbeat about how hyperinflationary low interest rates and QE would be. These geniuses specialize in never learning from their mistakes. With no kill zone interest rates the economy has managed to stay above the recession line. Powell got scared straight by his experiment in cooling off an economy that wasn't hot to begin with. Why he thought it was wise to conduct this experiment is mysterious. I guess it's one of those "the world is wrong" things.

     I disagree with the widely held assumption that immigration depresses wages. It's more likely the opposite is the case. More immigrants would lift supply and demand together, leading to more hiring of the native born. Businesses need workers and customers, immigration adds both.

[Karl Henning]

Indeed. But this does not mean that it wasn't the house's duty to proceed, if the evdience against the President is solid (which, alas, it appears to be).

Yes, a political gamble (and a stark contrast to the political gambles the craven GOP Quislings won't take, but an assertion that the Rule of Law, that Oaths to uphold the Constitution, and that inarguable facts matter.

[Karl Henning]

This is a gamble if ever there was one. If Mitch McConnell has it his way and Trump will not be removed from office then the Democrats have done nothing else than securing his second term.

While your central point, that Trump is likely to win a second term holds, this stems from the social fact that his supporters are absolutely in the tank with him. Per y other post, we disagree that giving the Trumpkins more occasion for their "WITCH HUNT" delusion is all that the House vote has signified.

[Daverz]

I'm not impressed. I ask whether it's true or not, because I haven't seen it addressed in the link Simon provided above.

I actually started to google some of the claims, but I had a meeting.  There's so much nonsense to unpack in that paragraph.  The jobs number is a "so what?"  You can find various plots like this online:



It's good that jobs continue to be added, but Trump has not changed the trend...yet.  In short, he inherited a good economy from his predecessor.  However, there are some troubling signs, like a recession in manufacturing

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-10-09/despite-trump-vow-manufacturing-in-recession
https://slate.com/business/2019/10/manufacturing-recession-matters-factory-jobs-trade-war.html

Let's not forget the trade wars that Trump is losing badly.

The African/Hispanic/Asian-American stuff is pure Stephen Miller, I think.  Subgroup statistics would tend to rise or fall along with the aggregate statistic.  Does Trump want a cookie for that?  Black unemployment is still twice as high as white unemployment.  The tax cut has not resulted in anything like the promised growth rate (because that was the usual trickle-down lie; Trump is just stupid enough to believe it).   Cutting regulation is standard Republican-speak for despoiling the environment, reducing food safety, worker safety, etc.  I hope you like breathing more mercury.

[SimonNZ]

I'm not impressed. I ask whether it's true or not, because I haven't seen it addressed in the link Simon provided above.

There's a problem with the economic indicators Trump is watching if there are still a vast number of people living in poverty

Even if you wanted to give Trump credit for some improvement in the economy does that excuse him for misconduct elsewhere?

Would you excuse a pederast schoolteacher if his students were getting straight As?

[Florestan]

There's a problem with the economic indicators Trump is watching if there are still a vast number of people living in poverty

Agreed, but I asked only whether those indicators are as good as he claims they are.

Even if you wanted to give Trump credit for some improvement in the economy does that excuse him for misconduct elsewhere?

Would you excuse a pederast schoolteacher if his students were getting straight As?

I think the comparison is farfetched. A president or prime-minister (not only of the USA, but in general) can be a liar, a womanizer or a drunkard, or all three at once --- none of which are crimes under any jurisdiction, btw --- yet the policies of his administration can be sound and lead to economic boom and general prosperity (case in point, Bill Clinton, liar and womanizer). I'm not saying it's the case with Trump. I ask whether the US economy is today in as good shape as he claims it is.

[Florestan]

While your central point, that Trump is likely to win a second term holds

When I gave my reasons for this, Daverz sort of sneered at me. What are your reasons for saying that?

Oh, and I want to make it clear what I have already said explicitly, just in case: I am no fan of Trump.

[SimonNZ]

I think the comparison is farfetched. A president or prime-minister (not only of the USA, but in general) can be a liar, a womanizer or a drunkard, or all three at once --- none of which are crimes under any jurisdiction, btw --- yet the policies of his administration can be sound and lead to economic boom and general prosperity (case in point, Bill Clinton, liar and womanizer). I'm not saying it's the case with Trump. I ask whether the US economy is today in as good shape as he claims it is.

You're being disingenuous again. Because you know those aren't the crimes he's accused of, or the crimes he's under multiple investigations for, or the crimes he's had to pay out for.

[Karl Henning]

When I gave my reasons for this, Daverz sort of sneered at me. What are your reasons for saying that?

Oh, and I want to make it clear what I have already said explicitly, just in case: I am no fan of Trump.

Rest easy, I do not mistake you for a Trumpkin.

It's pretty clear that Trump was depressingly correct when he claimed he could shoot someone in broad daylight on Fifth Avenue, and get away with it. His core of support among the electorate will be behind him, no matter what. They are the true suckers for fake news, yet they rationalize their emotional attachment by fondly imagining that any facts/news not to their liking is false.

And the present progress of the Democratic Party's quest for a nominee does not fill me with confidence that they will designate someone who can appeal to any of the Trump voters who have sober remorse over the present POTUS. So, I don't see the Impeachment as any misstep, per second.

[SimonNZ]

They interviewed some Trump fans recently and asked them about how they'd react now if he shot someone on 5th Ave.

Every one of them said that Trump must have had a good reason and the person must have been bad and needed shooting.

[Florestan]

You're being disingenuous again. Because you know those aren't the crimes he's accused of, or the crimes he's under multiple investigations for, or the crimes he's had to pay out for.

Ho, ho, ho! It's you who are (deliberately) being disingenuous, because it's you who brought up pederasty.