Everybody Knows...

[Sunstone]

In my opinion, "everybody" knows -- at least deep down most people know -- that Trump will most likely be a disaster as a president, but hope, partisanship, a lack of discernment, etc obscure the truth for many.

If you disagree with this, I'd be curious to know what you base your optimism on? What do you see in Trump that indicates to you he'd be at least a mediocre president, and not an outright disaster?

 

[Mister_T]

My hope quickly turned to dust when I saw what he filled his cabinet up with.

 

[Deidre]

I'm not sure that he won the electoral vote based on people thinking he'd make an amazing President. If there were a much better democratic candidate running against him, he might not have won. Just my opinion.

 

[bobhikes]

In my opinion, "everybody" knows -- at least deep down most people know -- that Trump will most likely be a disaster as a president, but hope, partisanship, a lack of discernment, etc obscure the truth for many.

If you disagree with this, I'd be curious to know what you base your optimism on? What do you see in Trump that indicates to you he'd be at least a mediocre president, and not an outright disaster?

I have faith in the system its over 200 years old and nobody so far has be an outright disaster.

 

[Sunstone]

I have faith in the system its over 200 years old and nobody so far has be an outright disaster.

That's certainly an interesting position.

 

[Mister_T]

I have faith in the system its over 200 years old and nobody so far has be an outright disaster.

I'm sure Rome had similar sentiments at one point in time.

 

[Quintessence]

My hope quickly turned to dust when I saw what he filled his cabinet up with.

That was kind of the issue for me as well.

 

[Mindmaster]

In my opinion, "everybody" knows -- at least deep down most people know -- that Trump will most likely be a disaster as a president, but hope, partisanship, a lack of discernment, etc obscure the truth for many.

If you disagree with this, I'd be curious to know what you base your optimism on? What do you see in Trump that indicates to you he'd be at least a mediocre president, and not an outright disaster?

Haven't seen Democrats this upset since Lincoln freed the slaves...

I feel the scale of the President-type job is actually beyond any single individual, and because of that, it's more his cabinet and other office holders that are going to do the heavy lifting. I think the left should feel lucky that it's him, and not Pence who is the President; Trump is far more center/left-leaning verses other choices. He doesn't hate gay people, doesn't have crazy fundamentalist beliefs, and doesn't think it's his duty to empty your wallet. (Hi Bernie, and Obama!) Honestly, Hillary lost because she's not much different than Trump, but she has tons more scandalous baggage. The dems screwed themselves by screwing Bernie, clearly the more moral and useful candidate was snubbed.

There was no reason to believe the rookie senator from Illinois who had a high score streak for missing sessions was going to be a useful President, but everyone literally voted for him because he was black. This type of shill candidate will not work anymore we can share too much information and don't trust the media completely. Identity politics is not going to be good enough to get anyone elected these days, and as soon as you start with them you alienate someone else and shoot yourself in the foot. If you think Obama was a good candidate ever you already need to re-evaluate some life choices -- he was bad on paper from day one, and was up until the absolute last day of his term. If you think Hillary was ever a solid choice - you're nearly qualified as postal.

P.S. I really think Obama won specifically due to inferior Republican candidates, not that the the Bush Presidents we're any better. Everyone past Reagan was pretty much a fail, we just got a bit of air with Clinton (and I think he was LUCKY), and right back into the drink.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

He doesn't hate gay people, doesn't have crazy fundamentalist beliefs, and doesn't think it's his duty to empty your wallet. (Hi Bernie, and Obama!)

Bernie doesn't want to drain your wallet.And while he isn't a religious fundamentalist, there are many objections to his characters; i.e., how easily provoked he is and how he mocks and taunts people. It's like Ohio's pot bill that was voted down, because though it gave legalization, it was turned down by the Ohio citizenry due to it giving control over the pot trade to the state. I actually agree with him on several points, but he is a very poor choice to represent them. However, his cabinet appointments are speaking louder than his "leftist positions," and given how he has "reversed" on many Right wing issues, it appears he is "reversing" on many of his Left issues. He wasn't able to intellectually appeal to the Left, as I do believe it was nothing more than "casting nets" when he "took" those positions, no more than he cast nets with the Right on immigration, but both really paled in comparison to his most gainful nets cast, the ones cast upon those getting caught up into an emotional frenzy and cheering on abhorrent behaviors. Those people who live in a fantasy world of victimization, thinking the black people and gays and immigrants are having everything handed over to them, while "poor me didn't get ****."

Hillary lost because she's not much different than Trump, but she has tons more scandalous baggage.

She's clearly very different from Trump, and her "scandalous baggage," for the biggest and most part, is made up twisted and spun nonsense. Literally no different than when a Liberal biased source spins something said by the Right. Benghazi was over something she didn't really have anything to do with, and actually many people have been busted for private email server use, as well as other electronic device violations, but no one has been grilled for it like Clinton. Just like Bill's infidelity. Who else really gets in "such trouble" over infidelity and twisting words like that?

The dems screwed themselves by screwing Bernie, clearly the more moral and useful candidate was snubbed.

That I do agree with. In terms of the popular vote and EC, that old man would have stomped the crap out of Trump. And, really, the only prediction that was wrong was the EC. The Dems need to accept they screwed themselves like the Reps need to accept Trump barely won.
Me, I'm more curious about the court order to halt vote recounts when there was reported cases of precinct discrepancies, as reported by local news sources. That's something people should have been outraged over, but it seems to have slipped past public attention virtually undetected.

President, but everyone literally voted for him because he was black.

Yeah, couldn't have been due to positions of ending the wars, stimulus package, and other reforms.

 

[tytlyf]

IMO, when I heard his inauguration speech, I felt he was going directly after the few people who control the republican party. People that use government for profit at the expense of the middle class. I'm pretty sure he's not going after democrats.

 

[Nietzsche]

I have faith in the system its over 200 years old and nobody so far has be an outright disaster.

Woodrow Wilson. Warren G. Harding. James Buchanan. Franklin Pierce. Andrew Jackson. John Tyler. Milliard Fillmore.

Notice, I did not mention the likes of Bush, or Nixon, or Carter and so on. Why? Because unpopular does not necessarily mean bad. Nixon did a number of bad things but I'd argue was net-gain for the nation. Bush was somewhat incompetent at times, but at least he had good intentions and also did enough that I think most rational people would say was a net gain. As for Carter, most of his failures had to do with a series of absolutely horrible circumstances that were largely out of his control. Kind of like Hoover in that regard.

 

[Mindmaster]

Yeah, couldn't have been due to positions of ending the wars, stimulus package, and other reforms.

What war has Obama ended? Everything that was up in the air (including Iraq) is still ongoing... He didn't even close Gitmo, and most people agree that is an abuse of human rights.

If by stimulus package you mean 9 trillion in additional debt with no economic growth to show for it, I'm confused.

If you mean by reforms gay marriage, etc, well it was heading that way anyway.

 

[RedDragon94]

In my opinion, "everybody" knows -- at least deep down most people know -- that Trump will most likely be a disaster as a president, but hope, partisanship, a lack of discernment, etc obscure the truth for many.

If you disagree with this, I'd be curious to know what you base your optimism on? What do you see in Trump that indicates to you he'd be at least a mediocre president, and not an outright disaster?

He still hasn't done anything. When he outsources a million jobs then come talk to me.

You are from America right?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What war has Obama ended? Everything that was up in the air (including Iraq) is still ongoing...

Afghanistan came to an end, and there were no more "boots on the ground" in Iraq until ISIS showed up. He didn't exactly end it, but our troops weren't fighting their either.

If by stimulus package you mean 9 trillion in additional debt with no economic growth to show for it, I'm confused.

You're simply blind if you haven't seen any economic growth. Wall Street gained substantially during his presidency, jobs were added (albeit low paying jobs), and the recession came to an end. The real complaint lies in the fact the jobs created have largely been low-wage jobs, and though there has indeed been economic growth under Obama, it has mostly went straight to the top, with little of it being seen by anyone else.

 

[RedDragon94]

You're simply blind if you haven't seen any economic growth. Wall Street gained substantially during his presidency, jobs were added (albeit low paying jobs), and the recession came to an end. The real complaint lies in the fact the jobs created have largely been low-wage jobs, and though there has indeed been economic growth under Obama, it has mostly went straight to the top, with little of it being seen by anyone else.

You have a funny definition of economic growth. What's the point if all we get is low-paying jobs? What did Obama do for small business or even just business in general?

 

[Neo Deist]

In my opinion, "everybody" knows -- at least deep down most people know -- that Trump will most likely be a disaster as a president, but hope, partisanship, a lack of discernment, etc obscure the truth for many.

I don't feel that way. I think the grandeur of the Oval Office and being surrounded by the legacy of the Forefathers can humble a person. Many ex-Presidents have mentioned that. Once you start getting briefings in the Sit-Room and dealing with Heads of State, your mindset can change. Presidents often "grow up" in the Office and come out the better for it. Give the man a chance without prejudging or being biased. If he fails, we fail as a country. We need to stand behind him and work to make things better, not worse by being divisive.

We have tried every combination of politicians. I think an outsider is exactly what we need right now. If in 4 years it doesn't work out, at least we can say that we tried something different.

If it makes you feel any better, he already has the Oval Office looking better!

Obama's curtains - chocolate brown

Trump's curtains - gold with blue trim

President Trump will also get to select various paintings and decorations from the White House collection, or borrow them from museums. Anything that hangs in the Oval Office increases in value.

 

[icehorse]

He doesn't hate gay people, doesn't have crazy fundamentalist beliefs, and doesn't think it's his duty to empty your wallet. (Hi Bernie, and Obama!)

Trust me, Trump is after your wallet.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You have a funny definition of economic growth. What's the point if all we get is low-paying jobs? What did Obama do for small business or even just business in general?

As I pointed out, by the definition and books, there has indeed been economic growth. Economic growth, however, doesn't really care what wages and salaries people make or the benefits they have. It pretty much just cares about if they are working, and only cares about them for a while if they are unemployed. It cares about the total money being generated, not about how it's being distributed.

 

[David1967]

You have a funny definition of economic growth. What's the point if all we get is low-paying jobs? What did Obama do for small business or even just business in general?

As a small business owner I will answer that last question from personal experience. Nothing but make it more difficult. ACA made my health insurance unaffordable.

 

[Mindmaster]

Trust me, Trump is after your wallet.

Well, I'm after YOUR wallet in a literal sense as well, so join the club or pretend not to be playing the game -- doesn't matter to me.