Well, at least We'll have a President Now...

[Audie]

It's called having good PR and good speechwriters.

But he still seems to have those qualities. They say he was a good teacher at UC law

 

[Audie]

There is of course far more than that. There was his talk of sexually assaulting married women and getting away with it because he is rich. Have you heard his "Grab them by the p@ssy" tape? Bragging about being able to walk into changing areas where underaged girls would be half naked or even naked because he ran the Miss Universe and Miss Teen USA, Miss Universe and Miss USA tournaments. Cheating on his wives while they were pregnant. Paying off the women that he cheated with. And a halfway credible rape charge.

I worried more about how his fiscal policies were affecting America. Under Obama as our economy improved our deficit spending went down. That should have continued under Trump, instead our deficit went up. The tax cut for the wealthy was leaving a bill that the poor would have to pay later. Even before the Covid Pandemic we were under threat of a new recession.

I'm no economist, but the American debt and deficit just keeps going up.
I predict it is set to really skyrocket now,
with your Democrats

The charges you list of sexist, a more appropriate word than misogynist, are fully as applicable to clinton.

My main concept is the rather hysterical
behaviour of the left re how dreadful they think Trump is, the comparably unrealistic view from the right, and a hope you will all return to sanity by and by.

 

[Sunstone]

It's curious to me that Trump's lowest popularity ratings followed his tax cuts. He has never sank as low even during his mismanagement of the pandemic. I am surprised because I was under the impression that significant numbers of Americans had faith in 'trickle down economics' and perceived the tax cuts as beneficial to themselves. I guess I was wrong about that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm no economist, but the American debt and deficit just keeps going up.
I predict it is set to really skyrocket now,
with your Democrats

The charges you list of sexist, a more appropriate word than misogynist, are fully as applicable to clinton.

My main concept is the rather hysterical
behaviour of the left re how dreadful they think Trump is, the comparably unrealistic view from the right, and a hope you will all return to sanity by and by.

It could. One can look up the debt and deficit from various sources on line. Obama was actually fiscally conservative. He was handed an economy in recession and it took some spending to help lift us up out of it. As the economy improved his deficits went down. Under Trump they started to rise again when they should have been dropping. That is a formula for disaster. Sooner or later the debt and deficit do affect the economy.

And I will accept "sexist". The remarks against Clinton did not rankle me too much, besides the fact that they were sophomoric. I was no Clinton fan or a fan of how the Democrats seemed to think that it was "her turn".

 

[Audie]

It could. One can look up the debt and deficit from various sources on line. Obama was actually fiscally conservative. He was handed an economy in recession and it took some spending to help lift us up out of it. As the economy improved his deficits went down. Under Trump they started to rise again when they should have been dropping. That is a formula for disaster. Sooner or later the debt and deficit do affect the economy.

And I will accept "sexist". The remarks against Clinton did not rankle me too much, besides the fact that they were sophomoric. I was no Clinton fan or a fan of how the Democrats seemed to think that it was "her turn".

Sophomoric charges of rape. Droll.

Grab- by is sophmotic

If you Americans don't learn to control
tax and spend it won't make a bit of difference who is president.

 

[Sunstone]

I'm no economist, but the American debt and deficit just keeps going up.
I predict it is set to really skyrocket now,
with your Democrats

I'm no economist either, but I don't believe
you need to be one in order to be familiar with
the tried and tested practice of 'spending
an economy out of a recession".

As you probably know, there seems to be
ample historical evidence that you can rack up
quite a deficit while doing so without harming
the economy. That is, without significant risk
of creating an inflationary economy, jacking up
interest rates, etc.

Of course, economics involves so many variables
that nothing is certain. Quite unlike me, who is
almost always wrong about nearly everything.

 

[Sunstone]

Obama was actually fiscally conservative. He was handed an economy in recession and it took some spending to help lift us up out of it.

That's true about Obama and fiscal conservatism. The spending that 'lifted us out of the Great Recession', though -- wasn't that passed under Bush in his last months in office? What I mostly remember about it was that a few hundred economists signed a letter to Congress stating that, according to their math, the 600 billion package was insufficient and needed to be increased in size. They accurately predicted that it would lead to at least a decade of relatively sluggish growth, rather than a booming economy. I was rather impressed when that's exactly what happened. Of course, the stock market soared, but the stock market is of little actual relevance these days to the middle and lower classes, since we seem to have developed a two-tier economy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's true about Obama and fiscal conservatism. The spending that 'lifted us out of the Great Recession', though -- wasn't that passed under Bush in his last months in office? What I mostly remember about it was that a few hundred economists signed a letter to Congress stating that, according to their math, the 600 billion package was insufficient and needed to be increased in size. They accurately predicted that it would lead to at least a decade of relatively sluggish growth, rather than a booming economy. I was rather impressed when that's exactly what happened. Of course, the stock market soared, but the stock market is of little actual relevance these days to the middle and lower classes, since we seem to have developed a two-tier economy.

Economics is far from a specialty of mine. I could just see a repeating of old failures under Trump. He would look good for a short while and leave a huge bill to be paid in his wake. And I would like to agree that wage disparity is a real problem, but that would be "socialist"

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

But he still seems to have those qualities. They say he was a good teacher at UC law

Yeah, that doesn't necessarily transfer to being a good president. He really wasn't. He's like Pope Francis. He speaks pretty words but doesn't really back it up. Not to mention he was a warmonger, too.

 

[Audie]

Yeah, that doesn't necessarily transfer to being a good president. He really wasn't. He's like Pope Francis. He speaks pretty words but doesn't really back it up. Not to mention he was a warmonger, too.

I thought he was ok.
It was kind of sick the way so many
were swooning and all but singing
Hallelujah at him.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I thought he was ok.
It was kind of sick the way so many
were swooning and all but singing
Hallelujah at him.

I found the deification of Obama extremely off putting too. There was not that much difference between them and the Trumpistas.

 

[SomeRandom]

It's called having good PR and good speechwriters.

Whilst I agree. It still puts him heads and shoulders above Trump’s public perception. (At least internationally.) Isn’t Trump supposed to be like super rich in comparison? Could he just not afford them?
And if he could, did he seriously still fail whilst having a PR team and speech writers? If so, that’s an extra level of fail.

 

[Audie]

I found the deification of Obama extremely off putting too. There was not that much difference between them and the Trumpistas.

At least nobody would look at Biden that way.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

No , he is a jerk of the first water, imo.

However, its little in comparison to what is said
about him.

Go back where came from...if you choose to
call it hate, its your privilege. Does notmake it
so.

I'm sure you understand the feeling of someone, anyone, who perceives that a
newcomer trying to upset the applecart.

That is not hate.

The style of Trump is very professional wrestling. Crude, vulgar, utterly lacking
in nuance. Lots of fakersy. Or so it feels to me.

Your truck driver, Nascar guys seem to see it
as plain straight talking, and that makes sense to me.

It does not make them bad people anymore
than the snooty air of people who scorn
flyover country and etc are bad people because
some see them that way.

From over here that seething hate I see in America
is for Trump. The reasons for it
look mostly either trumped up by dishonest
reporting, or visceral matters related to his style,
making him a target for those who wish to, to project
their own issues. Goes for Trump
haters and backers equally.

Other than that, I think"tacist" "liar" and " hate", pure or
otherwise need to be defined way down for them to qualify
for all the calumny.

I hope when he is gone all of you, left and right
can start drifting back to sanity, none of you
seem to have both oars in the water these days.

I keep hearing how he is misogynistic.
So I looked it up yesterday. He made
comments on Hillary physical appearance.
That was given as a prime example.

Tacky, sure. To me Hillary is hideous, very
hard to look at.

Misogyny tho? Ridiculous.

Interesting. He is a jerk, crude, vulgar, utterly lacking in nuance. But he is not "hateful", in your estimation.

I would be curious to see an example of what you are referring to when you speak of "seething hate I see in America ... for Trump". Please explain why you characterize that as "hate" instead of being a "jerk, crude, vulgar, utterly lacking in nuance".

And when Trump reacted to black lives matter by brutally attacking protesters who legally assembled in front of the White House at Lafayette Square, with physical force and chemical irritants, so he could take a photo with the Bible ... that also wasn't "hate"? Boy, if you think brutalizing protesters is just being "vulgar and utterly lacking in nuance", I sure wouldn't want to see what true "hate" looks like.

Thanks.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

It does not make them bad people anymore
than the snooty air of people who scorn
flyover country and etc are bad people because
some see them that way.

I grew up in flyover country. I live in flyover country.

Condemning Trump's hate is not snooty. It is decency. I don't criticize Trump and his supporters because I look down on them, but because I expect better of them. They are my family and friends.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I hope when he is gone all of you, left and right
can start drifting back to sanity, none of you
seem to have both oars in the water these days.

I acknowledge there is hate on both sides. But to equate support for Donald Trump to support for Joe Biden, in terms of the level of hateful rhetoric each candidate feeds into, is just blind. Look at my signature. Senator Lindsay Graham actually spoke those words. Republican leaders back in 2016, and many of them today, know full well that Donald Trump is a hateful bigot - they admit it.

Not so with Joe Biden. No one even accuses Joe of being a hate-monger. Trump's own side acknowledges he is a hate monger.

It's grapes vs. watermelons.

 

[Audie]

I acknowledge there is hate on both sides. But to equate support for Donald Trump to support for Joe Biden, in terms of the level of hateful rhetoric each candidate feeds into, is just blind. Look at my signature. Senator Lindsay Graham actually spoke those words. Republican leaders back in 2016, and many of them today, know full well that Donald Trump is a hateful bigot - they admit it.

Not so with Joe Biden. No one even accuses Joe of being a hate-monger. Trump's own side acknowledges he is a hate monger.

It's grapes vs. watermelons.

I didn't equate them.

I did mean what I said though.