« prev   random   next »

15
4

Calling it Now: Best-President-to-Date

By steverbeaver following x   2018 Jul 1, 12:01am 2,838 views   99 comments   watch   sfw   quote     share    


It has truly been an unexpected surprise to watch the Trump admin perform thus far. In totality, I am fairly confident to call it now: we are witnessing a very rare event of effective and beneficial leadership, one that we may not witness again in our lifetime. That is all I wanted to post. Good luck to each of you in making the best of these good times.

« First    « Previous    Comments 41 - 80 of 99    Next »    Last »

41   bob2356   ignore (2)   2018 Jul 8, 6:35am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

40 posts and no one has said why Trump is the greatest. So far:, cancelled tpp which wasn't going to pas anyway. big tax cut for .1%, said let's do lunch later to NK, didn't fuck up the continued growth of he economy. Other than TPP you could say exactly the same for reagan and bush first term. Where is all this greatness?
42   Aphroman   ignore (6)   2018 Jul 8, 8:55am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

bob2356 says
40 posts and no one has said why Trump is the greatest. So far:, cancelled tpp which wasn't going to pas anyway. big tax cut for .1%, said let's do lunch later to NK, didn't fuck up the continued growth of he economy. Other than TPP you could say exactly the same for reagan and bush first term. Where is all this greatness?


He drives “Liberals” nuts, that obviously counts for something

He’s the first white Republican after the well tanned Democrat usurper we managed to survive through previously

He’s marketed himself as being the greatest, and my team likes him, it feels like he likes us too, also very valuable

Am i missing any of the important stuff?

Oh yea, he’s got his finger fat on the “Brown invaders from the south are taking your jobs and raiding the National treasury, hence causing ypur misery” button that has been utilized throughout history to usher in the worst government imaginable. Thats #MAGA style winning
43   steverbeaver   ignore (1)   2018 Jul 8, 9:06am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I am basing this on performance behavior

Situation
Task
Actions
Results

Almost everything has been exceptional when viewed this way from my point of view, from announcement to current day. Maybe there's something out there that does a nice summary comparison among all presidents as well.
44   Aphroman   ignore (6)   2018 Jul 8, 11:42am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

steverbeaver says
I am basing this on performance behavior

Situation
Task
Actions
Results

Almost everything has been exceptional when viewed this way from my point of view, from announcement to current day. Maybe there's something out there that does a nice summary comparison among all presidents as well.


Repealing and Replacing Obamacare?
Draining the Swamp?
Locking Her up?
Bringing Manufacturing jobs back?

Where’s the data that shows Mission Accomplished?

There’s a reason why Trump tried to dispatch #MAGA and replace it with #KAGA, but ditched the attempt ASAP. He’s said that his supporters are Low IQ, uneducated people and that he loves them, but he underestimated how dumb they are. Give Trump credit he knows marketing, and knew to jump ship on #KAGA as soon as he realized his supporters aren’t dumb enough to go along with Keeping America Great Again when the only thing he had accomplished was implementing the Koch/GOPe/Heritage Foundations Tax Cuts
45   bob2356   ignore (2)   2018 Jul 8, 12:04pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

steverbeaver says
I am basing this on performance behavior

Situation
Task
Actions
Results

Almost everything has been exceptional when viewed this way from my point of view


Almost everything as in what?
46   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Jul 8, 12:10pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Let's see, one, now two pro-2A judges, got the voluntary denuclearization of North Korea (a point you forgot, and not having to give billions on cash pallets to get it), fixing the unfair trade system, getting out of the horrible Iran Deal, record low unemployment, pushing a permanent solution to immigration, strong economy, ban of immigration from Shithole Civil War countries, standing up to Chinese Steel Dumping with the EU trying to pass the buck to us, demanding more Euro contributions for NATO, selling a shitload of weapons to Saudi Arabia, and standing up for American Workers against Harley Davidson, instead of giving the "Natural Forces" lie bullshit.

Oh, and top-notch, non-Brownie reactions to Texas and Puerto Rican hurricanes, the latter in the face of gross corruption and incompetence by Socialist Mayors.

Next: NAFTA goes bye-bye. Canada and Mexico need NAFTA a whole helluva lot more than the American Worker.

And we're not even halfway into his first term.
47   TrumpingTits   ignore (0)   2018 Jul 8, 2:59pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfWompWomp says
NAFTA goes bye-bye


No...or rather, this incarnation of NAFTA will go bye-bye. It is a congressional-executive agreement, so it will take Congress to pass legislation in both houses to rescind it and you know that they won't. But, they will be happy to replace it with a new NAFTA. So, we will get a NAFTA 2. And I'd be careful about wishing for a new King, if I were you. You might just get one. :)
48   steverbeaver   ignore (1)   2018 Jul 8, 3:56pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Tell me... are you still forced to buy health insurance or pay a "fine"?
49   steverbeaver   ignore (1)   2018 Jul 8, 4:06pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Latest example: precisely zero fucks given when dealing with Chinese bullshit on trade. Situation is all recent previous presidents did jack shit to keep things fair. Task is to make America Great Again. Actions involve stern warnings followed up by actual soft actions in the form of new tariffs. Result is stock market knows what's-what and cares fuck-all about repercussions because they know we will win on this handily. It was a difficult choice to make and had lots of opposition. Does a good leader ultimately rely on "consensus"? How many detractors to his actions were benefitting from status-quo?

If you come at me arguing about how China was fair to US or its other trade partners, there is ample proof to the contrary and I have personally observed it.
50   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Jul 8, 5:26pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TrumpingTits says
No...or rather, this incarnation of NAFTA will go bye-bye. It is a congressional-executive agreement, so it will take Congress to pass legislation in both houses to rescind it and you know that they won't. But, they will be happy to replace it with a new NAFTA. So, we will get a NAFTA 2. And I'd be careful about wishing for a new King, if I were you. You might just get one. :)


If it's a treaty, while the President can make treaties that the Senate has to ratify, the Constitution does not explicitly require Senate approval to abrogate Treaties. The Precedence is somewhat mixed but in favor of Presidential Abrogation.
51   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Jul 8, 5:28pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

steverbeaver says
Tell me... are you still forced to buy health insurance or pay a "fine"?


Ah, Another great Trump accomplishment Big Insurance got their mandatory insurance/subsidy scheme nixed.

I'm sure a missed a few other Big Achievements.
52   TrumpingTits   ignore (0)   2018 Jul 8, 6:19pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfWompWomp says
If it's a treaty, while the President can make treaties that the Senate has to ratify, the Constitution does not explicitly require Senate approval to abrogate Treaties. The Precedence is somewhat mixed but in favor of Presidential Abrogation.


Nope. It is a congressional-executive agreement. Almost all modern 'treaties' are such and all trade treaties are.

But trade agreements are different. Like all modern trade pacts, NAFTA is a congressional-executive agreement created by statute, not treaty. Trump cannot terminate it — or even renegotiate it — without the approval of Congress.

The Constitution grants to the president the power to make treaties, subject to approval by two-thirds of the Senate. Our nation's most significant obligations take this form, such as the North Atlantic Treaty that created NATO and the San Francisco Treaty that ended World War II in the Pacific. Presidents also have made some limited international compacts all on their own, though the Constitution doesn't acknowledge this power. President Obama concluded the Paris climate accords and the Iran nuclear deal without the approval of the Senate or House of Representatives. Because Congress never cemented these deals into law, Trump can reverse them with the stroke of a pen on Day One.

But trade deals are different, because under the Constitution's Commerce Clause, only Congress may alter our tariff, tax and customs laws. Congress first authorizes the president to reach a trade agreement with certain countries within limited parameters. Once the deal is struck, the president sends it to Congress for enactment into U.S. domestic law. No trade agreement goes into force until Congress passes the statutes that carry out the trade deal's obligations. -- http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-yoo-ku-trump-nafta-20161129-story.html


So it is legislation. And like all forms of legislation, only Congress can change it, repeal it or the courts can declare it unconstitutional. Now Trump could simply refuse to follow/enforce the law much like Obama's Regime did. But that could be challenged in court.
53   TrumpingTits   ignore (0)   2018 Jul 8, 6:25pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

steverbeaver says
Tell me... are you still forced to buy health insurance or pay a "fine"?

No. As of this year we are not required to pay the fine.

Note: MILLIONS of people opted to pay the fine instead of buy the insurance. Or I should say: MILLIONS more paid the fine than bought the crappy insurance. It was only a good deal for welfare bums, basically.
54   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2018 Jul 8, 7:13pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfWompWomp says
I'm sure a missed a few other Big Achievements.


Yes you did, a BIG one... your 401K balance:

55   APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch   ignore (34)   2018 Jul 8, 7:28pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Putin says he's fucked a lot of presidents in the ass but Trump is the first to shriek "MOMMEEEEE!" when he gets up to steam.
56   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Jul 8, 7:28pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TrumpingTits says
So it is legislation. And like all forms of legislation, only Congress can change it, repeal it or the courts can declare it unconstitutional. Now Trump could simply refuse to follow/enforce the law much like Obama's Regime did. But that could be challenged in court.


Except, NAFTA has a clause in it.

Article 2205: Withdrawal

A Party may withdraw from this Agreement six months after it provides written notice of withdrawal to the other Parties. If a Party withdraws, the Agreement shall remain in force for the remaining Parties.

http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/chap-22.asp

Many experts believe Trump can withdraw, although Congress could reimpose it - which would be a hugely unpopular move among the Republican Base.


Todd Tucker, fellow, the Roosevelt Institute
Congress can’t block Trump from withdrawing, but he will have other problems to deal with if he does so.

The executive branch has exclusive authority over foreign relations. Presidents from William McKinley to Franklin Roosevelt to Jimmy Carter terminated international agreements without explicit congressional authorization — including some that dealt with trade.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/26/16505508/nafta-congress-block-trump-withdraw-trade-power

So excited. Right now, China and Europe are using Mexico and Canada as backdoors to get Euro/Chinese goods tariff free into the USA, providing Canadian and Mexican jobs while depriving Americans of those jobs they would have gotten if NAFTA didn't exist, while depriving America of Tariff Revenue. A Lose-Lose deal.

Canada has a mere 36M people. It needs NAFTA far, far, far more than we do.
57   bob2356   ignore (2)   2018 Jul 8, 8:11pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

MrMagic says
Yes you did, a BIG one... your 401K balance:


The dow went up 250% under obama. Does that make obama the best president to date instead?
58   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2018 Jul 8, 8:48pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

bob2356 says
MrMagic says
Yes you did, a BIG one... your 401K balance:


The dow went up 250% under obama. Does that make obama the best president to date instead?


Ahhhh, math with Bernie supporters...

The answer is NO, the DOW was at 14K and dropped to 7K, and took 5 years to get back to just break even of 14K under Obama, before finishing at 18K when Trump came in.

Even if you started at the 7K number, 18K isn't 250%..

Where do Bernie supporters learn Math?
59   Quigley   ignore (0)   2018 Jul 8, 8:51pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Oddly, the Dow dropped sharply after Obama’s election, then began to rise again after he was sworn in. With Trump, the rising began as soon as he was elected and didn’t reverse much for a solid year.
60   PrivilegedtobeWhite   ignore (1)   2018 Jul 8, 9:11pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

bob2356 says
MrMagic says
Yes you did, a BIG one... your 401K balance:


The dow went up 250% under obama. Does that make obama the best president to date instead?
The market went up under Obama during QE Infinity. Wow.
61   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2018 Jul 8, 9:31pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

PrivilegedtobeWhite says
bob2356 says
MrMagic says
Yes you did, a BIG one... your 401K balance:


The dow went up 250% under obama. Does that make obama the best president to date instead?
The market went up under Obama during QE Infinity. Wow.


Exactly.

Amazing what happens to the market when you juice it with over $4 TRILLION of printed money, then what happens to it when the printing press is shut off.

Since Bob likes doubling of the market under Obama, he must like doubling of the debt under Obama too, right?

Those pesky facts.
62   TrumpingTits   ignore (0)   2018 Jul 8, 11:52pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

MrMagic says
he must like doubling of the debt under Obama too, right?


...especially since that debt doubling happened 'by magic' as the Libs contend that Obama didn't have budget deficits compared to Trump!
63   TrumpingTits   ignore (0)   2018 Jul 9, 12:01am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfWompWomp says
A Party may withdraw from this Agreement six months after it provides written notice of withdrawal to the other Parties. If a Party withdraws, the Agreement shall remain in force for the remaining Parties.


Yes. In the US, that is as Congress decides, not the President (except to sign whatever legislation Congress puts on his desk to do said withdrawal)

TwoScoopsOfWompWomp says
The executive branch has exclusive authority over foreign relations


Except those involving trade. Under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, only Congress may alter our tariff, tax and customs laws. Congressional-Executive Agreements are DOMESTIC legislation.

TwoScoopsOfWompWomp says
Presidents from William McKinley to Franklin Roosevelt to Jimmy Carter terminated international agreements without explicit congressional authorization — including some that dealt with trade.

Yeah. TREATIES. Not Congressional-Executive Agreements. Those are just like domestic laws that stay on the books until Congress says otherwise.

Again, Trump can order federal agencies to defy the domestic legislation set under NAFTA. But it just takes one impacted party with standing to get injunctive relief in court to tear that down.

Carter go away with abrogating treaties because the courts didn't recognize those who challenged it to have standing, not because they ruled in his favor. The cases never got that far.

You're not going to 'win' this one no matter how badly you wish reality was different. You can chalk it up to a middling detail, yes. But it is an important one. :)
64   Aphroman   ignore (6)   2018 Jul 9, 5:11am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

steverbeaver says
Tell me... are you still forced to buy health insurance or pay a "fine"?


Trump repeatedly said on the campaign trail that he would “repeal and replace Obamacare”. Just like all the rest of the Republicans for years. If all he was ever going to do was remove the small fine that nobody was paying before, and leave Obamacare intact otherwise, why didn’t he campaign on that idea?

For all intents and purposes, Obamacare remains unchanged
65   Quigley   ignore (0)   2018 Jul 9, 8:33am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Trump can’t repeal a Congressionally passed law. The Constitution says only Congress may do that. So there’s that.
68   Onvacation   ignore (4)   2018 Jul 9, 8:03pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

skridlov says
Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy R,. FDR

Slave owners and racists.
69   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Jul 9, 8:09pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TrumpingTits says
Yeah. TREATIES. Not Congressional-Executive Agreements. Those are just like domestic laws that stay on the books until Congress says otherwise.


Nope. The President has foreign policy power, and only the Senate (not the House) can approve foreign agreements as a check on the near absolute power of the Presidency in this area.

SCOTUS has already stood aside while similar agreements were nixed by Presidents, including McKinley and Carter. SCOTUS has historically been extremely shy of restricting the Foreign Policy powers of the President.

So the Congress may have passed enabling legislation for NAFTA, but the President can abrogate participation in it.

The Constitution is strangely specific by explicitly mentioning treaties have to be approved by the Senate, but says nothing of their abrogation. Historically, Presidents have unilaterally done so, and such actions took effect immediately, even if the Senate huffed and puffed before "approving" it (not that their approval is needed).
70   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Jul 9, 8:10pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TrumpingTits says
Yeah. TREATIES. Not Congressional-Executive Agreements. Those are just like domestic laws that stay on the books until Congress says otherwise.


If one President makes an agreement with Congress , another President may nix. Just like every other Executive Agreement.

If Somehow Obama made the Iran Deal some kind of Congressional-Executive agreement, Trump could have withdrawn from it.

Almost every expert, even Globalists from the Roosevelt Institute, agree that Trump can pull out of NAFTA. Neither the Senate, and certainly not the House, has the authority to impose an international agreement without the President.


This could be the SCOTUS issue of Trump's Presidency, but I'm very confident that SCOTUS will not take away the President's historically interpreted as near-total foreign policy powers. By historically, I mean since the birth of the Republic.
71   ThreeBays   ignore (0)   2018 Jul 10, 1:08am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

It's party time, since Republicans switched from bitching about the deficit to pretending it doesn't even exist.
72   Aphroman   ignore (6)   2018 Jul 10, 6:26am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

ThreeBays says
It's party time, since Republicans switched from bitching about the deficit to pretending it doesn't even exist.


What about Obamacare? Seem like they are really liking Obamacare now that Chump failed to repeal and replace. They’ve been programmed to respond “yea but he did away with the mandate, problem solved.” Oh really? So everything else is good with Obamacare, just not the mandate?

How many people paid the fine each year for not having insurance?

How many people have canceled their health insurance now that Obamacare doesn’t compel them to purchase?

Being that the answer is ~0, nothing has changed. It’s obvious that Chumpublicans aren’t intelligent enough to realize this, however they seem smart enough not to even attempt to discuss it. Lol
73   BayArea   ignore (0)   2018 Jul 10, 6:32am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

bob2356 says
MrMagic says
Yes you did, a BIG one... your 401K balance:


The dow went up 250% under obama. Does that make obama the best president to date instead?


You should be ashamed of yourself for that one.
74   dr6B   ignore (1)   2018 Jul 10, 6:41am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Aphroman says
How many people paid the fine each year for not having insurance


About 4.5% of taxpayers, which is quite a lot

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/28/us/politics/obamacare-individual-mandate-penalty-maps.html
75   dr6B   ignore (1)   2018 Jul 10, 6:47am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

ThreeBays says
It's party time, since Republicans switched from bitching about the deficit to pretending it doesn't even exist.

The new talking point is "we can never pay it back", forgetting that in some way it WILL be paid back (inflation). Or that most of it is owed to entities in US of A. Also, giving money to defense contractors is OK, but paying anyone else is a crime.
76   Aphroman   ignore (6)   2018 Jul 10, 7:22am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

drB6 says
Aphroman says
How many people paid the fine each year for not having insurance


About 4.5% of taxpayers, which is quite a lot

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/28/us/politics/obamacare-individual-mandate-penalty-maps.html


The average penalty was $462 lol

That’s less than the increase in gas prices that afe crushing low income Americans, under Trump
77   Quigley   ignore (0)   2018 Jul 10, 7:32am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Aphroman says
That’s less than the increase in gas prices that afe crushing low income Americans, under Trump


And somehow the President controls worldwide gas prices? Interesting how your mind works.
78   dr6B   ignore (1)   2018 Jul 10, 7:33am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Aphroman says
That’s less than the increase in gas prices

High gas prices are extremely good - I wish gas was $5-8/gal. This allows development of alternative energy sources (less global warming and/or dependence on Gulf terroristocracies) and really helps state where I live. Also, as we all are adults here (hopefully), we know that Obamacare was a giveaway to insurance companies.
79   steverbeaver   ignore (1)   2018 Jul 10, 7:36am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I have a friend who was "taxed" ~$1400 for not buying the sham that is Obamacare.
80   Onvacation   ignore (4)   2018 Jul 10, 8:17am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Aphroman says
Locking Her up?

Hard to do after half the country voted for her. History will reveal the Clintons' and Bushes' crimes.

« First    « Previous    Comments 41 - 80 of 99    Next »    Last »





The Housing Trap
You're being set up to spend your life paying off a debt you don't need to take on, for a house that costs far more than it should. The conspirators are all around you, smiling to lure you in, carefully choosing their words and watching your reactions as they push your buttons, anxiously waiting for the moment when you sign the papers that will trap you and guarantee their payoff. Don't be just another victim of the housing market. Use this book to defend your freedom and defeat their schemes. You can win the game, but first you have to learn how to play it.
115 pages, $12.50

Kindle version available


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions