Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 80

Thread: Trump Administration: 2 year SITREP

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, ohio
    Posts
    3,326
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    So where are we on the Trump Presidency?

    No argument that DJT has remained true to himself and his candidacy, the anti-Barack Obama. He has not become "more Presidential", as was hoped and he stated he would do.
    But what does "being more presidential" mean?? Kissing up to the press? Failing those who voted him in, by 'compromising' with the opposition??

    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    Economically: DJT presides over a strong economy with unemployment at its lowest rate for half a century, there is and should be some roll over from the Obama Administration (things don't happen overnight), but he does deserve credit. He did approve a tax cut, which arguably contributed to the national debt rising from $19T to $21.7T, anticipated to grow to $23T by the end of the year. He promised but has not moved on designating China a currency manipulator. He has increased oil and gas production in the US.
    On this alone, i hope he will get re-elected.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    Border Security: There is no wall ... yet. Currently the government is shutdown over a standoff for $5.7B in funding for the wall.
    And as long as the dems keep opposing him, it shows they have LITTLE to no desire to ever secure our borders.. When THEY mention "but we support border security, it seems to ONLY be in favor of more lawyers, more medics and the like to PROCESS into the US, those they catch. NOT Stopping them coming in..
    So i am HOPING to hell, he holds his red-line on this.. And does NOT cave in, granting amnesty, like the dems demand.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    Affordable Care Act / Obamacare: Largely remains intact with a federal judge recently declaring the ACA unconstitutional if the penalty is eliminated. That judge has issued a stay on the decision for now. If that decision stands, there is no legislative solution to replace the health care law (repeal AND replace). Polling suggests the ACA is more popular than it was in the past, specifically with people who previously opposed it; enrollment dipped less than 5 percent this year, even though there's no longer a tax penalty (fine) for people who go without insurance.
    Its like with most things. Once people get a taste of the entitlement (the ACA's giving subsidies etc to those of lower income), its HARD to get people off it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    Infrastructure: No movement on a campaign promise to initiate a $1T infrastructure program.
    Again, because of the dems stalling.

    Judicial reform: Probably his greatest & longest lasting accomplishment (one I think he should / could tout more often). 2 new SCOTUS Justices, 29 Circuit Court Justices. In DJT's third year in office, he is likely to have fewer positions to fill because he has already named judges for many of the vacancies he inherited from BHO. The long term impacts are a more conservative federal judiciary. If he gets another SCOTUS Justice, that will likely move the court from center-right to Conservative ... for a generation. [/quote]

    Which imo is why the left is PRAYING like crazy, RBG doesn't die soon, so he can't get a 3rd pick to sit on the scotus.

    Quote Originally Posted by AF sgt View Post
    Outcomes of what, though? What ever changes? We get 4 years of bluster, 4 years of opposition, and then we move on to another 4 years of the same. It's hard to take it seriously. Hell, now the Dems are the ones bitching about a Republican administration pulling troops out of certain locations. I always thought it was the Republicans who were supposed to bitch about the Dems doing it. It's just all so ridiculous that I can't pretend anything will ever be different, other than the party that gets the blame.
    Which is why so many folk i know, seem to think there's NO REAL difference in actual party. BOTH do the same.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    Understanding that government can give nothing to anyone without first taking it from someone else and that some things are not the role of the government:

    -get govt spending under control, we are digging a hole we may never be able to get out of.
    -reduce the size of government, cut dead weight, fire / retire non-performers.
    I would like to start with
    A) Getting rid of depts NOT called for in the constitution. Such as the EPA< Dept of education, NSA.
    B) all these federal workers "Furloed" because they are seen as "NON ESSENTIAL". WELL if they are non-essential, WHY ARE THEY HIRED in the first place!
    C) Pass a law requiring a balanced budget.
    D) Pass another law saying if congress shuts down, NO CONGRESSMAN GETS PAID!

    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    -incentivize work vice hand outs, reduce the welfare state.
    Oh hell. You just triggered 90% of the left.. "Entitlement reform always seems to be off limits".. BUT ITS SOMETHING WE DAMN WELL NEED!

    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    -unscrew education; not everyone needs college but more and more lack the basic skills / knowledge to even pursue a trade. Fewer poses critical thinking skills but regurgitate what they hear from [fill in the blank].
    How's about focusing on TRADE SCHOOLS.. More so than useless college degrees! BUT then with 85% of the colleges, being lock step into the liberal agenda, of course those there, won't have any critical thinking skills.. HENCE why i say get rid of the Dept of indoctrination!

    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    -relearn the meaning of compromise, if we are going to force everyone to have the same idea ... that is totalitarianism which is not what I have spent the last 27 years defending.
    IMO the DEMS are the only ones who need to learn that. For far too long they feel a compromise is WE GIVE THEM everything, they give us nothing.

    [QUOTE=Mjölnir;371397]

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    126
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AF sgt View Post
    Outcomes of what, though? What ever changes? We get 4 years of bluster, 4 years of opposition, and then we move on to another 4 years of the same. It's hard to take it seriously. Hell, now the Dems are the ones bitching about a Republican administration pulling troops out of certain locations. I always thought it was the Republicans who were supposed to bitch about the Dems doing it. It's just all so ridiculous that I can't pretend anything will ever be different, other than the party that gets the blame.
    You're statement is so true. It's frustrating as hell listening to these politicians rail against things they clearly used to support, which now they don't support at all, but will support again if it furthers their own careers. What do these a-holes really, truly believe? I couldn't tell you.

    Out of pretty much every politician that opens their mouth, the only ones I've sensed any honesty from are the libertarians and socialists. I really do think they mean what they say, and will so tomorrow and the next day. One one hand it's refreshing, the other hand absolutely terrifying.

    When it comes down to it ("at the end of the day" for you 'fadsters'), I try to rate people on their true convictions to upholding our Constitution.
    Last edited by FLAPS; 01-22-2019 at 12:55 PM.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    126
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    [QUOTE=garhkal;371422]But what does "being more presidential" mean?? [QUOTE]

    I love when people act like DJT should 'act more presidential.' If an astronaut on the ISS decides to make goofy faces and fart during a live press interview, are we going to say, "he needs to act more like an astronaut!"? No, he's an astronaut....period. If Mick Jagger decides during a concert to sing "My Heart will go on" in a surprise duet with Celine Dion, are we going to say, "Mick needs to act more like a Rock Star!"? The answer is no, because he's a rock star....period.

    If the POTUS does anything, he's still the POTUS. There is no such thing as acting more like one or less than one. That said, this POTUS has communicated more directly to his voter base (via twitter) than any POTUS in US History. Is this MORE 'presidential' or less? Neither. He's the POTUS.

  4. #14
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,964
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    But what does "being more presidential" mean?? Kissing up to the press? Failing those who voted him in, by 'compromising' with the opposition??
    Not having juvenile hissy fits on Twitter would be a good start. Providing consistent direction that doesn't change on a whim (media reactions) maybe right after that (I just concluded a tour at the Pentagon, direction coming from the administration is far less than consistent and amount of money, time, resources etc. getting wasted because POTUS is not consistent would astound you.) And at some point, compromise will have to be done, he lost republican control of the House, Congress is split and that is the reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    Again, because of the dems stalling.
    How did the Democrats stall that? The administration did not ask for it in the FY17, FY18 or FY19 Presidential Budget Requests, which is step one of the Appropriations cycle and originates with the President’s Administration ... not Congress. DJT has made zero movement on that through inaction (no ask), not opposition by the Democrats who were the minority party in both chambers until a couple weeks ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    I would like to start with
    A) Getting rid of depts NOT called for in the constitution. Such as the EPA< Dept of education, NSA.
    That would be the entire Executive Branch vice POTUS and VPOTUS. The Constitution names none of the Federal Departments. Article 2 states that POTUS May seek advice from heads of Departments but does not state what they are. Secretaries are again mentioned (but not specifically by Department) in the 25th Amendment to facilitate the order of succession if POTUS dies, is disabled or removed ... the specific list (order) is in the Presidential Succession Act ... not the Constitution. If you only want those things specifically mentioned in the Constitution, you are looking at Congress (Art I), POTUS & VPOTUS (Art II), SCOTUS (Art III) and other courts that Congress established (Art III); the Army and Navy are in Art I, no USAF, no USMC. That would be it, no VA, no DoD, no Homeland Security, no DoA, no DoJ (FBI, US Border Patrol) etc. You may not like all of them, I would argue some are too big ... none are overall useless.

    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    B) all these federal workers "Furloed" because they are seen as "NON ESSENTIAL". WELL if they are non-essential, WHY ARE THEY HIRED in the first place!
    I would best compare it to being like if there was a blizzard and the base closes, mission essential is ‘in extremis’ operations not sustained functions / missions. Things like admin, disbursing, finance, non-emergency room medical, MWR, etc all close but the security, fire dept, watch center is still there.

    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    D) Pass another law saying if congress shuts down, NO CONGRESSMAN GETS PAID!
    Concur, but right now Congress is not closed / shutdown. The members and their staffs are working.

    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    Oh hell. You just triggered 90% of the left.. "Entitlement reform always seems to be off limits".. BUT ITS SOMETHING WE DAMN WELL NEED!
    I do believe there is a need for certain entitlements, I think it has grown beyond the need.

    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    How's about focusing on TRADE SCHOOLS.. More so than useless college degrees! BUT then with 85% of the colleges, being lock step into the liberal agenda, of course those there, won't have any critical thinking skills.. HENCE why i say get rid of the Dept of indoctrination!
    Basic education / critical thinking (IMO) does not equate to college prep. If am all for trade schools but be real: construction, carpentry, electronics require math ... maybe not calculus ... but algebra etc., even an infantryman conducting a call for indirect fires is doing trigonometry and calculus. And when I mention critical thinking I am talking about the ability to research, weigh varying ideas and make an informed decision ... that is far from liberal.

    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    IMO the DEMS are the only ones who need to learn that. For far too long they feel a compromise is WE GIVE THEM everything, they give us nothing.
    Agree, but you are also describing POTUS for the first 26 days of the current shutdown until he offered a three year extension of DACA protections, which was after he agreed to the funding packages passed by the Republican House and Senate in December, before he got thrashed by his base overnight and flip flopped in less than 24 hours. Again, this isn’t about his commitment to the border ... it is about 2020.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  5. #15
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,964
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    [QUOTE=FLAPS;371424][QUOTE=garhkal;371422]But what does "being more presidential" mean??

    I love when people act like DJT should 'act more presidential.' If an astronaut on the ISS decides to make goofy faces and fart during a live press interview, are we going to say, "he needs to act more like an astronaut!"? No, he's an astronaut....period. If Mick Jagger decides during a concert to sing "My Heart will go on" in a surprise duet with Celine Dion, are we going to say, "Mick needs to act more like a Rock Star!"? The answer is no, because he's a rock star....period.

    If the POTUS does anything, he's still the POTUS. There is no such thing as acting more like one or less than one. That said, this POTUS has communicated more directly to his voter base (via twitter) than any POTUS in US History. Is this MORE 'presidential' or less? Neither. He's the POTUS.
    More Presidential doesn't mean not communicating by Twitter. BHO used it pretty well, DJT uses it very effectively. Unfortunately, DJT has mpt risen to the dignity of the office, something he is a temporary occupant of ... something he actually directly addressed but (IMO) hasn't done. I am not saying compromise who you are ... but POTUS using social medial to call people "stupid", "dummy", "clown", "lightweight" or whining about being all alone etc. isn't what I expect of POTUS; especially when some of the people are of his own party and he needed them for legislation. GWB, BHO both did a pretty good job of keeping their personality and not demeaning the office; something I think DJT does with his behavior. Yes, he is POTUS and only accountable to himself and voters. But, when he was asked about it, he said he would rise to the office and has failed to do so, making excuses for him is no different than liberals that excused issues with BHO or WJC ... but because it is a different party is it ... 'different'?
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  6. #16
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,964
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AF sgt View Post
    See, you did exactly what I'm talking about. You realized that, no matter where our discussion went, that there wasn't going to be a conclusion, that we'd just keep going back and forth, so you just moved past it. That's what I've done with caring about politics. You and I are the same.
    I like to debate ... I don't like to argue.

    If we are the same, can I get you to make my mortgage payment?
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    188
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    I like to debate ... I don't like to argue.
    Couldn't agree more. Once government starts debating, instead of arguing, I might think about paying attention and caring about what they have to say.

    If we are the same, can I get you to make my mortgage payment?
    Other than our mortgage payments, we are the same!

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    188
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by FLAPS View Post

    Out of pretty much every politician that opens their mouth, the only ones I've sensed any honesty from are the libertarians and socialists. I really do think they mean what they say, and will so tomorrow and the next day. One one hand it's refreshing, the other hand absolutely terrifying.
    This is, as you state, the scary truth. Everyone else just cares about getting elected. Hell, if Bernie Sanders was even slightly interested in compromising his values (which I personally disagree with) he would have had a much better shot at the Dem nomination, but he's so true in his beliefs about socialism that it will never happen. Same thing goes for Rand Paul, for the most part.

  9. #19
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,882
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    To be fair, He said that he could be presidential. Not that he would....

    & Really can you blame him? Because, since the 1st minute of the inauguration, He's been under constant attack from every angle. and not just from the Dems either.

    rino Republicans like Paul Ryan & The Alzeheimers patient McCain (who called for a total repeal of Obamacare and Closing open borders, for the last damn decade) But, didn't do shit to fix it, when they had the chance, slow walked the agenda from the get-go.

    Then you've got the totally biased far-left, media assholes and their shills grandstanding, lying by commission and omission, and the "do no evil" big -tech global oligarchs, censuring all opposition and creating algorithms.... Promoting the "WHITE BAD.....Everyone else good" Narrative....

    All things considered....Have to give him a B- and Thank God, that someone in the GOP finally grew some balls.
    Last edited by Rainmaker; 01-22-2019 at 04:27 PM.

  10. #20
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,964
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    To be fair, He said that he could be presidential. Not that he would.

    & Really can you blame him? Because, since the 1st minute of the inauguration, He's been under constant attack from every angle. and not just from the Dems either.

    rino Republicans like Paul Ryan & The Alzeheimers patient McCain (who called for a total repeal of Obamacare and Closing open borders, for the last damn decade) But, didn't do shit to fix it, when they had the chance, slow walked the agenda from the get-go.

    Then you've got the totally biased far-left media assholes and their shills grandstanding, lying by commission and omission, and big tech censoring opposing view & developing algorthims to promote everything but, "WHITE BAD.....Everyone else good" Narrative....

    All things considered....I give him a B- and thank God, that someone in the GOP finally grew some balls.
    To be fair, he said:

    Trump put it another way during a Thursday morning appearance on NBC's Today Show. "I will be so presidential," he said, "you will be so bored. You'll say, 'Can't he have a little more energy?'"
    Can I blame him, yes. I have a high expectation for POTUS, I won't compromise those expectations just because I like some of what he is doing. I don't hate DJT, I don't love him either / didn't vote for him, neither for HRC. I have no issue citing where he has fallen short, and no issue giving him credit where he as earned it. I think blindly defending him invites furtherance of the 'cult of personality' that we had with BHO and his supporters unwilling to note, concede or acknowledge when he fell short ... the only difference is the party affiliation.

    As I said, his biggest #win is likely with the number of SCOTUS Justices and Federal Judges he has appointed. That will likely create a gradual shift in the interpretation of laws for 20-30 years. I know a lot of people who held their nose and voted for DJT hoping for SCOTUS appointments from him vice HRC. If he gets a third SCOTUS nomination, the Court will be Conservative for my foreseeable lifetime.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •