|
At this point, I think we may consider Donald Trump's incompetence a positive characteristic and be very thankful for it.
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 18:58 |
|
|
Levitate posted:I think most of his decision making is based off "what did Obama do? gently caress that guy I'm doing the opposite" and I'm not really even joking that much Because that's what makes him feel good. He's a piece of poo poo racist bully.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:Comparing other presidents to Trump is hard because he's so incompetent that it blunts his ability to succeed at evil to a certain degree. Franklin Pierce was a worse human being.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:Comparing other presidents to Trump is hard because he's so incompetent that it blunts his ability to succeed at evil to a certain degree. If given enough time I'm 100% certain he is going to get us into a war and possibly a nuclear war. I know that sounds crazy and being hyperbolic and all that but if there was one person in charge of the nuclear arsenal that I would think "this guy has no clue what it really means to start a nuclear war and what the effect would be" it would be Trump and I can 100% see him losing his poo poo one day and ordering North Korea to be nuked. Does anyone honestly think that's not a possibility?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:As president, nothing he's done so far is as bad as what LBJ or Nixon did in Vietnam, or what W did in Iraq, or what Reagan did all over the domestic landscape. But that's because he's so loving dumb he can't even get his own party to go along with half of his poo poo. Nothing that's so immediately apparent, at least. His ravaging of environmental regulations, both directly and via his appointments, is pretty loving bad in the long run.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Vladimir Putin posted:All true but how else would you give drug coverage to the elderly? Invent a non-pharma based solution that didn't exist and still doesn't exist to this day about a decade post ACA? Go with the previously mentioned "much better Al Gore plan" from the other post. Medicare Part D didn't exist until after Gore came out with his plan and attacked Bush for using the surplus for tax cuts instead of seniors. Bush didn't want to give up the tax cut, so he came out with his own debt-financed prescription plan (with no cost controls) to blunt the criticism. Gore's Plan: quote:* Cost: An estimated $253 billion over 10 years. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Oct 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Vladimir Putin posted:All true but how else would you give drug coverage to the elderly? Invent a non-pharma based solution that didn't exist and still doesn't exist to this day about a decade post ACA? Maybe allow Medicare to negotiate bulk drug prices with the companies? Or allow drug reimportation?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
They had to pass that stinker in the middle of the night too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
BRISTOL PALINS BABY posted:When Trump leaves office, I'm gonna do one of those movie things where I run into a bar and scream NEXT ROUND'S ON ME, EVERYBODY! I will celebrate his death every year until I follow him into the abyss. I've got a basket of fireworks hidden in the basement for just that occasion.   :
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Enkmar posted:I honestly couldn't think of an easier bill to defeat than a lovely tax bill like this Killing the Mortgage Deduction makes it a dead man walking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:Killing the Mortgage Deduction makes it a dead man walking. It makes no changes to the mortgage interest deduction.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:Nothing that's so immediately apparent, at least. His ravaging of environmental regulations, both directly and via his appointments, is pretty loving bad in the long run. True, plus he might cause enough mass death in Puerto Rico from sheer spite to "catch up" on accomplishing evil. Also he might use nukes or something insane, but that's a given. Shimrra Jamaane posted:Franklin Pierce was a worse human being. Was he worse than Buchanan? Honestly don't remember.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:Killing the Mortgage Deduction makes it a dead man walking. Capping the SALT deduction is also projected to only provide 1/4th of the revenue making the tax cut aspect even more unfunded. https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/918546212286029824 This bill looks a lot harder to pass than I would have expected a Republican tax cut to look.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Wrong thread
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:As a human being he's absolutely the loving worst, worse than anybody you can name by miles. The combination of undiluted, unrepentant evil and just dumb as gently caress has no precedent.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:Comparing other presidents to Trump is hard because he's so incompetent that it blunts his ability to succeed at evil to a certain degree. The damage he's done to the public's faith in the electoral process and our fellow man is probably permanent. At least it is for me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
farraday posted:Capping the SALT deduction is also projected to only provide 1/4th of the revenue making the tax cut aspect even more unfunded. I've got a spoiler alert for how this is going to end: They are not going to give a poo poo about the deficit and just pass the cuts with a 10-year sunset; exactly like Bush did.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:The damage he's done to the public's faith in the electoral process and our fellow man is probably permanent. At least it is for me. Yeah there's something to be said when a person like him is so transparently and openly lovely, yet people still flock to defend and support him and how that really is loving with me. At least with Bush people could pretend he was a good guy because he could act like one publicly (while using the government to do horrible things) but Trump doesn't even put that effort in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I've got a spoiler alert for how this is going to end: Yeah, conservatives don't care about any of the things they say they care about except insofar as it can be used to attack their opponents.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I've got a spoiler alert for how this is going to end: that's what they're going to wind up trying to do but they were going to do that anyway. losing these pay-fors still makes it harder. the issue is there's a limited amount of deficit even these nutters will accept. corker promised not to vote for anything that increases the deficit, mccain may not either (and this is credible: he voted against the bush tax cuts) so that gives you a margin of zero. there's probably at least one other senator who objects to a 4.5t hole in the budget. so, you have to reduce the tax cuts to meet that one marginal senator's demands. perhaps it is only 3t. whoops, you just lost rand paul. that's three, bill fails.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:True, plus he might cause enough mass death in Puerto Rico from sheer spite to "catch up" on accomplishing evil. Buchanan was our most incompetent President but Pierce was actively evil. He personally supported and sponsored attempts to conquer the Caribbean and Central America to establish a perpetual slave empire.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:The damage he's done to the public's faith in the electoral process and our fellow man is probably permanent. At least it is for me. Faith in those things was always a mistake, though. They system was always dumb, and our fellow man was always, on average, a loving rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Shocked, SHOCKED https://twitter.com/sarahkendzior/status/918545579231367168
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
So what's the realistic outcome for the Senate makeup after the midterms? Status quo?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Levitate posted:I think most of his decision making is based off "what did Obama do? gently caress that guy I'm doing the opposite" and I'm not really even joking that much You know you could make a strong case that the correspondance dinner where Obama roasted Trump back in 2011 may have turned out to be the most catastrophic decision of Obama's two terms.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
farraday posted:Capping the SALT deduction is also projected to only provide 1/4th of the revenue making the tax cut aspect even more unfunded. They're trying to hide the massive wealthy tax break they're giving It's not easy to do that anymore
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Javes posted:So what's the realistic outcome for the Senate makeup after the midterms? Status quo? Depends if McCain is dead and that seat is up for grabs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Javes posted:So what's the realistic outcome for the Senate makeup after the midterms? Status quo? At this point, the range of reasonable possibilities is between 50 and 53 gop seats, so between loss of 2 and gain of 1
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:that's what they're going to wind up trying to do but they were going to do that anyway. losing these pay-fors still makes it harder. Paul already is on record that they don't need to be paid for. He said his major concern with the bill is that they are actually trying to pay for part of it with "middle class tax hikes." McCain voted for the Bush tax cuts to be reauthorized in 2006 and has voted for deficit increasing tax cuts before. He was against the Bush tax cuts because he lost the primary to Bush and because he was worried about their impact on military spending. The sequester means that is not going to be a major concern this time around. They are going to just jettison the hard choices and get the bill through with a sunset. The idea that their cuts need to be offset is entirely self-imposed to protect from "hypocrisy" charges.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
Javes posted:So what's the realistic outcome for the Senate makeup after the midterms? Status quo? For the Senate to be flipped one of the safe red states would have to flip. This would require a wave unprecedented in American history, basically, or a black swan event like someone dying in office.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Paul already is on record that they don't need to be paid for. you don't lose paul because they're not paid for, you lose paul because they're not as big as originally promised
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Depends if McCain is dead and that seat is up for grabs. Yep, and probably also depends heavily on what Mueller comes out with. I expect his results will be made public by spring.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:You know you could make a strong case that the correspondance dinner where Obama roasted Trump back in 2011 may have turned out to be the most catastrophic decision of Obama's two terms. Assuming we all dont die, it may turn out fine. If we can assume hillary was destined to lose, then the gop got the most monkey paw president imaginable. Trump is utterly destroying their party.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Javes posted:So what's the realistic outcome for the Senate makeup after the midterms? Status quo? It's going to be somewhere between 51 R and 58 R. Probably a couple seat R gain, which would be 54-55 R.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:You know you could make a strong case that the correspondance dinner where Obama roasted Trump back in 2011 may have turned out to be the most catastrophic decision of Obama's two terms. Correspondents, not correspondance. Also you're probably right.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Javes posted:So what's the realistic outcome for the Senate makeup after the midterms? Status quo?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Assuming we all dont die, it may turn out fine. If we can assume hillary was destined to lose, then the gop got the most monkey paw president imaginable. Trump is utterly destroying their party. Also, every American institution, education, society, the world, etc
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Assuming we all dont die, it may turn out fine. If we can assume hillary was destined to lose, then the top got the most monkey paw president imaginable. Trump is utterly destroying their party. I've said it before and I'll say it again. A Cruz or Rubio Presidency would be a worse timeline. You'd still have a terrible SCOTUS judge stealing a seat, you'd have someone equally as terrible as Devos, Pruitt and the FCC dude running those departments. Hell I bet you would still have Devos since she was going to buy the job no matter who the Republican in office was. And the President would be much more popular among the general populace because they'd be looking 'respectable' and not an embarrassing fuckup. The only thing that would be different in a positive way would be that our state department wouldn't be so gutted. But that state department would probably be directed for war against Iran or something so eh
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Javes posted:So what's the realistic outcome for the Senate makeup after the midterms? Status quo? the best case scenario for Democrats should be status quo. there are a bunch of democratic seats up for election that have no business being democratic, six or so, in states like North Dakota, West Virginia, and Indiana. republicans have one vulnerable seat (nevada) and one red seat with a weak candidate (arizona). so in a normal universe democrats only losing two of their six while stealing arizona and winning nevada is amazingly good. the reasonable situation is losing 2-4 of those seats and picking up nevada, for a net loss of 1-3, given how terrible the map is. it is possible the republican party will be so damaged that democrats hold all six (i really doubt it), and win those two. this is a very unlikely situation (more not losing any D seats), but would get you a 50-50 senate which would be nearly ungovernable however if they continue to poo poo the bed and run terrible, terrible candidates in primaries it is theoretically possible that the Democrats could take the Senate. the one side thing that i did not mention is that Collins is a bit of a wildcard - I do not know if she would resign ahead of time making a special election in 2018, would resign only if she wins (and who would appoint her successor in that case, her or LePage). former means possible pickup but is unlikely. latter probably means there's a more doctrinare republican nominee (especially if lepage gets to nominate the person) instead of the most moderate R senator, making mcconnell's life a tiny bit easier
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 18:58 |
|
|
Rigel posted:Assuming we all dont die, it may turn out fine. If we can assume hillary was destined to lose, then the gop got the most monkey paw president imaginable. Trump is utterly destroying their party. Hillary had to be destined to lose since the opposition chose literally the worst human being alive, an actual breathing avatar of Mammon. If Satan himself had gotten on the ballot in the Republican slot, he'd have run a close race with her.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2017 20:01
|
|