U.S Presidential Election | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

U.S Presidential Election

LeeToRainesToRoach said:
You'd prefer he just rolls over and allows the media destroy him, like Abbott. Which they'd do in a heartbeat.

Is there anything about Trump you admire?

The list is wearing thin, I didn't mind his mandate to bring jobs back to America, that was obviously a key reason as to why so many rust belt folks gave him the green light. I also didn't mind him brokering a more peaceful Korean Peninsula, I reckon he probably copped some unwarranted flack there. On the other hand he's prone to overstating his achievements, that was brought to the surface when he addressed the UN. Drain the swamp? Has he really followed through that promise? Tax cuts for the top 1% isn't really alleviating corruption. Also the fact scores of his advisors will wind up in prison isn't the draining method I had in mind.

But like I've said numerous times, if he comes out clean after the FBI investigations then his Teflon coat is something to be admired. My hunch is the all too frequent protests indicate a man hiding something but whether that is impeachable remains to be seen.

As for Abbott, I think his captain's calls were bordering on idiocy. He also struggled to get out of opposition mode, he needed to focus on policy rather than personal attacks. That street fighter spirit has now seen him as a key sabateur in his own parties demise, that's a sad indictment on a guy who had the opportunity to lead by example.
 
bullus_hit said:
The list is wearing thin, I didn't mind his mandate to bring jobs back to America, that was obviously a key reason as to why so many rust belt folks gave him the green light. I also didn't mind him brokering a more peaceful Korean Peninsula, I reckon he probably copped some unwarranted flack there. On the other hand he's prone to overstating his achievements, that was brought to the surface when he addressed the UN.

You could've stopped there.

Come on, he cut taxes for low-income earners by 25%. 'Drain the swamp' referred to lobbyists; he's passed some legislation in that area and there's more on the way. Above all he stands his ground amid howls of protest and overt media bias and spits back in his detractors' faces. He has balls.

He's made Twitter (largely) work for him; you might not like Donald Trump, but you know him. You know what he's thinking. You know he's in there batting for the majority of Americans.
 
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
You could've stopped there.

Come on, he cut taxes for low-income earners by 25%. 'Drain the swamp' referred to lobbyists; he's passed some legislation in that area and there's more on the way. Above all he stands his ground amid howls of protest and overt media bias and spits back in his detractors' faces. He has balls.

He's made Twitter (largely) work for him; you might not like Donald Trump, but you know him. You know what he's thinking. You know he's in there batting for the majority of Americans.

"Know what he's thinking"? He's not thinking. His shtick is direct from WWE. He's a "heel". He likes the publicity and the crowds. He acts like a meat head and the meat heads respond. There aren't "policies" that coalesce into a "narrative" here. There isn't an "agenda". Just a greedy rich kid attempting to monetise the presidency. That's it. No nuance. No great conservative gambit. No middle class revival.

Nice revisionist approach to "drain the swamp". He specifically mentioned Clinton's links to the banks and then employed those same fat cat bankers he was disparaging all through his campaign. That isn't genius, it's fraud.
 
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
You could've stopped there.

Come on, he cut taxes for low-income earners by 25%. 'Drain the swamp' referred to lobbyists; he's passed some legislation in that area and there's more on the way. Above all he stands his ground amid howls of protest and overt media bias and spits back in his detractors' faces. He has balls.

He's made Twitter (largely) work for him; you might not like Donald Trump, but you know him. You know what he's thinking. You know he's in there batting for the majority of Americans.

We'll definitely agree on that count, Trump has reinvented the news cycle, in fact he dictates the content with his various tweets, that is clearly a game changer. His base are rock solid in their devotion, nothing will change their views, not even criminality which is unprecedented for a POTUS. He also narrow casts his views depending on the audience, where there are contradictions he uses terms like 'fake news' or 'witch-hunt' or 'enemy of the state' to set the scene for the conspiracy nuts. We could call that genius or we could call it opportunism, however you look at it the approach has been successful. The big problem for Trump is the legal ramifications, particularly with the FBI breathing down his neck, one advisor even suggested he choose between Twitter or an orange jumpsuit, those are the stakes.

Don't think you are correct about the tax cuts benefiting the poor, Forbes did a thorough analysis & it favoured the filthy rich, that appears to be payback for campaign donations. The issue of lobbyists interfering in elections will never go away unless donations are banned altogether, can't ever see that happening. Trump is an NRA man through & through, he's effectively the new spokesperson for gun manufacturers. It's so easy for politicians to use phrases like 'our thoughts & prayers are with the victims' but that is a cheap way of dodging any responsibility. As insidious as it sounds, the gun lobby are totally fine with massacres because there is always a spike in sales immediately following the carnage, this in part because gun owners are scared new laws will come into place. I was never a John Howard supporter but his stance on guns was perhaps his crowning achievement, and you won't ever get a more conservative politician. The Americans still see this as a left versus right issue, background checks should be common sense but we are not dealing with rational thinkers.

You are probably correct that many Americans feel Trump has their back but I think this is more a byproduct of tribalism, the reality is public education is being gutted, healthcare is in constant damage control, the EPA is seen as little more than an impediment for big business, even nuclear proliferation is starting to make a comeback. All this doesn't equate to benefiting the majority. If it was such a lay down misere then we wouldn't be seeing gerrymandering & electoral purging, those in the Trump camp are already showing signs of desperation. By my reckoning the senate will be lost and that spells trouble for Republicans.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack/2017/09/29/trump-plan-delivers-massive-tax-cuts-to-the-1-and-sharp-kick-to-upper-middle-class/#18ada1d71099
 
Senate wont be lost Bullus because Dems are protecting the 2012 result. Might even go backwards. Likely that Dems take the senate in 2020.

In any rationale universe the house would be lost but margins of 49 - 42 might not be enough because of republican gerrymandering. Basically Dems need to outpoll Republicans by around 10% or more to have a solid chance at winning the house.

PS Dems hold 26 of the 35 senate seats for re-election.

In 2020 the republicans are protecting 21 senate seats.
 
lamb22 said:
Senate wont be lost Bullus because Dems are protecting the 2012 result. Might even go backwards. Likely that Dems take the senate in 2020.

In any rationale universe the house would be lost but margins of 49 - 42 might not be enough because of republican gerrymandering. Basically Dems need to outpoll Republicans by around 10% or more to have a solid chance at winning the house.

PS Dems hold 26 of the 35 senate seats for re-election.

In 2020 the republicans are protecting 21 senate seats.

Yeah I just checked that, projection is 52-48, House looks like going back to Dems.
 
lamb22 said:
Senate wont be lost Bullus because Dems are protecting the 2012 result. Might even go backwards. Likely that Dems take the senate in 2020.

In any rationale universe the house would be lost but margins of 49 - 42 might not be enough because of republican gerrymandering. Basically Dems need to outpoll Republicans by around 10% or more to have a solid chance at winning the house.

PS Dems hold 26 of the 35 senate seats for re-election.

In 2020 the republicans are protecting 21 senate seats.

Yeah, Senate looks hard.

What really gets me is the gerrymandering in the House, Democrats get way more votes and lose the House. I don't follow US politics closely enough but if I was the Dems I'd be targeting State Houses as that is the only way to remove the gerrymanders and have a fair battle for the House.

I also don't really expect an impeachment in any case. Trump may be many things but one thing he does not lack is rat cunning - you impeach Trump and you get a more competent, more likely to be able to do deals in Washington, still very right wing, replacement: Pence. Trump partly chose Pence because it makes you think twice about impeaching Trump, smart move.

DS
 
be interesting to see how Trump changes citizens rights for US born when that right is enshrined in the constitution.
 
Was the "blue wave" named after the Bolton era at Carlton? If the midterms were supposed to be a referendum on Trump, then by historic measures, the public mildly approves.
 
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
Was the "blue wave" named after the Bolton era at Carlton? If the midterms were supposed to be a referendum on Trump, then by historic measures, the public mildly approves.

Not the result the Dems were hoping for, they poured a lot of resources into Texas and failed. On the other hand Trump is back in the impeachment pit, tax records another issue. At least it won't be boring.
 
Looks like the actual number of votes cast for the Democrats will be around 7% higher than for the GOP, hardly mild approval. Then again, Trump won the Presidency with less votes than Clinton.

Aah, representative democracy, always reflecting the will of the people.

DS
 
bullus_hit said:
Not the result the Dems were hoping for, they poured a lot of resources into Texas and failed. On the other hand Trump is back in the impeachment pit, tax records another issue. At least it won't be boring.

Doesn't impeachment require a two thirds majority in the Senate? That's even less likely than it was yesterday.

I find it amusing that after losing the election to a man who couldn't win, Democrat supporters are pinning their hopes of toppling him on attacks from left field rather than beating him at the political game.

Even the Herald Sun appears hostile towards Trump now, but he is a force of nature.
 
DavidSSS said:
Looks like the actual number of votes cast for the Democrats will be around 7% higher than for the GOP, hardly mild approval. Then again, Trump won the Presidency with less votes than Clinton.

Aah, representative democracy, always reflecting the will of the people.

DS

Happy birthday David!

The Republicans re-took the House at Obama's first midterm with a swing of 64 seats, but it didn't mean a whole lot when the election came around.
 
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
Doesn't impeachment require a two thirds majority in the Senate? That's even less likely than it was yesterday.

I find it amusing that after losing the election to a man who couldn't win, Democrat supporters are pinning their hopes of toppling him on attacks from left field rather than beating him at the political game.

Even the Herald Sun appears hostile towards Trump now, but he is a force of nature.

It will be death by a thousand cuts, they will be launching investigations left, right & centre. I think the aim is to send his approval ratings into the low 30s & to incite mutiny.
 
There are so many issues with US Politics.

The one that really gets me is the blatant way that the Republicans actively try and stop blacks voting and gerrymander the electorates. What will hopefully help a bit at least is the Dems getting 7 governorships.

The Senate is no surprise, the Republicans winning Texas, well, if they had lost Texas there really would have been a lot for them to worry about.

As it stands the Dems winning the House will give them a chance to undermine Trump in the run up to 2020. Not that the Dems are much different to the GOP. Let's face it, Trump got in, at least in part, because people were sick of business as usual where the country has got richer but the poor and middle classes haven't.

Impeachment? Was never likely. I think it is a 2/3 majority needed. The Dems were always likely to lose Senate seats at this election, they won so many 6 years ago.

The next Presidential election is a while off. The Dems need to be sorting out a good candidate.

DS