The Trump Presidency – 2016

[RainMaker]

I'm fine with building a wall but that's because I was told Mexico would be paying for it. Have we got anymore details on that aspect?

[Groundhog]

What a futile waste of money.

[cuervo72]

http://time.com/money/4639544/trump-...et-budget-cut/

I mean, these will pay for part of the wall.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

http://time.com/money/4639544/trump-...et-budget-cut/

I mean, these will pay for part of the wall.

He said Mexico was paying for it.

[cuervo72]

Sure, but are they going to pay for the moat, too??

[BishopMVP]

The Mexicans in this article do make a compelling point - their government is still even more corrupt and incompetent than ours. And as the author points out there's enough indirect ways to do so (taxing remittances, increasing border tolls, attaching it as an increase in foreign debt) that Trump will at least be able to convince his supporters that Mexico is paying for it, even if a deep dive into the numbers show they don't add up. Economics are not the hoi polloi's strong suit.

[bbgunn]

Can I just say that this is one of the reasons why I love FOFC. This thread is way better than the shit I see in the comment sections of so-called news sites whose main objective is to divide and conquer - and by so-called news sites I mean all of them. They're all slanted one way or the other. Can anyone please show me a decent, neutral news organization that doesn't inject bias into their stories?

Anyway, I digress. My point is that it is refreshing to see intelligent discussion and debate by people passionate about their convictions, without name-calling, mama-insulting, racial insult-spewing, war-sowing language. Love you guys. Carry on.

[Ben E Lou]

So I'm not buying this talk for one minute that Trump is cleverly creating distractions and has diabolical hidden agendas when he sends out dumb tweets like this morning's "I'm gonna have a federal investigation into the millions of people who voted illegally in an election that I won" stuff.

No.

Just no.

He is not that smart; he is not that clever; he is not that strategic. He is, however, DEEPLY insecure, and it eats at his very core that people are saying publicly that his crowd wasn't the biggest and that someone won more votes than he did. He isn't saying and doing this stuff because he's some mastermind. It's because his massive-but-extremely-fragile ego is getting hammered, and he can't take it.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

So I'm not buying this talk for one minute that Trump is cleverly creating distractions and has diabolical hidden agendas when he sends out dumb tweets like this morning's "I'm gonna have a federal investigation into the millions of people who voted illegally in an election that I won" stuff.

No.

Just no.

He is not that smart; he is not that clever; he is not that strategic. He is, however, DEEPLY insecure, and it eats at his very core that people are saying publicly that his crowd wasn't the biggest and that someone won more votes than he did. He isn't saying and doing this stuff because he's some mastermind. It's because his massive-but-extremely-fragile ego is getting hammered, and he can't take it.

BUT the GOP leaders have the sense to use that to their advantage, and they ARE strategic. He serves them beautifully in two ways. First, he's a big distraction. The media can't help but focus on him instead of policy matters, which lets the GOP slip through unpopular parts of its agenda while everyone is looking at Trump acting like an ass. Second, he does not care about policy, and they have craftily surrounded him with advisers who will make sure that he signs the right bills, issues the right orders, and appoints the right judges.

The GOP is an order of magnitude better at politics than every democrat not named Obama. Being a Democrat right now is like cheering for a team coached by Rich Kotite going against Bill Belichick.

Sigh.

[albionmoonlight]

dola:

If I were the Democrats, I would at least try to judo Trump's insecurity against the GOP. It might not work, but it seems worth trying. I'd make ads playing clips of Trump saying populist things and getting cheered on by the crowds. Then I'd portray some pending GOP bill as the opposite of that and the cheering stops. Then I'd craft some message along the lines of "We didn't elect him to be Paul Ryan's bitch. So why's he acting like it?"

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

BUT the GOP leaders have the sense to use that to their advantage, and they ARE strategic. He serves them beautifully in two ways. First, he's a big distraction. The media can't help but focus on him instead of policy matters, which lets the GOP slip through unpopular parts of its agenda while everyone is looking at Trump acting like an ass. Second, he does not care about policy, and they have craftily surrounded him with advisers who will make sure that he signs the right bills, issues the right orders, and appoints the right judges.

The GOP is an order of magnitude better at politics than every democrat not named Obama. Being a Democrat right now is like cheering for a team coached by Rich Kotite going against Bill Belichick.

Sigh.

I don't disagree with any of that. I guess basically I'm saying, that's it's an effect, not a cause, of his crazy tweeting. So many people are suggesting (if not flat-out saying) that we are witnessing "Trump The Evil Genius" in action; I think we're witnessing "Trump The Incredibly Fragile."

[JPhillips]

I expect that's coming when the cuts to Medicare and Social Security are debated.

[Easy Mac]

So, is there any reason to believe that any "independent" body or whatever that Trump gets to do an election audit won't turn up "evidence?" This just seems like the next totalitarian step on his list. He's already lied about God knows what, its well within reason to assume they'll create "evidence" to show fraud to drastically purge rolls/change voting rules.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

So I'm not buying this talk for one minute that Trump is cleverly creating distractions and has diabolical hidden agendas when he sends out dumb tweets like this morning's "I'm gonna have a federal investigation into the millions of people who voted illegally in an election that I won" stuff.

No.

Just no.

He is not that smart; he is not that clever; he is not that strategic. He is, however, DEEPLY insecure, and it eats at his very core that people are saying publicly that his crowd wasn't the biggest and that someone won more votes than he did. He isn't saying and doing this stuff because he's some mastermind. It's because his massive-but-extremely-fragile ego is getting hammered, and he can't take it.

I didnt realize you were Trumps counselor. Because that would really be the only way you know if he is DEEPLY insecure.
Because, I doubt a man who has done what he has is DEEPLY insecure.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I didnt realize you were Trumps counselor. Because that would really be the only way you know if he is DEEPLY insecure.
Because, I doubt a man who has done what he has is DEEPLY insecure.

[Calis]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

So I'm not buying this talk for one minute that Trump is cleverly creating distractions and has diabolical hidden agendas when he sends out dumb tweets like this morning's "I'm gonna have a federal investigation into the millions of people who voted illegally in an election that I won" stuff.

No.

Just no.

He is not that smart; he is not that clever; he is not that strategic. He is, however, DEEPLY insecure, and it eats at his very core that people are saying publicly that his crowd wasn't the biggest and that someone won more votes than he did. He isn't saying and doing this stuff because he's some mastermind. It's because his massive-but-extremely-fragile ego is getting hammered, and he can't take it.

I originally thought it was master levels of strategery by Trump as well with his deflecting, but I'm coming around to your way of thinking. I think these pointless things actually bug the shit out of him.

It is amazing to watch these things play out now because anything stupid he does is him messing with the media. He's not accountable for anything. I know this is always the case with politicians and their supporters but seems like we've ratcheted it up to 11 now.

We live in odd times.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

So I'm not buying this talk for one minute that Trump is cleverly creating distractions and has diabolical hidden agendas when he sends out dumb tweets like this morning's "I'm gonna have a federal investigation into the millions of people who voted illegally in an election that I won" stuff.

No.

Just no.

He is not that smart; he is not that clever; he is not that strategic. He is, however, DEEPLY insecure, and it eats at his very core that people are saying publicly that his crowd wasn't the biggest and that someone won more votes than he did. He isn't saying and doing this stuff because he's some mastermind. It's because his massive-but-extremely-fragile ego is getting hammered, and he can't take it.

Yeah, I needed to be brought back around to this POV. The "create a distraction" effect is a by-product, but the design. I agree.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I didnt realize you were Trumps counselor. Because that would really be the only way you know if he is DEEPLY insecure.
Because, I doubt a man who has done what he has is DEEPLY insecure.

I don't think it takes a trained psychiatrist to know he's got massive insecurity issues.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I expect that's coming when the cuts to Medicare and Social Security are debated.

I still really doubt we'll see cuts to either. I know it's Ryan's big thing but there are not enough Republican members that will go along with it. And Trump still runs on a populist message and cutting Medicare or Social Security just doesn't fit that message.

[tarcone]

Again, just looking at the women he married. Yeah he has a ton of money. but usually, hot chicks are not attracted to insecurity. No matter the size of the bank account.

his ego may be fragile (which I doubt), but I dont think he is insecure.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I still really doubt we'll see cuts to either. I know it's Ryan's big thing but there are not enough Republican members that will go along with it. And Trump still runs on a populist message and cutting Medicare or Social Security just doesn't fit that message.

I hope so, but his OMB pick yesterday was talking about how they will need to do cuts to Medicare and Social Security. I think entitlement cuts are very high on Pence's list and he seems to be running a lot of policy.

[tarcone]

Its funny (not really) that politicians want to cut SS and medicare. Considering taxpayers pay into those two accounts specifically. They are not just regular tax dollars.

It is a sign of corruption when the government steals from the population.

This should have been dealt with years ago.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

So, is there any reason to believe that any "independent" body or whatever that Trump gets to do an election audit won't turn up "evidence?" This just seems like the next totalitarian step on his list. He's already lied about God knows what, its well within reason to assume they'll create "evidence" to show fraud to drastically purge rolls/change voting rules.

Kris Kobach will probably run the investigation and he's been at the front of the voting restrictions movement. His meeting notes with Trump seemed to show a push for nationwide restrictions, so I'm sure this will be the "evidence" for some national restrictions and/or VRA rollback.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Its funn(not really) that politicians want to cut SS and medicare. Considering taxpayers pay into those two accounts specifically. They are not just regular tax dollars.

It is a sign of corruption when the government steals from the population.

This should have been dealt with years ago.

Sort of. That's been true of Social Security, but Medicare isn't fully funded by FICA taxes.

[RainMaker]

It also depends on what you consider a "cut". For instance, I think Trump has said he'd like to change it so that Medicare can negotiate with drug companies. This was something that they currently cannot do which is insane in my opinion.

So if that is changed and the government saves massive amounts of money (like the VA does) by negotiating for the best price, isn't that a cut? You're technically spending less on Medicare than you did before.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Sort of. That's been true of Social Security, but Medicare isn't fully funded by FICA taxes.

Dont get me started on insurance and the health care industry.

As much as I pay into medicare, as do all taxpayers, you would think it would be fully funded.

But my point stands. These are the only safety nets that I am 100% behind. And cutting these puts millions at risk, and will end up costing us more in the long run.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

It also depends on what you consider a "cut". For instance, I think Trump has said he'd like to change it so that Medicare can negotiate with drug companies. This was something that they currently cannot do which is insane in my opinion.

So if that is changed and the government saves massive amounts of money (like the VA does) by negotiating for the best price, isn't that a cut? You're technically spending less on Medicare than you did before.

Im ok if this is the type of "cut" they are talking about. This makes sense.

I hope he throw in a rider about capping the amount medications cost the consumer. But i digress.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Im ok if this is the type of "cut" they are talking about. This makes sense.

I hope he throw in a rider about capping the amount medications cost the consumer. But i digress.

Being able to buy overseas would help a lot too. For some reason this country gets played like suckers on drug prices. Everyone else negotiates for a great price and we are the one's paying whatever they tell us since we can't legally purchase elsewhere.

[JPhillips]

If you look at the Ryan budget and the Heritage budget plan, which the WH has said will be the model for their budget, the cuts are likely to be much deeper than negotiating drug prices. Both put Medicare into a premium support program rather than an entitlement, and both limit growth to overall inflation rather than medical inflation.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

For some reason

I wonder...

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I didnt realize you were Trumps counselor. Because that would really be the only way you know if he is DEEPLY insecure.
Because, I doubt a man who has done what he has is DEEPLY insecure.

Insecurity doesn't go away because you've been arguably successful - in fact insecurity can lead to someone BEING successful because they might strive harder to fight that off.

In my experience insecurity comes from your upbringing, the situation you were in and the way you were treated - from what I've heard of Mr Trumps father I can understand why he's somewhat insecure.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

So I'm not buying this talk for one minute that Trump is cleverly creating distractions and has diabolical hidden agendas when he sends out dumb tweets like this morning's "I'm gonna have a federal investigation into the millions of people who voted illegally in an election that I won" stuff.

No.

Just no.

He is not that smart; he is not that clever; he is not that strategic. He is, however, DEEPLY insecure, and it eats at his very core that people are saying publicly that his crowd wasn't the biggest and that someone won more votes than he did. He isn't saying and doing this stuff because he's some mastermind. It's because his massive-but-extremely-fragile ego is getting hammered, and he can't take it.

B I N G O

The guy is massively insecure. He can't handle insults, he can't handle being wrong and he can't handle losing on any level. Everything else is going to be a byproduct.

The frightening thing is what happens as his ego continues to get hammered. I think the democrats best strategy is to attack the policies and not Trump. We saw what happened with Hillary in the general when she kept trying to "GOTCHA" Trump. Same thing happened in the republican primary.

Don't drop yourself to what he is. Focus on the issues, give him rope and watch him to the noose and stick his neck in it.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Again, just looking at the women he married. Yeah he has a ton of money. but usually, hot chicks are not attracted to insecurity. No matter the size of the bank account.

his ego may be fragile (which I doubt), but I dont think he is insecure.

While I don't for one minute think I have you vast experience with hot chicks ...

You're presuming his insecurity is a disadvantage in seducing ladies, I'd say it only is if its easily visible - his comes out as aggression which can be seen as confidence in many cases and extravagant gestures ... both of which I'd expect some women find attractive.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

If you look at the Ryan budget and the Heritage budget plan, which the WH has said will be the model for their budget, the cuts are likely to be much deeper than negotiating drug prices. Both put Medicare into a premium support program rather than an entitlement, and both limit growth to overall inflation rather than medical inflation.

One of the sneaky things in that budget plan I noticed was that SS cuts wouldn't start right away. Obviously they realize they can't cut current benefits because they'd lose those voters. So the cuts start down the road. Basically if you are planning to be on SS in 20 years, you'd be the one getting fucked.

The Medicare thing looks like a mess. How do you tell people who spent 40 years paying into it that they're no longer entitled to that benefit? It's like putting into a savings account and having them tell you that your interest rate is slashed retroactively.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I think the democrats best strategy is to attack the policies and not Trump.

This is true. They attacked the hell out of Trump in the general election, and he won. Personal attacks are not enough.

Also, let's say they spend all of their time attacking Trump and somehow succeed. They have done nothing at that point to educate/persuade the public about their policies.

If you attack, say, turning Medicare into block grants, and you win that argument, then you've helped build support for the policy you want.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

One of the sneaky things in that budget plan I noticed was that SS cuts wouldn't start right away. Obviously they realize they can't cut current benefits because they'd lose those voters. So the cuts start down the road. Basically if you are planning to be on SS in 20 years, you'd be the one getting fucked.

The Medicare thing looks like a mess. How do you tell people who spent 40 years paying into it that they're no longer entitled to that benefit? It's like putting into a savings account and having them tell you that your interest rate is slashed retroactively.

This is happening already at the state level. My mother lives in Ohio and was promised healthcare for life as the spouse of a state employee. She stayed home, raised a family, and had basically no income or savings or retirement plan to draw from in her old age. She did what women of her era were expected to do.

And now the state has pulled her healthcare and given her premium support of something like 250 a month. 250 for a woman in her eighties. At the end of the day spending less is more important than honoring promises.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

So, is there any reason to believe that any "independent" body or whatever that Trump gets to do an election audit won't turn up "evidence?" This just seems like the next totalitarian step on his list. He's already lied about God knows what, its well within reason to assume they'll create "evidence" to show fraud to drastically purge rolls/change voting rules.

Some are already helping Trump get to the bottom of this:

Steve Bannon Is Registered to Vote in Two States

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Logan

Some are already helping Trump get to the bottom of this:

Steve Bannon Is Registered to Vote in Two States

Heh. I'm not a Bannon fan by any means, but in fairness to him, I blame the lack of communication between government agencies for this. I moved from SC in August 2014. Upon moving, I filed a change of address, registered to vote in NC within a week or so, got a NC license, etc. etc. etc. I did everything that someone should have to do when moving. However, when I had a chuckle-worthy voting experience in NC this past fall that didn't involve me needing to show anything with my address on it, out of curiosity I checked online. Sure enough, well over two years after having moved, I was still registered to vote in South Carolina. Assuming SC works like NC does now, anyone could have walked in to my polling place there and claimed to be me, recited the address, and voted.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

This is true. They attacked the hell out of Trump in the general election, and he won. Personal attacks are not enough.

Also, let's say they spend all of their time attacking Trump and somehow succeed. They have done nothing at that point to educate/persuade the public about their policies.

If you attack, say, turning Medicare into block grants, and you win that argument, then you've helped build support for the policy you want.

Exactly. This is just like sports at this point. It's MY side vs YOUR side. So you attack Trump, you are attacking ME. It is highly ineffective if your goal is to change minds. Lets not kid ourselves here, minds have to be changed or there will be more Trumps. As much as the democrats want to think this is some fluke, it isn't like they won this election by 20 percentage points and lost because of a fluke. We are talking about a few million votes when 130 million or so went to the polls. This can and will happen again if they continue to campaign the way they have.

Attack this issues. Over and over and over again. Debate the issues with Trump supporters. Don't attack Trump. It's hard not to, but don't do it. In fact, I would treat Trump like an angry customer on a customer service call. Be exceedingly nice. Don't fall into his trap. Don't play the game on his level because you are going to have a tough time winning there. That's the level he LOVES to play at.

Another thing. . . if he does sign a bill that's good, don't rail on it. Be happy he did it. Let him take the credit. When you can point out good things someone does, it becomes a hell of a lot easier to convince a Trump supporter or even Trump that your disapproval of another plan is based on the opinion of the policy, not the opinion of the man.

The more people turn this personal, the more likely it is we get Trump again in 4 years.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Sure enough, well over two years after having moved, I was still registered to vote in South Carolina. Assuming SC works like NC does now, anyone could have walked in to my polling place there and claimed to be me, recited the address, and voted.

What would have been the answer in this case, would you have to UNregister yourself in SC somehow?

edit to add: Obviously the state should be better at handling this, I'm asking what would have had to happen, not looking at what should happen.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

What would have been the answer in this case, would you have to UNregister yourself in SC somehow?

edit to add: Obviously the state should be better at handling this, I'm asking what would have had to happen, not looking at what should happen.

That's my assumption, but if the government is assuming that people will be motivated to go through the extra effort to do that when it's not illegal to be registered in two states, they're crazier than even *I* thought they were. Case in point, when I found out about this, I used Google to see if I was in violation of the law. When I found out that I wasn't, of course I didn't bother finding out how to do it, (and obviously haven't in the 2 1/2 months since, given that my answer to your question starts with "that's my assumption". )

[Easy Mac]

I'm sure I'd be considered a bit conservative on this issue, but why not tie voter registration to registering with the Selective Service? Heck tie in passports as well.

Just open it for everyone, have a little box to check if you want to be exempt for whatever reason from the draft (religious...). If you want exemptions, it requires some sort of interview. But, if you move, you have to update the registry. You can then request a new passport/ID, and that can be used for your voter ID.

I'm sure people will say, but then the government is tracking you... they already do that with state voter registrations, its no different, but centralized so that each state can reference another.

There's no reason a service like this can't be free. I can't imagine it would take up any sizeable portion of a federal budget that makes implementing this not feasible.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

I'm sure I'd be considered a bit conservative on this issue, but why not tie voter registration to registering with the Selective Service? Heck tie in passports as well.

I'd say that most people who registered for the draft never bother to update their residency info, despite that being legally required (which I didn't even know until I Googled it). Plus, that's only true until you're 26.

And only 1/3rd of U.S. residents are believed to have a valid passport.

I ain't kicking dirt on the concept out of hand, just saying that those two thing really don't cover it. Hell, I'm not sure if anything covers it unless maybe you tie it to the social security database.

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'd say that most people who registered for the draft never bother to update their residency info, despite that being legally required (which I didn't even know until I Googled it). Plus, that's only true until you're 26.

And only 1/3rd of U.S. residents are believed to have a valid passport.

I ain't kicking dirt on the concept out of hand, just saying that those two thing really don't cover it. Hell, I'm not sure if anything covers it unless maybe you tie it to the social security database.

That's what I'm saying, surely rolling all of this into one service would greatly reduce government redundancy, and may actually save the government money. Think of how this could help track down tax cheats, welfare cheats, any number of people who are trying to game the system.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Exactly. This is just like sports at this point. It's MY side vs YOUR side. So you attack Trump, you are attacking ME. It is highly ineffective if your goal is to change minds. Lets not kid ourselves here, minds have to be changed or there will be more Trumps. As much as the democrats want to think this is some fluke, it isn't like they won this election by 20 percentage points and lost because of a fluke. We are talking about a few million votes when 130 million or so went to the polls. This can and will happen again if they continue to campaign the way they have.

Attack this issues. Over and over and over again. Debate the issues with Trump supporters. Don't attack Trump. It's hard not to, but don't do it. In fact, I would treat Trump like an angry customer on a customer service call. Be exceedingly nice. Don't fall into his trap. Don't play the game on his level because you are going to have a tough time winning there. That's the level he LOVES to play at.

Another thing. . . if he does sign a bill that's good, don't rail on it. Be happy he did it. Let him take the credit. When you can point out good things someone does, it becomes a hell of a lot easier to convince a Trump supporter or even Trump that your disapproval of another plan is based on the opinion of the policy, not the opinion of the man.

The more people turn this personal, the more likely it is we get Trump again in 4 years.

How do you square this with data that shows popularity of the president effects members of the same party all the way down to state level races? I'll admit this past election didn't follow that, but the data on the general effect is clear. That's why the GOP obstruct everything and delegitimize the president was so effective all the way down to the state rep level.

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by tarcone

hot chicks are not attracted to insecurity.

I'm horrible remembering the beliefs/persona of the posters here (it took me years to remember which Missouri poster was which).

Anyway, i have found that if I can attach a quote to each major poster I remember them much better.

This, my friend, will be your quote

[Easy Mac]

So Trump is using his old, unsecure phone still... probably doesn't matter. It's not like he doesn't run and tell his boss everything anyway.

[tarcone]

Wouldnt the whole voter fraud issue be solved by making everyone show a picture ID when they vote?

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Wouldnt the whole voter fraud issue be solved by making everyone show a picture ID when they vote?

If everyone got a free ID card, sure.

Also, isn't it odd how he said there would be fraud of illegals voting; then once the results were challenged, said there was no fraud; then once people kept harping on how he got blown out in the vote, said there was fraud.

[tarcone]

Why would it have to be free?
An ID is pretty inexpensive.