Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Dontrike]

You mean providing OPINIONS that they got from Twitter, CNN and MSNBC, because they knew very little about Trump before he became president, so social media pretty much brainwashed them with anti-Trump propaganda and outright lies.

Sorry, I'm not playing the game of trying to convince a person who takes the exagerations, projections and lies from the Leftist MSM as absolute truth, for the same reason I'm not trying to convince a religious person that there is no such thing as a deity.

I'd love to hear about these "exaggerations" and lies about Trump. I'm being serious, what exactly do you mean by this?

[Xyonai]

Trump's Trips to the 'Southern White House' continue to sink tax payer money into his own pockets. Today's bill: A $3.4M Superbowl party.

Queue the clarion calls of 'Party of Fiscal Responsibility!' and 'Drain the Swamp!' and watch the people who screamed themselves hoarse about corruption remain silent. Because the GOP is nothing if not entirely consistent on being sniveling hypocrites.

[Elegiac]

You mean providing OPINIONS that they got from Twitter, CNN and MSNBC

1) Considering Herr Drumpf spends most of his time on Twitter, what exactly is the issue with getting the words from the ass' mouth?
2) I'd be willing to wager not even half the links in this thread are from CNN and MSNBC put together. Especially when you consider you have quite a few international critics who have absolutely no stake in America's ridiculous "fake news" game.

because they knew very little about Trump before he became president, so social media pretty much brainwashed them with anti-Trump propaganda and outright lies.

That's cute, hun, but people have known he was a shitbag since before he started the Apprentice.

This is why the Simpsons literally mocked the idea of President Trump long before 2016 - because the idea of such a person becoming President seemed ludicrous at the time.

Sorry, I'm not playing the game of trying to convince a person who takes the exagerations, projections and lies from the Leftist MSM as absolute truth, for the same reason I'm not trying to convince a religious person that there is no such thing as a deity.

"Leftist MSM?" No such animal in this right aligned country.

Also, y'all are cute with assuming everyone who disagrees with you gets the news from CNN, but where I'm from we're taught to take corporate news media with a grain of salt. Not sure why you think that's even a valid insult, lol.

[Orbitus]

You mean providing OPINIONS that they got from Twitter, CNN and MSNBC, because they knew very little about Trump before he became president, so social media pretty much brainwashed them with anti-Trump propaganda and outright lies.

Sorry, I'm not playing the game of trying to convince a person who takes the exagerations, projections and lies from the Leftist MSM as absolute truth, for the same reason I'm not trying to convince a religious person that there is no such thing as a deity.

I know a lot about Trump's past before he became President. That is why I would never vote for his racist, misogynistic, sexual assaulting ass.

And you still haven't shown why they are wrong or lying.

[Elegiac]

I know a lot about Trump's past before he became President. That is why I would never vote for his racist, misogynistic, sexual assaulting ass.

And you still haven't shown why they are wrong or lying.

It's like they think we weren't laughing our asses off when Trump was busy selling steaks in Sharper Image back in 2007.

Such business acumen, many skill, wow.

[Orbitus]

It's like they think we weren't laughing our asses off when Trump was busy selling steaks in Sharper Image back in 2007.

Yep, and when people said he wasn't racist, and you cite examples, they ignore them, and then when you give them sources, they whine at the sources you give, and then they try to show you that he was pictured with black people, that means he wasn't racist to them. Even though, he was only there to receive an award based on his German heritage, and not because he was a paragon for civil rights or something like that.

[Elegiac]

Yep, and when people said he wasn't racist, and you cite examples, they ignore them, and then when you give them sources, they whine at the sources you give, and then they try to show you that he was pictured with black people, that means he wasn't racist to them. Even though, he was only there to receive an award based on his German heritage, and not because he was a paragon for civil rights or something like that.

My personal favorite is pointing out none of Trump's ancestors or even his current wife would be eligible for a visa under his proposed immigration rules.

[Orbitus]

My personal favorite is pointing out none of Trump's ancestors or even his current wife would be eligible for a visa under his proposed immigration rules.

Yep, I have started showing people my master list I found on reddit, and the last guy whined about the sources for the articles that were posted. Even though some of them were even from right wing sources like Breitbart.

[derpkitteh]

It's funny how you lot can never seem to articulate why this would be a good thing besides "triggering the libs".

it's only really somewhat ok because the republicans have kinda fallen into being the only ones in favor of gun rights and free speech, and at the very least sensible immigration policy(a lot of dumbass republicans out there in favor of more immigration though, because their business buddies want it for cheap labor).

if the democrats would dedicate their selves just to free speech and gun rights, i'd never vote for another republican. i can live with increased immigration, it's not an end-all-be-all. free speech and gun rights are though.

[Orbitus]

it's only really somewhat ok because the republicans have kinda fallen into being the only ones in favor of gun rights and free speech, and at the very least sensible immigration policy(a lot of dumbass republicans out there in favor of more immigration though, because their business buddies want it for cheap labor).

if the democrats would dedicate their selves just to free speech and gun rights, i'd never vote for another republican. i can live with increased immigration, it's not an end-all-be-all. free speech and gun rights are though.

Show me a Democrat that is denying peoples' free speech rights, or gun rights besides Beto who has already dropped out. I bet you can't find any. Because, every other candidates are campaigning on things that have already been ruled constitutional by SCOTUS. Pretty much every other Democrat are running on Universal Background checks, that literally 90% of the country wants.

But hey, you do you, you were going to anyway with denying reality.

[Elegiac]

it's only really somewhat ok because the republicans have kinda fallen into being the only ones in favor of gun rights and free speech, and at the very least sensible immigration policy(a lot of dumbass republicans out there in favor of more immigration though, because their business buddies want it for cheap labor).

if the democrats would dedicate their selves just to free speech and gun rights, i'd never vote for another republican. i can live with increased immigration, it's not an end-all-be-all. free speech and gun rights are though.

"If only Democrats were Republican, I'd totally vote for them."

Miss me with that bullshit, comrade.

[derpkitteh]

Show me a Democrat that is denying peoples' free speech rights, or gun rights besides Beto who has already dropped out. I bet you can't find any. Because, every other candidates are campaigning on things that have already been ruled constitutional by SCOTUS. Pretty much every other Democrat are running on Universal Background checks, that literally 90% of the country wants.

But hey, you do you, you were going to anyway with denying reality.

expansion of gun laws at all is wrong, and i'll never support it. if every gun law in the country could be kept exactly as it is right at this moment and not changed either to remove or increase it, i would be alright with this stability(except virginia, that has to be reversed). but they just want to take more and more, and that's not acceptable.

"If only Democrats were Republican, I'd totally vote for them."

Miss me with that bullshit, comrade.

those aren't republican positions, they're libertarian positions. aka, liberty, liberal, freedom of choice to act in manners you see fit. with the way our world currently works, the way human nature works, the only safe form of government is one that works to see the liberty of all of its people upheld. to ensure the most freedom possible.

human nature means that all governments are corruptible, and will always ultimately fall to the corrupt nature of the humans in charge of them. a government with strong authoritative stances will always ultimately fall into being authoritarian and fascist. a government focused on liberty will take much longer to succumb to human nature, and it's easier to fight against the influence of authoritarianism.

the phrase "absolute power corrupts absolutely" comes to mind. the human being is the creature with absolute power on this planet, and we will always lead to corruption eventually. look at every single form of government back to the founding for the very first civilizations.

[Elegiac]

those aren't republican positions, they're libertarian positions.

Same bullshit, different name. The latter's just become a fig leaf for people that don't want to get dismissed as elitist bigots out of hand.

[Orbitus]

expansion of gun laws at all is wrong, and i'll never support it. if every gun law in the country could be kept exactly as it is right at this moment and not changed either to remove or increase it, i would be alright with this stability(except virginia, that has to be reversed). but they just want to take more and more, and that's not acceptable.



those aren't republican positions, they're libertarian positions. aka, liberty, liberal, freedom of choice to act in manners you see fit. with the way our world currently works, the way human nature works, the only safe form of government is one that works to see the liberty of all of its people upheld. to ensure the most freedom possible.

human nature means that all governments are corruptible, and will always ultimately fall to the corrupt nature of the humans in charge of them. a government with strong authoritative stances will always ultimately fall into being authoritarian and fascist. a government focused on liberty will take much longer to succumb to human nature, and it's easier to fight against the influence of authoritarianism.

the phrase "absolute power corrupts absolutely" comes to mind. the human being is the creature with absolute power on this planet, and we will always lead to corruption eventually. look at every single form of government back to the founding for the very first civilizations.

Yeah, that isn't going to happen. Virginia is going in the right direction, considering most of the country supports it. And it isn't a 51-49 poll it is a 90-10 poll.

[Elegiac]

human nature means that all governments are corruptible, and will always ultimately fall to the corrupt nature of the humans in charge of them. a government with strong authoritative stances will always ultimately fall into being authoritarian and fascist. a government focused on liberty will take much longer to succumb to human nature, and it's easier to fight against the influence of authoritarianism.

Citation needed.

the phrase "absolute power corrupts absolutely" comes to mind. the human being is the creature with absolute power on this planet, and we will always lead to corruption eventually. look at every single form of government back to the founding for the very first civilizations.

Acton's dictum was false, quite frankly.

Power doesn't corrupt. It reveals.

This also is a very simplistic reading of history that isn't borne out by the record. History isn't a morality play.

[Orbitus]

Same bullshit, different name. The latter's just become a fig leaf for people that don't want to get dismissed as elitist bigots out of hand.

Yeah, they don't want to be labeled as Trump supporters, even though we know deprkitteh here absolutely supports Trump.

Including Trump's idea of seizing guns first, apparently.

[Dontrike]

Trump's Trips to the 'Southern White House' continue to sink tax payer money into his own pockets. Today's bill: A $3.4M Superbowl party.

Queue the clarion calls of 'Party of Fiscal Responsibility!' and 'Drain the Swamp!' and watch the people who screamed themselves hoarse about corruption remain silent. Because the GOP is nothing if not entirely consistent on being sniveling hypocrites.

*GOP crickets absolutely silent*

Remember when Biden cost the taxpayer's somewhere around $20k one time?

*GOP crickets start chirping to a deafening degree.*

I'll never understand the rich's need for these lavish fucking parties. It probably only cost $40 in food when Trump ordered McDonald's.

- - - Updated - - -

it's only really somewhat ok because the republicans have kinda fallen into being the only ones in favor of gun rights and free speech

Free speech? Point to the party where they want that. You're talking about republicans that don't even want to hear about the word gay, let alone calling them out on their shit.

No one is trying to hamper anyone's gun rights, but you haven't shown your work there either.

and at the very least sensible immigration policy(a lot of dumbass republicans out there in favor of more immigration though, because their business buddies want it for cheap labor).

The concentration camps are sensible? Well gee golly, no one said that and now they're okay.

if the democrats would dedicate their selves just to free speech and gun rights, i'd never vote for another republican. i can live with increased immigration, it's not an end-all-be-all. free speech and gun rights are though.

They are not trying to take away gun rights, no one's free speech is being taken away, and no one is calling for increased immigration.

Do you ever tell the truth?

- - - Updated - - -

but they just want to take more and more, and that's not acceptable.

No one wants to take anything. Why do you keep saying that?

[Poopymonster]

Yeah, that isn't going to happen. Virginia is going in the right direction, considering most of the country supports it. And it isn't a 51-49 poll it is a 90-10 poll.

But they are wrong. I don't care if the SCOTUS says it's Constitutional, it's wrong.

Must be from the Oorlong school of debate.

[Beefhammer]

Free speech? Point to the party where they want that. You're talking about republicans that don't even want to hear about the word gay, let alone calling them out on their shit.

No one is trying to hamper anyone's gun rights, but you haven't shown your work there either.

They are not trying to take away gun rights, no one's free speech is being taken away, and no one is calling for increased immigration.

Free speech in this case is code for racist racist speech, that people are having to pay public consequences for being assholes. It also means meqnsnwhen bigots say they will not serve gay people in their businesses, that they shouldn't be held accountable for mentioning that by the public.

As for gun rights, anything that slows down the process of getting a gun is seen as taking away gun rights, and the forever agenda of Dems wanting to take your guns away, even though it's never happened, fear mongering.

- - - Updated - - -

But they are wrong. I don't care if the SCOTUS says it's Constitutional, it's wrong.

Must be from the Oorlong school of debate.

You mean throw false shit out there as if you know what you are talking about and it's right?

[Breccia]

Minor thing, but why? Are there not actual important things to focus on?

I don't get it. He's from Missouri. That's not even the right state. /s

On topic: while this piece is listed as opinion he states and cites many facts, specifically with the goal of getting out in front of the lies Trump will tell at the SotU. Other than the exact numbers, most is stuff we already knew -- Obama didn't trash the economy, Trump didn't actually make it any better, tax cut for the rich didn't pay for itself, etc. But this bit is worth noting, because I hadn't seen it before:

Part of the challenge is that the president’s trade war has created headwinds for the economy. It has harmed everyone from American suppliers to farmers to wholesalers to retailers to consumers. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the administration’s trade policies will shave 0.5 percent from GDP this year and reduce average household income by nearly $1,300.

The OP ED is hardly the only one to cite this CBO piece. Some places have their own takes, such as the Washington Examiner who blames Democrats and Republicans and says it's time to cut entitlements, and FOX News who leaves out the tax cut not working but points out Obama had trillion dollar deficits to...conveniently forgetting what Obama inherited from W and how he brought the deficit down, what are the odds?

So I'll just go with WaPo instead. Quoting lots and lots of it because paywall.

This year’s deficit would be an increase from 2019, when the government deficit grew to $984 billion. The deficit in 2016, President Barack Obama’s last full year in office, was $585 billion. CBO now projects that the deficit will be at least $1 trillion each year in perpetuity unless policymakers make changes.

The CBO also projected the economy would grow by 2.2 percent in 2020, which represents a healthy clip but falls short of the 3 percent target set by the Trump administration. The projections were contained in the CBO’s annual budget and economic outlook.

With rising annual deficits, the total debt held by the government is also projected to grow dramatically, from about $18 trillion in 2020 to $31 trillion in 2030, according to the CBO’s projections. The U.S. government must pay interest on this debt to keep borrowing money.

The deficit outlook appears slightly worse than it did just a year ago. In 2019, bipartisan majorities in Congress approved new spending bills that added more than $500 billion to the deficit over the next decade. The most expensive new policies were the permanent repeal of taxes created under Obama’s Affordable Care Act, including one on expensive health plans.

These actions would have done more to drive up the deficit had they not been mitigated by lower-than-expected interest rates, which allow the government to borrow money more cheaply than the CBO had originally anticipated.

The CBO projection also appears to cast doubt on recent statements by President Trump and other administration officials that the 2017 Republican tax cut is creating enough revenue through new economic growth that it will offset all near-term losses. White House officials have defended the $1.5 trillion tax legislation, which slashed tax rates for businesses and many households.

Tax revenue has risen slowly since the tax cuts were passed, but many forecasters say the cuts led to a sizable drop-off in projected revenue collections. Combined with an increase in spending, the deficit has ballooned, forcing the Treasury Department to borrow more money to cover the balance.

Trump, asked about the rising deficit following the tax cuts, told CNBC last year: “We’ve taken in more revenue substantially than we did when the taxes were high. Nobody can even believe it."

Quick aside here: Trump calls out more revenue and conveniently leaves out spending -- spending he personally insisted on, such as defense spending and sending more troops to the Middle East. As befits a businessman who lost dozens of companies, doesn't pay people, and went bankrupt six times, he leaves out that while revenue grew 5%, spending grew by more. And it gets worse.

The CBO report shows that tax collections are weaker than they would be without the 2017 Republican tax law, which permanently locked in lower rates for many corporations while creating temporary reductions for households. Tax revenue remained roughly flat the first year the law was in effect, despite economic growth of nearly 3 percent. It rose slightly in 2019 but not enough to compensate for flatlining the year before.

So Trump can try to insist he wasn't lying -- the "nobody can believe it" is going to be hard to swallow, considering as listed above if he had done nothing tax revenue would have gone up by more -- but only by leaving out the second, equally important half of Economics 101. Basically, Trump is saying "I fired a gun" and leaving out "and the bullets hit a nun in the skull and killed her".

In January 2017, before the tax law, the CBO projected corporate tax revenue would represent 1.8 percent of gross domestic product. Now, they are expected to represent only 1.1 percent of GDP.

Many Republicans in recent years have abandoned the calls to slash spending in part because Trump has supported big increases in the budget. During the Obama administration, many Republicans insisted on spending cuts as a way to shrink the deficit. About half of the current deficit can be attributed to spending increases and tax cuts put in place by Congress since 2015, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

“This is an important warning light,” Marc Goldwein, a budget expert with the group, said of the CBO’s report. “We know deficits as a share of GDP have never been this high when the economy is this strong.”

Again: anyone who actually looks into the facts of the situation knows Trump is doing one of two things:
1) flat-out lying, or
2) finding the barest niche of truth he can carve out that somehow doesn't make him look like a dismal failure

Trump promised big boosts to the economy and to balance the budget. Trump lied. His words and actions have led to the opposite, and everyone knows it, even the rabid fanbase.