The Trump Card...

[ATeam]

Propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress

As an example, even if he proposes the amendment, if Congress doesn't ratify it, The Washington Post will rate that as a broken promise.

We'll have to wait and see on that one but my sense is that if Trump proposes the amendment, the Washington Post would count it as a promise kept. The language "propose" is straightforward and clear. To keep the promise, Trump does not even have to have a friend in congress introduce the bill. He needs only to speak in favor of the amendment in any future speech he gives or statement he makes as president.

Less significant than how the Washington Post parses the words is how Trump supporters will view him if term limits are not imposed, or at least if a genuine bill to do so is not introduced. When cheering backers at rallies and sympathetic supporters in front of their TVs hear Trump advocate term limits, some of them may then pause to think about the nuances and actions required to actually deliver that result. A greater number, I believe, will expect to see term limits actually imposed and will be disappointed in Trump if they are not. Some of those who voted for Trump to get term limits will understand that other players are involved. Some will not and those are the ones whose support Trump will lose.

I pointed to the Washington Post's online tool simply because it is convenient. There are numerous articles out there from numerous sources that list Trumps many promises. A year from now, it will be a simple matter to survey all such articles to see what the promise trackers say. Some may say a promise was kept. Some may say the same promise was not kept. Some may say something in between.

For me, this is not about interpreting the precise wording of a Trump promise or holding him to words as if this was a court of law. It's not even about Trump's actions relative to the promise. It's about the EXPECTATIONS Trump voters have and whether those expectations are fulfilled.

As I write this, Turtle, I am mindful of the distinctions you drew above about taking Trump literally vs. seriously and vise versa. I am also mindful of a new distinction that has entered public discourse, which is about taking Trump symbolically.

None of that matters in the end. Trump supporters are going to do what they do. Time will tell if they stick with Trump or not.

 

[ATeam]

Trump is sick and tired of China screwing us over for years, from everything from currency manipulation, on trade, and with China thinking it can steal our technology with abandon. With that Tweet, in combination with the dripping-with-sarcasm "unprecedented" Tweet, he cut off at the knees any potential threat of intimidation or one-upmanship by China, removed any perceived bargaining chip they thought they'd get out of it, and put them on notice that he's not going to bend over for them like Obama and his predecessors have done for decades.

I thought about your words as I read these words in the Wall Street Journal:

"Trade battles between the world’s two largest economies would hurt both sides, economists said. When the U.S. slapped tariffs on imports of Chinese tires in 2009, it saved up to 1,200 jobs, according to a Peterson Institute study. But it cost U.S. consumers around $1.1 billion, or around $900,000 per job, in higher tires prices in 2011 and cut retail spending in other areas, leading to an overall loss of 2,500 jobs, the institute calculated. China, meanwhile, retaliated by blocking U.S. chicken exports, leading to $1 billion in lost U.S. sales."

This China thing is not going to be instant or easy, and it is not going to be immediately clear what the effects of a given statement or action may be. However it plays out, it's serious business that affects our pocketbooks.

Diane and I earn a living by selling gym memberships and providing fitness services. When tire prices increase for our gym members, that's less money they have to spend in the gym.

Expediters earn a living by transporting expedited freight. A trade war may have the immediate effect of slowing trade and thereby reducing the amount of freight that is available to haul.

 

[Turtle]

Propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress

As an example, even if he proposes the amendment, if Congress doesn't ratify it, The Washington Post will rate that as a broken promise.

We'll have to wait and see on that one but my sense is that if Trump proposes the amendment, the Washington Post would count it as a promise kept. The language "propose" is straightforward and clear. To keep the promise, Trump does not even have to have a friend in congress introduce the bill. He needs only to speak in favor of the amendment in any future speech he gives or statement he makes as president.

That was sarcasm, as the Washington Post (and other liberal media, as well as liberals in general) tends to massage even the positive into a negative whenever possible when it comes to Trump, and have a long history of doing the opposite when it comes to Obama and Clinton. And they do it all while claiming to be non-partisan.

Less significant than how the Washington Post parses the words is how Trump supporters will view him if term limits are not imposed, or at least if a genuine bill to do so is not introduced. When cheering backers at rallies and sympathetic supporters in front of their TVs hear Trump advocate term limits, some of them may then pause to think about the nuances and actions required to actually deliver that result. A greater number, I believe, will expect to see term limits actually imposed and will be disappointed in Trump if they are not. Some of those who voted for Trump to get term limits will understand that other players are involved. Some will not and those are the ones whose support Trump will lose.

Just because Trump's voters have all been lumped together as uneducated white morons doesn't mean they are. The use of "a greater number" seems to imply that you think they are. They all know what it takes to get a Constitutional Amendment, and that it took 7 years for the term limits imposed on the President to be passed. They know that while the overwhelming majority of Americans favor term limits on congressional members, they also know that getting Congress to ratify such an amendment for the President is a piece of cake compared to getting them to limit their own selves.

For me, this is not about interpreting the precise wording of a Trump promise or holding him to words as if this was a court of law. It's not even about Trump's actions relative to the promise. It's about the EXPECTATIONS Trump voters have and whether those expectations are fulfilled.

I know. And I think you aren't giving Trump supporters the credit they deserve.

 

[OntarioVanMan]

being a Trump supporter I think I have an inkling of reality as well....as these might be "promises" there is what he can actually get done legally without resorting to Exec. Order and being a dictator...and what the budget will support...these promises add up to a lot of money we don't have YET!!....BUT he has set up the military contractors that we won't pay the overblown prices for his naval expansion plans...and so forth...
The corporate tax cut will cost billions if implemented at 15%...and erode the budget...The new trade deals to come maybe of which he has no real control except in our interests...Jobs...IMO will be the last to materialize until corporations see real movement...not just the promises...this process should consume to set up the first 4 years...

 

[Turtle]

I thought about your words as I read these words in the Wall Street Journal:

"Trade battles between the world’s two largest economies would hurt both sides, economists said. When the U.S. slapped tariffs on imports of Chinese tires in 2009, it saved up to 1,200 jobs, according to a Peterson Institute study. But it cost U.S. consumers around $1.1 billion, or around $900,000 per job, in higher tires prices in 2011 and cut retail spending in other areas, leading to an overall loss of 2,500 jobs, the institute calculated. China, meanwhile, retaliated by blocking U.S. chicken exports, leading to $1 billion in lost U.S. sales."

Do keep in mind that the Wall Street Journal is one of the biggest cheerleaders for Globalization and Free Trade, and the Peterson Institute is the head cheerleader. The Peterson Institute, like most all think tanks, are ideologically driven in accordance with the interests of its funders. In the case of Petersen, it's billionaires who's interest lies in the gold mine of globalization and unrestricted free trade. Like many think tanks, they put out propaganda disguised as research. Their executives and board of directors are a who's who of international banking and finance.

This study was widely criticized and their conclusions largely debunked. Even in their own footnotes they show their conclusions are drawn from assumption of causation and from questionable correlations, and different conclusions can easily be reached simply by applying different assumptions. For example, they assume every single American retail job (not including food service) lost during the study's time frame was due to the Chinese tire tariff, without noting the effect of the Internet and online commerce on retail jobs. Employees of Amazon and other e-tailers are not included in the number of people employed in the retail industry. Then they take very large large numbers that cover a wide variety of sectors and whittle it down to apply to the tire industry and lost retail jobs. Talk about painting with a broad brush.

The same Peterson Institute (and pretty much every other proponent of globalization and free trade) tout technology as the primary reason for America's lost manufacturing jobs. It a common refrain (and deflection) from economists who hate the thought that globalization is not the world’s unambiguous salvation. But if technology were the source of manufacturing workers’ woes, productivity would be rising sharply, which it isn’t. If technology were the source of lost jobs, then 1200 jobs moved to Mexico would be filled in Mexico by 1200 or so robots instead of 1200 or so Mexicans.

This China thing is not going to be instant or easy, and it is not going to be immediately clear what the effects of a given statement or action may be. However it plays out, it's serious business that affects our pocketbooks.

Like I said earlier, we may very well see a drop in GDP of 1.5-2% until we work our way out of it.

Diane and I earn a living by selling gym memberships and providing fitness services. When tire prices increase for our gym members, that's less money they have to spend in the gym.

Expediters earn a living by transporting expedited freight. A trade war may have the immediate effect of slowing trade and thereby reducing the amount of freight that is available to haul.

That's taking the Peterson Institutes numbers and conclusions as gospel. That's ignoring the fact that tire prices didn't rise as much as they claim, as the import gap was quickly filled by imports from all other countries and tire price increases remained modest along the same lines as inflation, it merely didn't decrease tire prices to the point it might have if the cheap Chinese tires had been allowed to continue to flood the market.

The MPAA and RIAA like to put a dollar value on every pirated copy of a movie or song, assuming that those who pirated those things would have otherwise paid for it. Globalists do the same when manufacturing jobs are lost to other countries, they pound the narrative that products would cost more if those jobs didn't go away. They won't talk about how it's the market that sets prices, not the cost of producing them, or advertising, or anything else. When Master Lock, for example, moved all of their production to China, saving them 35% in manufacturing costs, did the price of Master locks suddenly drop? Nope. "But, but, but, it kept prices low!" No it didn't. It improved Master's bottom line and improved the dividend for shareholders. The price of a Master padlock is the same it's always been, adjusting for inflation. If Master moved all production back to the US, would the price suddenly go up for Master locks? Nope. Not unless people are willing to pay more for them. The market sets the price. The same is true for Carrier air conditioners, automobiles and every other imported doodad.

 

[Turtle]

being a Trump supporter I think I have an inkling of reality as well....as these might be "promises" there is what he can actually get done legally without resorting to Exec. Order and being a dictator...and what the budget will support...these promises add up to a lot of money we don't have YET!!....BUT he has set up the military contractors that we won't pay the overblown prices for his naval expansion plans...and so forth...
The corporate tax cut will cost billions if implemented at 15%...and erode the budget...The new trade deals to come maybe of which he has no real control except in our interests...Jobs...IMO will be the last to materialize until corporations see real movement...not just the promises...this process should consume to set up the first 4 years...

Some of this is starting to remind me of the movie "Dave" where Kevin Klein, as the impostor President Dave, who decides to actually get things done and find room in the budget for a particular program, brings in his accountant friend to look at where the budget is being wasted and find the necessary money. The corporate tax cut will cost billions and erode the budget, but not if Trump can find all the wasted money mired in the bureaucracy of Pentagon procurement and in the other cabinet departments. That's why he's looking into all the "wasted" money given to foreign interest in support of green programs, why he's looking at costly regulations and the spending waste in Energy, Education, the EPA, all of it. And doing that is, IMHO, exactly what this country needs. It's no coincidence that Rick Perry has been tapped to head a department (Energy) that he himself wants eliminated. Completely eliminating it is probably not going to happen, nor necessarily smart, but he can certainly reduce is bureaucratic carbon footprint, and eliminate wasteful spending and the policies that kill jobs.

 

[ATeam]

Just because Trump's voters have all been lumped together as uneducated white morons doesn't mean they are. The use of "a greater number" seems to imply that you think they are.

Be fair. I have never once suggested or implied that Trump voters can be lumped together as you describe above. The implication you draw from the words "a greater number" is an incorrect implication and it is one made solely by you. About such a lumping, I have said no such thing, I have implied no such thing and I believe no such thing.

Over 60 million people voted for Trump. The only thing they all have in common with each other is that they marked their ballot for Donald Trump on election day. The reasons why they behaved that way at that particular instant varies with the individual. Would they do it again? Will they remain supportive of Trump a week from now or six months or a year? Time will tell. I expect some will remain supportive and some will not for reasons that matter individually to each. I do not group them together as you suggest.

 

[RoadTime]

Good comparison to the movie. Also, a movie I really enjoyed watching


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[Turtle]

Be fair. I have never once suggested or implied that Trump voters can be lumped together as you describe above.

I was being fair when I used the phrase "seems to." But "a greater number" phrasing, intentionally or not, necessarily lumps people into that category. As such, it "seems to" imply the stereotype of Trump voters, especially in the context of the juxtaposition of 'some of them may pause and think while a greater number will not.'

The implication you draw from the words "a greater number" is an incorrect implication and it is one made solely by you.

Well, I think you mean inference rather than implication, but yes, if was an inference made solely by me.

About such a lumping, I have said no such thing, I have implied no such thing and I believe no such thing.

Fair enough.

 

[Turtle]

Good comparison to the movie. Also, a movie I really enjoyed watching

This gets even funner when you inject Trump in the roll of Dave. "Let me give it a try."

 

[blackpup]

I think most Trump supporters are still enjoying the befuddlement of the media, and Democratic and Republican politicians alike.

jimmy

 

[Turtle]

Incidentally, Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg, who met with Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort Florida yesterday and discussed the estimate price tag for the new Air Force One planes, addressed the media after the meeting and said, “We’re going to get it done for less than that, and we’re committed to working together to make sure that happens.”

And on the F-35 figher jet program, “Very productive and really encouraged by the dialogue,” Muilenburg said. “We’re all focused on the same thing here. We want to make sure we give our war fighters the best capability in the world and that we do it in a way that’s affordable for our taxpayers.” Muilenburg then praised Trump saying, “His business headset around that is excellent…Got a lot of respect for him. He’s a good man and he’s doing the right thing.”

So Trump’s methods may be unorthodox, and he's not even President yet, but he seems to be getting some results.

 

[ATeam]

So Trump’s methods may be unorthodox, and he's not even President yet, but he seems to be getting some results.

In this case, the only result produced is showmanship on the front porch. No facts and no credible data have been shared. To be fair, Trump is not in office yet. No one is expecting him to do much before then.

 

[RoadTime]

Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[Turtle]

In this case, the only result produced is showmanship on the front porch. No facts and no credible data have been shared.

Then I'm not sure there will ever be any shared facts or data which will satisfy such a perception.

 

[x06col]

Propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress

As an example, even if he proposes the amendment, if Congress doesn't ratify it, The Washington Post will rate that as a broken promise.

We'll have to wait and see on that one but my sense is that if Trump proposes the amendment, the Washington Post would count it as a promise kept. The language "propose" is straightforward and clear. To keep the promise, Trump does not even have to have a friend in congress introduce the bill. He needs only to speak in favor of the amendment in any future speech he gives or statement he makes as president.

Less significant than how the Washington Post parses the words is how Trump supporters will view him if term limits are not imposed, or at least if a genuine bill to do so is not introduced. When cheering backers at rallies and sympathetic supporters in front of their TVs hear Trump advocate term limits, some of them may then pause to think about the nuances and actions required to actually deliver that result. A greater number, I believe, will expect to see term limits actually imposed and will be disappointed in Trump if they are not. Some of those who voted for Trump to get term limits will understand that other players are involved. Some will not and those are the ones whose support Trump will lose.

I pointed to the Washington Post's online tool simply because it is convenient. There are numerous articles out there from numerous sources that list Trumps many promises. A year from now, it will be a simple matter to survey all such articles to see what the promise trackers say. Some may say a promise was kept. Some may say the same promise was not kept. Some may say something in between.

For me, this is not about interpreting the precise wording of a Trump promise or holding him to words as if this was a court of law. It's not even about Trump's actions relative to the promise. It's about the EXPECTATIONS Trump voters have and whether those expectations are fulfilled.

As I write this, Turtle, I am mindful of the distinctions you drew above about taking Trump literally vs. seriously and vise versa. I am also mindful of a new distinction that has entered public discourse, which is about taking Trump symbolically.

None of that matters in the end. Trump supporters are going to do what they do. Time will tell if they stick with Trump or not.

Washington Post? WTF? Most of the people that voted for Trump, never heard of or give a s... about what the Post has to say. Only ones affected are the Leftie piss and moaners.

 

[ATeam]

Then I'm not sure there will ever be any shared facts or data which will satisfy such a perception.

Satisfy such a perception? What do you mean by that?

In every government program the financials are available to see. When this defense contractor talks about getting the costs down, I'm not looking for something to see that is impossible to provide. I'm looking for the kind of information an ordinary citizen would expect to see. How much did it cost before? What does it cost now? What is the cost difference?

These are the questions asked by every citizen who is concerned about fiscal responsibility in government. These questions are fair and reasonable to ask when someone says he/she intends to reduce the cost of something and you want to verify it actually happens.

 

[davekc]

Like all things political, I don't have any illusion that he will hit everything on that list. I think it will be more of a matter whether he is showing progress or going from scandal to scandal. A happy over all electorate will tolerate some foolishness if they are satisfied. if not, they and the press will rag him every chance they get. State elections in a couple of years will say how most feel.

 

[ATeam]

....State elections in a couple of years will say how most feel.

Key word: "feel." You hit it exactly. I don't think it is about logic or even results. The amount of support Trump retains will depend on how his supporters FEEL about him in a year or so.

 

[x06col]

....State elections in a couple of years will say how most feel.

Key word: "feel." You hit it exactly. I don't think it is about logic or even results. The amount of support Trump retains will depend on how his supporters FEEL about him in a year or so.

Yepper, touchy feely. That be exactly what this Country has become in my lifetime. Frankly, i'm not at all a fan of this immediate satisfaction, similar to the majority of new expediters. Watch the results/non results then type. Speculation.........Bah Humbug!