The Trump Card...

[coalminer]

So the 59 tomahawk missiles that we used on Syria will cost 70 million to replace. 2 questions, did they cause more than 70 million in damage and why on earth do they cost so dam much????


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[xiggi]

Regarding my prediction that Trump will be impeached, that scenario requires the erosion of Trump's base. Evidence of that erosion is now developing.

"According to polls taken over the last few weeks, support for the President among white men is eroding. Since March, the percentage of white males who say they back the President has dropped from 58% to 47%, according to polling by Quinnipiac University.

"Similarly, an IBD/TIPP poll conducted in March and released earlier this week showed that the President's support among white men fell from 58% earlier in March to 49%. That poll also showed a decline in support among rural Americans from 56% earlier in March to 41%" Source

Granted, these are polls and polls fluctuate. Look for additional polls to confirm this erosion in the future.

These polls were taken before the Syria missile strike and the Gorsuch nomination win. A different poll (Rasmussen) rates Trump's job approval numbers by the day. In general those poll numbers fluctuate 1-3 points per day. Trump's wins this week produced no sustained upward move in the Rasmussen poll. The downtrend that began on January 20 (Inauguration Day) continues.

Polls like the ones that had the election locked up for Hillary?

 

[ATeam]

Polls like the ones that had the election locked up for Hillary?

No, not polls like the ones that had the election locked up for Hillary, but polls like the ones that are conducted on an ongoing basis. The polls I reference provide meaningful trend information over time. Election polls attempt to predict the surveyed person's future behavior (how is he/she likely to vote and for whom?). Job satisfaction polls measure present sentiment about things that previously occurred (how do you feel today about what Trump did recently?).

Methodology varies between polls and a poll may or may not be accurate on a given day because other variables apply. But the same poll measured against itself over time can provide meaningful information. For example, The Rasmussen poll shows Trump's popularity declining. Another daily poll does the same but places Trump's popularity at a different level. If one of these polls showed Trump's popularity rising and the other showed it falling, both polls would be suspect. But when both polls show the same downward trend over a number of months, it's a safe bet that the downward trend truly exists.

Polling is always off by a greater or lesser amount. Whatever you may wish to say or believe about polls, the Republicans who have the power to impeach Trump will be paying close attention to Trump's poll numbers as they decide to impeach or not impeach. The lower the polls say Trump's support is, the more likely it becomes that impeachment proceedings will begin.

 

[ATeam]

So the 59 tomahawk missiles that we used on Syria will cost 70 million to replace. 2 questions, did they cause more than 70 million in damage and why on earth do they cost so dam much????

Partly because they had to pay an expediter to move the missile from the manufacturing facility to the navy base where they were loaded onto the ships.

 

[Turtle]

I do apologize for being keenly aware of some of the issues and their contextual backgrounds.

While your keen awareness of certain issues and their contextual backgrounds may be substantial, the fact remains that before Trump signed the internet bill, internet service providers did not have the right to aggregate and sell my data trail without my consent. Now they do.

Your "fact" is incorrect. Things today, right now, this minute, are exactly the same as they were before Trump signed the bill. Nothing has changed. The regulation that was prevented by the bill Trump signed wouldn't have gone into effect until December 4, 2017. What changed as when the FCC declared (and got the courts to agree) that broadband ISPs are a “common carrier” piece of vital telecommunications, which puts it fully under the FCC’s regulatory umbrella.

The FTC, not the FCC, has long been the consumer privacy enforcer for the federal government, since consumer privacy is one of the explicit authoritative missions of the Federal Trade Commission. The FCC does not have the regulatory authority to control privacy. The FTC can’t enforce privacy regulations on broadband providers even if it wants to, because the FTC Act has an explicit exception for common carriers.

Trump is the president who took my privacy rights away and gifted my data trail to large corporations. Had he vetoed the bill, the FCC rules that provided a modicum of privacy would have remained in place. Of that, I am keenly aware. There was no public support for this bill, yet Trump and the Republicans were quick to push it through.

It was the Republicans in Congress who have been greased like pigs by the likes of Comcast, Verizon and AT&T. But I do understand the need to blame Trump.

My ire is not with the legislation to roll back this particular one of Obama's last minute regulations, nor with Trump signing it, but with the FCC for wrangling a reclassification of broadband Internet in the first place. What Congress needs to do now is to craft legislation that would explicitly give the FTC the authority to regulate ISPs’ privacy matters, because the way the laws currently read, the regulations that this bill revoked had about a 98.6% chance of being overturned in the courts, anyway. That's why the FCC went through the courts in the first place to wrangle the reclassification.

I'm not defending Trump signing the legislation to roll back the regulations as a result of the CRA (Congressional Review Act). I'm just placing the blame where it needs to be. If he didn't sign the bill the regulations would have eventually been overturned regardless, because the FCC doesn't have the regulatory authority to require broadband internet service providers to get permission from customers before selling their personal information to third parties. That's the FTC's job. But the FTC cannot regulate privacy on a common carrier. These are things that Big Cable and Big Telecom are uhm, keenly aware of, and it's why they lobbied so hard to get the classification change in place. But the bottom line is, the December, 2016 FCC regulation (set to go into effect one year later) restricting privacy for broadband Internet providers is blatant regulation overreach under current law. The law needs to be changed. I think Congress and Trump were in too much of a hurry to roll back all of Obama's last minute regulations, and this one should have either been left in place, where it would have been overturned and then forced Congress into enacting a better law, or this one should have been given a much closer look without the influence of lobbying.

Trump signing the bill or not would not have change the law in such a way so as to change the regulatory authorities of the FCC and the FTC. It's mostly political and Chicken Little theater all around. Eventually the outrage of consumers and businesses will override the lobbying of Big Cable and Big Telecom.

 

[Ragman]

On another note. The red line is clear with Trump.

 

[ATeam]

See the links below for additional indications the Trump base is eroding. To be fair, there have been grass-roots rallies by Trump supporters to show their Trump support that have been under-reported in the media. That said, these pro-Trump rallies pale in comparison to the anti-Trump rallies both in size and frequency; and there is no evidence that Trump's grass-roots support has grown since Inauguration Day.

My central idea is that Trump will be impeached. His eroding base is part of the developing impeachment scenario, I believe.

'Done With Trump': Donald Trump's Online Base Fumes About Syria Strikes

Trump's Troll Army Isn't Ready for War In Syria

Donald Trump's Biggest Problem

The Alt Right is not Happy With Donald Trump

Donald Trump's libertarian supporters across the world desert him over Syria air strikes (see final paragraph of this story)

 

[Turtle]

It's funny that so many people think, and The Press continually hammers, "If you voted for Trump, you're a White Supremacist." Because Trump's core base is just that, alt-right wackos. Quite inconveniently, this ignores all of those voters who voted for Obama and then voted for Trump. But it's a narrative that must be pushed, because no one wants to be associated with the alt-right, and if it's pushed long enough and loud enough people will flee Trump. It's the same tactic used to associate gay rights with civil rights, because no one wants to be seen as being anti Civil Rights. It's classic demonization.

Is also why Trump supporters aren't always truthful in polling, regardless of the poll.

Finding press articles about Trump losing his base is easy, because they all assume his base is the alt-right. This completely ignores the fact that membership in the alt-right is miniscule. The narrative is that America is composed of two distinct groups: normal people (progressive liberals), and conservatives (racists one and all).

No one can throw a temper tantrum, or hold a grudge until they get their way, quite like a child. Or a liberal. So it's not surprising at all the the Trump protests are large and frequent, and mostly raw emotion. No intellectual arguments to be found, only name-calling vitriol.

 

[Ragman]

People also seem to forget, Trump was elected with much help from the Anti-Hillary Democrats, ie: those Democrats that are not leftists and would not vote for Bernie.

 

[ATeam]

It's funny that so many people think, and The Press continually hammers, "If you voted for Trump, you're a White Supremacist." Because Trump's core base is just that, alt-right wackos.

It may be funny but it is not what I am suggesting. Trump's base is made up of several identifiable components. The notable alt-right adherents are getting the "jumping off the Trump train" press today because they happen to be the ones who are jumping off and being vocal while doing so. Bit by bit, other components will leave as well. Some will stay no matter what but their numbers and political effect will be insufficient to serve as a political deterrent to impeachment.

Another faction is the anti-Hillary Democrats Ragman mentions above. They never considered themselves on board the Trump train but he received their votes on Election Day because they disliked Hillary more than they disliked Trump. Those soft votes became unavailable to Trump the day after they were cast.

While the narrative you describe may "quite inconveniently ... [ignore] all of those voters who voted for Obama and then voted for Trump." I do not. I referred to those voters a couple of posts above (the rust belt workers who may be wondering today why Trump has yet to keep his China-currency-manipulator pledge). They have yet to jump off the Trump train in a vocal way but they will as Trump disappoints.

Finding press articles about Trump losing his base is easy, because they all assume his base is the alt-right.

In this case, finding the articles is easy because the alt-right people are being very outspoken as they jump off the Trump train. As you correctly point out, they do not represent the entire Trump base, just a part of it. But it is a part Trump has now lost.

This completely ignores the fact that membership in the alt-right is miniscule. The narrative is that America is composed of two distinct groups: normal people (progressive liberals), and conservatives (racists one and all).

It may be THE narrative but it is not my narrative. The articles I cited document the departure of the alt-right people quoted in them and, presumably, others of a similar mindset. The articles speak of no one else and I have not suggested they do.

No one can throw a temper tantrum, or hold a grudge until they get their way, quite like a child. Or a liberal. So it's not surprising at all the the Trump protests are large and frequent, and mostly raw emotion. No intellectual arguments to be found, only name-calling vitriol.

Raw emotion sometimes coalesces into organized political action. The raw emotion expressed the day after Trump was inaugurated and at the many town hall meetings is so coalescing; not because of leadership from the Democratic party that is seemingly as lost in the headlights as ever, but because leadership is developing at the grass roots level. There is more to this than a temper tantrum.

This dynamic can be seen most clearly in Georgia's 6th Congressional District where a special election is underway. Republicans have held this seat forever but it may well be in play now. New on the scene are a number of grass-roots groups that have risen up to vote for the Democratic candidate. I do not know how they will fare but, because of this organized activism, the Democratic candidate will likely make an historically strong showing.

That is not to say the people rising up are Democrats. If not for the stringent ballot access rules of the two party system, a strong third party candidate may have emerged long ago. But with the rules as they are, the opposition is orienting itself around the Democratic ballot line. It is the easiest way for them to rally around and vote for an opposition candidate.

This race will be a fascinating one to watch. We'll get the chance to see not only how much the raw emotion has been converted into organized, effective activity; we'll also get to see how many Trump voters in 2017 will come through for a Republican now that Trump has been in office long enough for his voters to make a judgement.

 

[muttly]

The pro Trump rallies that are supposedly not large gatherings...it's because HE WON.
Not as much interest unless Trump shows up at one. The anti Trump gatherings aren't much more than whinefests because they still haven't come to grips with the fact that their candidate lost and that Trump is president.

 

[ATeam]

The pro Trump rallies that are supposedly not large gatherings...it's because HE WON.
Not as much interest unless Trump shows up at one. The anti Trump gatherings aren't much more than whinefests because they still haven't come to grips with the fact that their candidate lost and that Trump is president.

Maybe so, maybe not. See my comments above about Georgia's Sixth Congressional District special election.

 

[muttly]

These townhall uprisings have a lot to do with just organized progressive groups flooding them to cause a ruckus.

 

[Turtle]

(the rust belt workers who may be wondering today why Trump has yet to keep his China-currency-manipulator pledge

They aren't wondering. They couldn't care less.

It may be THE narrative but it is not my narrative. The articles I cited document the departure of the alt-right people quoted in them and, presumably, others of a similar mindset. The articles speak of no one else and I have not suggested they do.

OK. My bad. I got confused when you said, "See the links below for additional indications the Trump base is eroding," as if they are the Trump base.

 

[xiggi]

There is not a chance trump will be impeached simply because of falling poll numbers as long as the Republicans remain in the majority after midterms. I find the whole idea rather humorous regardless how big of a blowhard trump is. Without a major scandal appearing I'm not even sure what grounds they could proceed on.

 

[Turtle]

There is not a chance trump will be impeached simply because of falling poll numbers as long as the Republicans remain in the majority after midterms.

DING DING DING!!!
That's the right answer.

 

[ATeam]

There is not a chance trump will be impeached simply because of falling poll numbers as long as the Republicans remain in the majority after midterms. I find the whole idea rather humorous regardless how big of a blowhard trump is. Without a major scandal appearing I'm not even sure what grounds they could proceed on.

You are exactly right. When I made my impeachment prediction a while back, I laid out the scenario components. One of the components was declining popularity. That is one of several things that must develop, not the only thing.

 

[xiggi]

You are exactly right. When I made my impeachment prediction a while back, I laid out the scenario components. One of the components was declining popularity. That is one of several things that must develop, not the only thing.

I suppose if we lay out a number of scenarios when a new president takes office then we could say each one would be impeached if. In all honesty your postings have read more like a prediction than a possibility. But I am not always the most thorough reader of wordy posts so that could be my error.

 

[ATeam]

Without a major scandal appearing I'm not even sure what grounds they could proceed on.

This article may help answer your question.

Will Trump be impeached -- or is it just a liberal fantasy?

 

[Pilgrim]

Without a major scandal appearing I'm not even sure what grounds they could proceed on.

This article may help answer your question.

Will Trump be impeached -- or is it just a liberal fantasy?

The final paragraph in the above article aptly summarizes the liberal speculation and pipe dreams articulated by its liberal author (emphasis mine):

"On the other hand, the election of Trump has been a particularly painful blow to the progressive psyche, more so even perhaps than the re-election of Bush as the atrocities of the Iraq war mounted in 2004. Republicans suffered for eight years from what some of their critics called Obama derangement syndrome, becoming so wrapped up in their opposition to the president that any sense of greater purpose seemed sometimes to be lost. Are progressives and conservative purists suffering from Trump derangement syndrome? It’s possible. We’ll find out."

Ya think that "Trump derangement syndrome" might be widespread among liberals & a few establishment republicans might be "possible"? It's obviously a condition that results in departure from reality and obsession with fantasy - along with lawlessness and anarchy on the part of the distraught left. We've already found out, and these obnoxious never-Trumpers will find that mainstream American voters will reject them even more vigorously in the next mid-term elections.