GG

What Would Myra Say?

I think you're understating his position. It wasn't just that US should no longer be involved in Europe's matters, he also was a firm believer that US hawks overestimated the Soviet intentions, who he believed were very nice and kind people who wanted nothing better than peace and love for mankind. To have a US VP take a warm approach towards Stalin and his intentions was a colossal mistake. His policy preferences would have resigned a hell of a lot more people to the gulags than the unfortunate millions who ended up there, and there would have been another major war in Europe. History has spoken, and he's on the same side of history as US isolationists who were against US involvement in European matters in the late 1930's.

And his dovish tone towards the Soviets ensured that tens of millions met an early grave. But I'm sure his intentions were good

This guy

My recollection is that it was Daltrey

Trump is the ultimate media *****, who comes from the school that there's no such thing as bad publicity, so you have to wonder why he suddenly took a very confrontational tone against the press. There are two possible reasons - one, is the point you cite - that he's using the attacks on media to energize the base and set up a dictatorial rule by casting one half of the population as the enemy. The other theory is that he adopted the aggressive tone after he learned about the plot against his administration and saw some portions of the media actively working to help the plotters. Doesn't help that thin skinned narcissists don't take kindly to any criticism, especially when it's manufactured. Up to you to decide which one you believe in and which one is more plausible, given the facts and his history of being a complete media *****. Xi doesn't have to worry about the election cycle, he's got a bigger concern about being the first Chinese leader to preside over an economic downturn. That's why Trump thinks he has the upper hand. There are plenty of rumors flying around of what the deal will eventually look like, but the still strong US economy numbers give Trump more wiggle room. I think Trump's coal mandate is to remove the stifling regulations that effectively forced coal plants to close. The new rules allow utilities to make the choice based on return on the investment, in an already highly regulated market. In an ideal world, every regulator would be staffed with very smart people who have the whole set of information to make a industrial decisions. In reality, most regulators are clueless in understanding how businesses are run and what factors go into massive capital expenditure decisions. The question isn't whether gas is more efficient than coal, it's how do you migrate a sizeable portion of the electric supply to more efficient and cleaner sources, while maintaining low utility rates and not endangering electricity supply.

No evidence she was ground up

What are gay balls? What's the dress code?

Hmm, where can there be more damage?

She can fix that by marrying her brother.

For the global warming rhetoric, apply the Fight Club standard, because the first rule of Global Warming is never to admit to Global Warming. That’s not to say that there isn’t an issue with the climate, but admitting it publicly immediately throws you into the rabbit hole of inane solutions. Same as Trump not touching entitlements right now because he doesn’t need to be painted as the guy who pushed grandma off the cliff. If global warming/climate change/algore’s carbon non-neutral house are a true threat to humanity, there is plenty of time to come up with realistic solutions that won’t send us to the stone age. For the same reasons that AOC/Bernie don’t understand economics, they don’t understand how to effectively transition off fossil fuels (if that’s even needed at all). It’s a lot easier to pretend that heavily subsidized and inefficient renewable energy sources are the panacea when you get chauffeured around town. Like the well-meaning ladies in my town who were protesting the Iraq War, and to a person pulled out the “No War for Oil” laminated signs out of their 8-person SUVs. Progressives say that they’re in favor of clean energy, and that usually means stuff they cannot see or doesn’t have any visible residue in the Acela corridor. But clean energy’s dirty secret is the inability to transmit and store that energy source is a very dirty business (ask Dexter) Coal is an easy target because it’s hard and dirty and emits black smoke, but it also powers 30% of the US. Coal will die a natural death anyway because it’s not as efficient as natural gas (nor nuclear), but you can’t transition off coal overnight. It will happen gradually as new plants come online to take coal capacity off. It’s the same economic decision I discussed above – at a certain point in the near future, the utility will face a question of maintaining an old coal plant or building a new gas plant. As long as Trump (politicians favor fracking) gas will win out every time. It’s already happened in North NJ where the last two coal plants were shut 2 years ago.

Economy I’m sure that you’ve seen plenty of commentary that Trump behaves under a simple negotiating strategy that he described in The Art of The Deal. I can tell you from a reputable second-hand account who dealt directly with him in the real estate days, that’s exactly how he behaves. The no-holds aggressive posture is how he made his billions and how his companies faced four Chapter 11s. He never backs down, and is perfectly willing to walk away with nothing to pick up the next shiny object. This was my biggest fear about how his negotiating style will get America into trouble, because as I’ve said many times, whenever he’s faced someone competent across the table, he had his ass handed to him. And therein lies the difference. He’s using the American platform to negotiate with everyone who is weaker, and nobody has the desire nor the power to cobble up a unified coalition to stand their ground. If they did, Trump would lose bigly. China will buckle, because Xi cannot afford a true economic slowdown. Europe? Hah, they could have a chance if they had a strong UK leading the charge. I’m sure if there’s one thing that Eurozone hates more than Trump’s Cheshire cat smile is dealing with a messy UK divorce. Once Brexit terms are sorted out, Junker’s next course of action will be to buy a new set of knee pads (on Amazon, of course) prior to his summit with Trump. So, while playing a high stakes tariff game is very dangerous, because of the pain it can inflict, Trump is playing with a very strong hand against opponents known for folding and who have trouble keeping their own house in order. ... I agree with you that the people at the bottom of the economy’s rung will be hit by the next downturn, but that’s nothing that policies can really fix. Low wage, low skill means no job security. Never has, never will. Your admission that low wage workers finally started getting jobs under Trump is more of an indictment of the previous economic policies, than a compliment to Trump. Low wage jobs should have bounced back much quicker after the recession than they did. But for 7 years, those jobs evaporated because it made zero sense to bring those jobs back, knowing there would be more costs, red tape & regulations attached to those employees. The employers’ view on this was – “Why go through that headache for a low skill job that can be done by spreading more work to existing workers?” These are the real questions management goes through when they decide on whether to expand. In many cases after the recession, the additional cost was offset by a new growth opportunity and that's why demand was strong for skilled labor, but in the marginal/low-skill cases, the answer was always, No. This is the part of business thinking that Bernies and AOCs simply don’t understand. To them, the jobs miraculously appear without anyone considering the costs of adding new jobs. (As an aside, my advice to anyone worried about their jobs is to think about job security every day. Make yourself indispensable by doing more than the job requires. That makes you much harder to fire)

Sure thing, Dexter

Answering these properly takes time and that’s why you don’t see an immediate response. I won’t go point by point, because you’ve hit on many overlapping topics where the perceived concern and solution is usually tied to another more important topic, which sometimes is counterintuitive to the first topic you bring up. Let’s address the biggest issue that I think you raised, which is Trump’s responsibility for America losing its moral fiber. He’s an easy target because he’s fat, orange and has a big mouth which utters stupid things more often than not. But is he the symptom or the cause of the American moral rot? I think it’s too simplistic to believe that America suddenly has gone to the crapper in the three years of his campaign and presidency. If anything, he’s the pendulum swing to what the bi-coastal elites have been swinging since the Clinton impeachment. To be sure, I place full blame on Gingrich and his crew for that particular witch hunt (aided by the growing right wing radio universe), and you knew there would be a complete counterstrike from the left. It was also right around this time that the historically left leaning TV and paper news press dropped their pretenses to be impartial (and what gave Murdoch a wide berth and audience for counterprogramming). So during that time, flyover country was not only coined but publicly ridiculed for holding onto their guns and religion, and were told that they really didn’t build or create anything – somebody else made it happen. I was in a good intersection for the ’16 election, as a conservative, never-Trumper, living at the very heart of progressivism that shapes the news you read, but also spending a lot of time upstate among the deplorables. I never thought that a serial philanderer with a potty mouth had a chance with the ordinary church going folks. But hearing them talk about their expectations for Trump was an eye opener, which was a big F-U to the downstate visitors who treated all of them like rubes. They also didn’t forget the attention (or lack of) that the area received after Irene, especially after the hoopla that surrounded Katrina. Entire villages were wiped out, and people were basically told to get over it and move on, just like they had for generations. While Irene is an isolated incident for the Catskills, it’s a microcosm for the disdain rural and exurban folks felt towards the big city visitors. Hillary’s deplorables comment was simply a confirmation of what everyone up there and anywhere outside the major city centers knew. It was also hammered home AFTER the election, because the news tone reinforced the deplorables rhetoric by casting everyone who didn’t vote for Hillary as a racist misogynist, and hasn’t let up since. And it’s not only in how the investigations and “scandals” have been covered. It’s the mental gymnastics his opponents have to go through to criticize him, even though they supported the same policies only a short time before. And this is why you get pushback from people here who object to your claims that conservatives are whiners. You may see it as whining, while we see it as reaching the limit of getting pissed on. The years of conservatives sitting quietly are over, because there was not going to be any quarter from the vocal elites. Mild mannered, cultured R candidates are accused of throwing black people back in chains, despite having zero history of any racial animus, while former KKK grand wizards are esteemed D party elders, or are quietly forgiven for wearing blackface and strutting around town as Coonman. Ordinary people don’t understand how they became racists only eight years after many of them voted for Obama. It must be the only reason why they flipped their vote for Trump, or a few million more voted for the 3rd party option, or 5 million of them decided to sit out the election altogether. Trump is these people’s weapon against the blatant hypocrisy. He’s not an artful orator, but he’s one of the best at giving the middle finger back to the detractors, and they love him for it. You may think that Trump is the reason that morality has declined, but the roots are deeper, and again I blame the progressives. By taking their working plans from the long held communist beliefs that religion is an evil artifact of western empires, religion must be destroyed. This has been a central tenet of Marxism, because he knew organized religion was a hindrance to his worker paradise, and every socialist regime moved against the church. That’s why the stupid people stubbornly cling to their guns and religion. They’re apparently not enlightened enough. It’s also another reason why socialism is a crock of *****. It’s very good at breaking things up, but awful at building everything back. You don’t have to be a devout believer of any particular religion to recognize its value in forming the moral code of its people. Socialism/liberalism thinks those old-time religion values are bad, but worse than that, it doesn’t replace those values with anything equally strong and beneficial. The central tenet of every religion is that it’s immutable across generations, and that’s why a rigid application of God’s word is so important. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t evolving interpretations of that book over time. But the key is that, it’s the interpretation of that Book that’s happening, not rewriting of the Book. Liberalism rewrites the Book on the fly. I was raised in a fully non-practicing family, but don’t have any illusions that religions don’t matter and the world would be better off without religions. History has proven that atheists are just as brutal as religious zealots. I’ll address economy/foreign policy later.

Looks like Greggy's army put an end to this experiment (for now ) A controversial startup that was charging $8,000 to fill your veins with young blood says it's halted operations after a warning from regulators

This is a decent signing for them. He's not a $9 million TE, but is reasonable at $4 million. Best of luck

Next chapter, picked up by Cardinals

Evil Fox is just following Trump's orders

Why do you think those deductions are there in the first place? Should a business be allowed to deduct a business expense? How do you calculate a profit if you're not allowed to deduct expenses?

This now intersects with the Trump Media thread. The other reason that he’s using twitter is that he’s discovered that it’s much easier for him to get his message out directly to the people, kind of like FDR did with his radio address. A press conference still depends on many in the large press outlets having an anti-trump agenda in getting the full stories out. Just look at how McCabe is being treated in interviews, despite him admitting that he was part of a possible coup.

Trump gonna be Trump. He’s trolled his way to the Presidency, and the world hasn’t ended yet. BTW, how’s a press conference going to solve things more than a tweet?

And if there’s already a process in place (or maybe has been happening for a long time) that is meant to address the alleged coup and all those involved in it, and Trump is just trolling along until the i’s are dotted and t’s crossed?

If you don’t think he’s done more positive things, then you’re not looking at the right places. The economy is finally humming along, despite more headwinds. Regulations are coming down, and business and consumers get their confidence back. He managed to beat back the Obamacare yoke. The downside is there’s no permanent solution in place, but he also started the ball rolling in addressing the drug pricing arbitrage. He’s waging a very high stakes battle with his tariff gambits, but as we’re discussing in other threads, he’s using them more for strategic reasons to get China in line than for economic. He’s right to hammer Huawei and by extension China. no one had the balls to do it before. When he wins that battle, it will be a two prong win - strategic and economic. He’s also taken a winning approach to a changed US foreign policy. While isolationist in tone, it’s been much more aggressive in actually using American power to achieve our foreign policy goals. We’ll see if North Korea is a ruse, but so far it doesn’t look like it. The Iran stance is clearly a huge positive. The wall rhetoric is over the top, but most of it is to fulfill a campaign promise. He’s backed off much of what he was clamoring for in the campaign and few thought he would get a complete land wall. But its equally silly to block any type of barrier expansion and to completely change your tune on immigration simply because Trump supports it. Now it’s your turn. Name the actual instances where his results really suck.

What should he have done instead?

You actually sound like JohnC defending Housley. There’s been infinitely more criticism of Trump on this forum by the people you proclaim are his fans than anything we’ve seen from Obama’s fans in the prior 8 years. What you claim is whining are actually constant reminders of the hypocritical nature of the people whose jobs are to be objective in their reporting. Trump is a raw vulgarian, and that’s why most people don’t like him. Doesn’t mean that he’s done a bad job in his actions. It would be nice if more people like you focused on actual results than to pay attention to hos twitter account.