Reagan Was My Hero And Trump Is His Clone (Somewhat)

[3rdnlng]

For those of you that weren't politically aware way back in the 80's, Ronald Reagan brought this country out of misery. His optimism and policies were the first MAGA. Trump is following in his steps but has forgotten that finesse and humor is the "In like Flint way" . He'll figure it out, but is there anymore evidence of his competence?

[Doc Brown]

I can see how conservatives can see the similarities in their rise to power and similar policies, but Reagan was the "shining city on the hill" optimist who was one of the best presidents ever at bringing Americans together.  He had a whimsical, fatherly way about him that inspired people and gave them hope (similar to FDR during the depression).  Trump's personal insults both on the campaign trail and in office to people on both sides of the aisle have turned too many people off for him to ever get the national adoration Reagan had.  Reagan was the master at using self deprecating humor, while Trump is funny when making fun of other people (at the same time pissing half the country off).  

 

I would argue that as far as how they approach the office, Trump is similar to Obama so far.   They're obviously on the opposite side of the political spectrum and have different personalities/styles.  However, both are beloved by their base and loathed by the other side.  Both use/used authoritarian rhetoric that they alone are the key to fixing this nation's problems.  Both are narcissistic, thin skinned, stubborn, and overly concerned about their legacy.  Both claim that they want to bring this country together, but their actions don't meet their rhetoric as they just seem to deepen the tribalism and partisan divide (Obama inviting BLM activists to the White House, Trump pardoning Joe Arpiao and calling private citizens SOB's for kneeling during anthem).  Their major piece of legislation when their party has/had control of Congress (ACA for Obama, Tax reform for Trump) was passed without one vote from the other side.  Will Trump use his pen as aggressively as Obama did if Dems gain the House or Senate?  We shall see.

[Paulus]

Idk, I like a lot of the insults and think most are deserved. The smugness from those in the ivory towers has gotten a little out of hand over the past couple of decades. 

[SmokinES3]

7 minutes ago, Paulus said:

Idk, I like a lot of the insults and think most are deserved. The smugness from those in the ivory towers has gotten a little out of hand over the past couple of decades. 

I agree. It is a necessary evil.

[Buddy Hix]

10 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

For those of you that weren't politically aware way back in the 80's, Ronald Reagan brought this country out of misery. His optimism and policies were the first MAGA. Trump is following in his steps but has forgotten that finesse and humor is the "In like Flint way" . He'll figure it out, but is there anymore evidence of his competence?

Trump will figure it out? I have serious doubts that Trump can succeed based on his first 1.5 years in office. 

 

The tariff war with China went poorly because Trump failed to lead a unified team, and with other negotiations (NK, Iran) coming up it is worrisome.

 

 

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

Trump will figure it out? I have serious doubts that Trump can succeed based on his first 1.5 years in office. 

 

The tariff war with China went poorly because Trump failed to lead a unified team, and with other negotiations (NK, Iran) coming up it is worrisome.

 

 

We'll see.

[row_33]

things are different, Reagan appeared during my undergrad years, much enjoyed, had a great buildup in my life from Bill Buckley to be ready for this

 

it's not the same anymore, or at least I got the seriousness out of my system by the closing of Papa Bush's admin.

 

 

[GG]

8 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I can see how conservatives can see the similarities in their rise to power and similar policies, but Reagan was the "shining city on the hill" optimist who was one of the best presidents ever at bringing Americans together.  He had a whimsical, fatherly way about him that inspired people and gave them hope (similar to FDR during the depression).  Trump's personal insults both on the campaign trail and in office to people on both sides of the aisle have turned too many people off for him to ever get the national adoration Reagan had.  Reagan was the master at using self deprecating humor, while Trump is funny when making fun of other people (at the same time pissing half the country off).  

 

I would argue that as far as how they approach the office, Trump is similar to Obama so far.   They're obviously on the opposite side of the political spectrum and have different personalities/styles.  However, both are beloved by their base and loathed by the other side.  Both use/used authoritarian rhetoric that they alone are the key to fixing this nation's problems.  Both are narcissistic, thin skinned, stubborn, and overly concerned about their legacy.  Both claim that they want to bring this country together, but their actions don't meet their rhetoric as they just seem to deepen the tribalism and partisan divide (Obama inviting BLM activists to the White House, Trump pardoning Joe Arpiao and calling private citizens SOB's for kneeling during anthem).  Their major piece of legislation when their party has/had control of Congress (ACA for Obama, Tax reform for Trump) was passed without one vote from the other side.  Will Trump use his pen as aggressively as Obama did if Dems gain the House or Senate?  We shall see.

 

Well said.  Hopefully the result of Trump will be the re-establishment of the 3 branches of government

[SmokinES3]

1 hour ago, Buddy Hix said:

Trump will figure it out? I have serious doubts that Trump can succeed based on his first 1.5 years in office. 

 

The tariff war with China went poorly because Trump failed to lead a unified team, and with other negotiations (NK, Iran) coming up it is worrisome.

 

 

It went very well. We secured far more farming exports and cut tariffs on automobiles double digits... That's just the tip of the iceberg. A $380 billion reduction in the trade deficit!!!! This will be the largest annual reduction in history. Where do you people get your news??

Those scary tweets made it so horrible!!!??

Edited May 22, 2018 by SmokinES3

[row_33]

34 minutes ago, SmokinES3 said:

It went very well. We secured far more farming exports and cut tariffs on automobiles double digits... That's just the tip of the iceberg. A $380 billion reduction in the trade deficit!!!! This will be the largest annual reduction in history. Where do you people get your news??

Those scary tweets made it so horrible!!!??

 

someone sees this more seriously than taking a piss?

 

[Buddy Hix]

46 minutes ago, SmokinES3 said:

It went very well. We secured far more farming exports and cut tariffs on automobiles double digits... That's just the tip of the iceberg. A $380 billion reduction in the trade deficit!!!! This will be the largest annual reduction in history. Where do you people get your news??

Those scary tweets made it so horrible!!!??

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1IN2DT?__twitter_impression=true

 

From Trump himself...

 

And capitulating on ZTE seems like a weak stance, no?

[3rdnlng]

16 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

someone sees this more seriously than taking a piss?

 

Taking a piss can be a very serious need. Try doing an outside wedding rehearsal in front of a fountain with a female minister after having a few beers. Oh, with no way to get into the building to take a piss. So yes, pissing can become very serious.

1 minute ago, Buddy Hix said:

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1IN2DT?__twitter_impression=true

 

From Trump himself...

 

And capitulating on ZTE seems like a weak stance, no?

We'll see.

[row_33]

17 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Taking a piss can be a very serious need. Try doing an outside wedding rehearsal in front of a fountain with a female minister after having a few beers. Oh, with no way to get into the building to take a piss. So yes, pissing can become very serious.

We'll see.

 

do you American say

 

taking A piss

 

or

 

taking THE piss?

 

We get caught in the middle of the two civilizations, not in that sense though....

 

 

[3rdnlng]

6 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

do you American say

 

taking A piss

 

or

 

taking THE piss?

 

We get caught in the middle of the two civilizations, not in that sense though....

 

 

I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you, but we say "taking a piss". Do you Canadians still have a chamber pot next to your bed and sell your piss to the tannery down the street? 

Edited May 22, 2018 by 3rdnlng

[Koko78]

48 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you, but we say "taking a piss". Do you Canadians still have a chamber pot next to your bed and sell your piss to the tannery down the street? 

 

Woe to the unlucky Canuckian who dares to bring stale urine from a female to the local tannery. Not only is it unseemly, but it completely ruins the batch of dye.

 

I think the punishment is 3 years of not being allowed to watch hockey or curling. It's akin to the death penalty.

[row_33]

10 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Woe to the unlucky Canuckian who dares to bring stale urine from a female to the local tannery. Not only is it unseemly, but it completely ruins the batch of dye.

 

I think the punishment is 3 years of not being allowed to watch hockey or curling. It's akin to the death penalty.

 

I don't care about hockey, I just watch the Leafs.

 

 

[Koko78]

6 minutes ago, row_33 said:

I don't care about hockey, I just watch the Leafs.

 

Well played.

[row_33]

15 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Well played.

 

minefield talking to Sabres fans, but i have the upper hand as of today...

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

1 hour ago, row_33 said:

 

do you American say

 

taking A piss

 

or

 

taking THE piss?

 

We get caught in the middle of the two civilizations, not in that sense though....

 

 

 

Actually, we overthrew the British Crown two and a half centuries ago just so we didn't have to use that stupid expression.

[SmokinES3]

2 hours ago, Buddy Hix said:

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1IN2DT?__twitter_impression=true

 

From Trump himself...

 

And capitulating on ZTE seems like a weak stance, no?

That Reuters blurb said nothing and inferred things are going poorly... That's par for the course when it comes to Reuters.

 

We banned ZTE from conducting business here recently. It's being used as a bargaining chip. I don't see that as weak personally... 

[GG]

Just now, SmokinES3 said:

That Reuters blurb said nothing and inferred things are going poorly... That's par for the course when it comes to Reuters.

 

We banned ZTE from conducting business here recently. It's being used as a bargaining chip. I don't see that as weak personally... 

 

It is, if you think that ZTE is an extension of the Chinese intelligence apparatus.

[SmokinES3]

Just now, GG said:

 

It is, if you think that ZTE is an extension of the Chinese intelligence apparatus.

It's a communist government where the 1%er's in government dabble in capitalism. Everything they do is an extension of the Chinese intelligence apparatus.

[GG]

6 minutes ago, SmokinES3 said:

It's a communist government where the 1%er's in government dabble in capitalism. Everything they do is an extension of the Chinese intelligence apparatus.

 

Of course it is. 

 

But why should we be opening up our communication networks to Chinese intelligence?  It has a bit more sensitivity than a Chinese frying pan.

[SmokinES3]

1 hour ago, GG said:

 

Of course it is. 

 

But why should we be opening up our communication networks to Chinese intelligence?  It has a bit more sensitivity than a Chinese frying pan.

Absolutely. I'm sure that is being considered. One would think this admin would be more sensitive to potential illegal covert intelligence gathering than most, given their experience the last few years.

[Tiberius]

Mommy, what did Ronald Reagan do in World War Two? 

 

 

[3rdnlng]

4 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Mommy, what did Ronald Reagan do in World War Two? 

 

 

More than Bill Clinton or Obama did in any subsequent conflicts.

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

More than Bill Clinton or Obama did in any subsequent conflicts.

And that's all it takes to be your hero?? 

 

Wasnt Ronnie a New Deal Democrat?? 

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

And that's all it takes to be your hero?? 

 

Wasnt Ronnie a New Deal Democrat?? 

You can find everything you want to know on Google. I don't want to answer you on anything. You are a waste of my time. It was actually very pleasant when you weren't here performing your dumbass act.

[Tiberius]

Oh, you don't want me in your Trump is a hero thread?? 

 

 

Lol 

[US Egg]

The Clintons gave China the farm in U.S technology, particularly in missile defense,  two decades ago.

 

But of course that's dismissed as no big deal by the Left, even though it rapidly advanced China as a world power.

[Tiberius]

2 minutes ago, Ifartalot said:

The Clintons gave China the farm in U.S technology, particularly in missile defense,  two decades ago.

 

But of course that's dismissed as no big deal by the Left, even though it rapidly advanced China as a world power.

Are you sure Reagan didn't give all that stuff away? He gave weapons to the Iranians, you know that, fart person? 

[B-Man]

(If you read nothing else................read #6)

The Trump Rationale ..............His voters knew what they were getting, and most support him still.

by Victor Davis Hanson

 

Why exactly did nearly half the country vote for Donald Trump?

 

Why also did the arguments of Never Trump Republicans and conservatives have marginal effect on voters? Despite vehement denunciations of the Trump candidacy from many pundits on the right and in the media, Trump nonetheless got about the same percentage of Republican voters (88–90 percent) as did McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012, who both were handily defeated in the Electoral College.

 

Here are some of reasons voters knew what they were getting with Trump and yet nevertheless assumed he was preferable to a Clinton presidency.

 

1) Was Trump disqualified by his occasional but demonstrable character flaws and often rank vulgarity? To believe that plaint, voters would have needed a standard by which both past media of coverage of the White House and the prior behavior of presidents offered some useful benchmarks. Unfortunately, the sorts of disturbing things we know about Trump we often did not know in the past about other presidents. By any fair measure, the sexual gymnastics in the White House and West Wing of JFK and Bill Clinton, both successful presidents, were likely well beyond President Trump’s randy habits. Harry Truman’s prior Tom Pendergast machine connections make Trump steaks and Trump university seem minor. By any classical definition, Lyndon Johnson could have been characterized as both a crook and a pervert. In sum, the public is still not convinced that Trump’s crudities are necessarily different from what they imagine of some past presidents. But it does seem convinced, in our age of a 24/7 globalized Internet, that 90 percent negative media coverage of the Trump tenure is quite novel.

 

2) Personal morality and public governance are related, but we are not always quite sure how. Jimmy Carter was both a more moral person and a worse president than Bill Clinton. Jerry Ford was a more ethical leader than Donald Trump — and had a far worse first 16 months. FDR was a superb wartime leader — and carried on an affair in the White House, tried to pack and hijack the Supreme Court, sent U.S. citizens into internment camps, and abused his presidential powers in ways that might get a president impeached today. In the 1944 election, the Republican nominee Tom Dewey was the more ethical — and stuffy — man. In matters of spiritual leadership and moral role models, we wish that profane, philandering (including an affair with his step-niece), and unsteady General George S. Patton had just conducted himself in private and public as did the upright General Omar Bradley. But then we would have wished even more that Bradley had just half the strategic and tactical skill of Patton. If he had, thousands of lives might have been spared in the advance to the Rhine.

 

3) Trump did not run in a vacuum. A presidential vote is not a one-person race for sainthood but, like it or not, often a choice between a bad and worse option. Hillary Clinton would have likely ensured a 16-year progressive regnum. As far as counterfactual “what ifs” go, by 2024, at the end of Clinton’s second term, a conservative might not have recognized the federal judiciary, given the nature of lifetime appointees. The lives of millions of Americans would have been radically changed in an Obama-Clinton economy that probably would not have seen GDP or unemployment levels that Americans are now enjoying. Fracking, coal production, and new oil exploration would have been vastly curtailed. The out-of-control EPA would have become even more powerful. Half the country simply did not see the democratic socialist European Union, and its foreign and domestic agendas, as the model for 21st-century America.

What John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page, Samantha Power, Susan Rice, Peter Strzok, Sally Yates, and others did in 2016 would never have been known — given that their likely obstruction, lying, and lawbreaking were predicated on being unspoken recommendations for praise and advancement in a sure-thing Clinton administration. Christopher Steele might have either been unknown — or lionized.

 

Open borders, Chinese trade aggression, the antics of the Clinton Foundation, the Uranium One deal, the Iran deal, estrangement from Israel and the Gulf states, a permanently nuclear North Korea, leading from behind — all that and far more would be the continued norm into the 2020s. Ben Rhodes, architect of the Iran deal and the media echo chamber, might have been the national-security adviser. The red-state losers would be institutionalized as clingers, crazies, wackos, deplorables, and irredeemables in a Clinton administration. A Supreme Court with justices such as Loretta Lynch, Elizabeth Warren, and Eric Holder would have made the court little different in its agendas from those of the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and Harvard Law School.

 

4) Something had gone haywire with the Republican party at the national level. Since 1988, it had failed to achieve 51 percent of the popular presidential vote, losing the popular vote in five out of the past six elections, writing off as permanently lost the purple states of the Midwest. Most Republicans privately had all but given up on cracking the Electoral College matrix, given the lost-for-good big blue states such as California, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New York, changing demography in the Southwest, and the supposedly permanently forfeited Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

 

The proverbial Republican elite had become convinced that globalization, open borders, and free but unfair trade were either unstoppable or the fated future or simply irrelevant. Someone or something — even if painfully and crudely delivered — was bound to arise to remind the conservative Washington–New York punditocracy, the party elite, and Republican opinion makers that a third of the country had all but tuned them out. It was no longer sustainable to expect the conservative base to vote for more versions of sober establishmentarians like McCain and Romney just because they were Republicans, well-connected, well-résuméd, well-known, well-behaved, and played by the gloves-on Marquess of Queensberry political rules. Instead, such men and much of orthodox Republican ideology were suspect.

 

Amnestied illegal aliens would not in our lifetimes become conservative family-values voters. Vast trade deficits with China and ongoing chronic commercial cheating would not inevitably lead to the prosperity that would guarantee Chinese democracy. Asymmetrical trade deals were not sacrosanct under the canons of free trade. Unfettered globalization, outsourcing, and offshoring were not both inevitable and always positive. The losers of globalization did not bring their misery on themselves. The Iran deal was not better than nothing. North Korea would not inevitably remain nuclear. Middle East peace did not hinge of constant outreach to and subsidy of the corrupt and autocratic Palestinian Authority and Hamas cliques.

 

5) Lots of deep-state rust needed scraping. Yet it is hard to believe that either a Republican or Democratic traditionalist would have seen unemployment go below 4 percent, or the GDP rate exceed 3 percent, or would have ensured the current level of deregulation and energy production. 

 

{snip}

 

6) Something or someone was needed to remind the country that there is no longer a Democratic party as we once knew it. It is now a progressive and identity-politics religious movement. Trump took on his left-wing critics as few had before, did not back down, and did not offer apologies. He traded blow for blow with them. The result was not just media and cultural hysteria but also a catharsis that revealed what Americans knew but had not seen so overtly demonstrated by the new Left: the unapologetic media bias; chic assassination talk; the politicization of sports, Hollywood, and entertainment in slavish service to progressivism; the Internet virtue-signaling lynch mob; the out-of-control progressive deep state; and the new tribalism that envisions permanent ethnic and racial blocs while resenting assimilation and integration into the melting pot. For good or evil, the trash-talking and candid Trump challenged progressives. They took up the offer in spades and melted down — and America is getting a good look at where each side really sits.

 

In the end, only the people will vote on Trumpism. His supporters knew full well after July 2016 that his possible victory would come with a price — one they deemed more than worth paying given the past and present alternatives. Most also no longer trust polls or the media. To calibrate the national mood, they simply ask Trump voters whether they regret their 2016 votes (few do) and whether any Never Trump voters might reconsider (some are), and then they’re usually reassured that what is happening is what they thought would happen: a 3 percent GDP economy, low unemployment, record energy production, pushbacks on illegal immigration, no Iran deal, no to North Korean missiles pointed at the U.S., renewed friendship with Israel and the Gulf states, a deterrent foreign policy, stellar judicial appointments — along with Robert Mueller, Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen, and lots more, no doubt, to come.

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/trump-rationale-why-voters-chose-him-and-support-him-now/

[Buftex]

PPP...where sanity goes to die...

[THEHARDTRUTH]

1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said:

You can find everything you want to know on Google. I don't want to answer you on anything. You are a waste of my time. It was actually very pleasant when you weren't here performing your dumbass act.

Take your ball and go home Trumptard. Your sister and the livestock need some more affection.

[3rdnlng]

8 minutes ago, THEHARDTRUTH said:

Take your ball and go home Trumptard. Your sister and the livestock need some more affection.

Have you forgotten the pummeling you took the last time you were here? Do you feel lucky, punk?

[B-Man]

22 minutes ago, Buftex said:

PPP...where sanity goes to die...

 

15 minutes ago, THEHARDTRUTH said:

Take your ball and go home Trumptard. Your sister and the livestock need some more affection.

 

....Actually reading the posts and comprehending them ?....that's too hard.

 

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

....Actually reading the posts and comprehending them ?....that's too hard.

 

They are the drive-by liberals whose magazines can only hold one bullet at a time. Buftex has always been an idiot and that other dude thinks he's contributing or "showing me" by insinuating I'm involved with bestiality or incest. What he lacks in class he makes up for in assmudgeonry.

[Buftex]

41 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

They are the drive-by liberals whose magazines can only hold one bullet at a time. Buftex has always been an idiot and that other dude thinks he's contributing or "showing me" by insinuating I'm involved with bestiality or incest. What he lacks in class he makes up for in assmudgeonry.

Sorry man, but you are !@#$ing insane...

[Wacka]

3 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Mommy, what did Ronald Reagan do in World War Two? 

 

 

Made training films.

[DC Tom]

3 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Mommy, what did Ronald Reagan do in World War Two? 

 

 

 

He tried to get a combat posting in Europe, but was disqualified from overseas service because of bad nearsightedness.  You dumb ****.