What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[dps]

Renardo might be confused by the ambiguity attaching to the term these days.  I take it to mean hawkishness on the deficit, but some people use it to mean low taxes regardless of deficits.

Yeah, it's pretty clear that we need to either reduce spending or raise taxes, or eventually we'll have to do both (and I'm concerned that we may be near, if not past, the point where we have to do both).  Neither party wants to acknowledge this.  The Republicans are clearly not willing to raise taxes but lack the guts to really address spending.  The Democrats are generally more than willing to raise taxes, but then they just want to spend more rather than to reduce the deficit.

[garbon]

Interesting that neither former President Bush voted for Donald Trump.  Not sure if we've ever had a former President publicly not supporting their party's nominee, even if the nominee is an -ino.

That's because it's not their party anymore.  It's not even a post-Constitutional party; it's become an anti-Constitutional party.  People like you that consider yourselves conservatives need to come to that realization now.

What the hell choice do we have but to try to take back the Republican Party?  It had been frustrating enough even before the rise of Trumpism trying to keep the Republicans doing more than paying lip service to fiscal conservatism, but the Democrats won't even pay lip service to it.

So neither party in fact cares about the issue, but one of them is dishonest about it.  So you prefer the dishonest one?

I was just speaking about this and was like if neither party is going to be fiscally responsible, might as well support the one that is at least trying to help people.

[Razgovory]

When's the last time the Seedybot generated a comment in a political thread that had any actual content?  Open question.

I'm sure Raz has the exact date and time.

Lately I've been using facebook to see if I can pick out the people with rap sheets.  I don't have a legitimate use for the stuff I learned in those old criminology classes, but at least it keeps me occupied.  I would have made a good secret policeman.

[dps]

Interesting that neither former President Bush voted for Donald Trump.  Not sure if we've ever had a former President publicly not supporting their party's nominee, even if the nominee is an -ino.

That's because it's not their party anymore.  It's not even a post-Constitutional party; it's become an anti-Constitutional party.  People like you that consider yourselves conservatives need to come to that realization now.

What the hell choice do we have but to try to take back the Republican Party?  It had been frustrating enough even before the rise of Trumpism trying to keep the Republicans doing more than paying lip service to fiscal conservatism, but the Democrats won't even pay lip service to it.

So neither party in fact cares about the issue, but one of them is dishonest about it.  So you prefer the dishonest one?

I was just speaking about this and was like if neither party is going to be fiscally responsible, might as well support the one that is at least trying to help people.

For that to lead me to support the Democratic Party, you'll have to convince me that the Democrats are pursuing policies that will actually help anyone.  As it stands right now, the Democratic Party is as bad as the Trumpinistas when it comes to pushing economic policies that are deleterious for everyone in the long run.  The only hope I see is with anti-Trump Republicans (and only some of them).

Right now I can't in good conscience support either party, and tbh, I can't see how anyone who isn't a fool or a jackass can do so.  Reluctantly vote for some candidates of one party or another, yeah, but support either party itself, no.

[Zoupa]

You're either gravely misinformed or willfully ignorant if you're equating both parties in terms of long term policy proposals.

[Zoupa]

Renardo might be confused by the ambiguity attaching to the term these days.  I take it to mean hawkishness on the deficit, but some people use it to mean low taxes regardless of deficits.

Yeah, it's pretty clear that we need to either reduce spending or raise taxes, or eventually we'll have to do both (and I'm concerned that we may be near, if not past, the point where we have to do both).  Neither party wants to acknowledge this.  The Republicans are clearly not willing to raise taxes but lack the guts to really address spending.  The Democrats are generally more than willing to raise taxes, but then they just want to spend more rather than to reduce the deficit.

When's the last time Democrats raised taxes?

[The Minsky Moment]

Another feature of the wonderful hedge fund and real estate mogul trillion dollar giveaway -- aka the House tax plan -- is that it would kill the favorable tax treatment of private infrastructure bonds.  I point this out because the use of those bonds was the last fig leaf for Trump's phantom infrastructure plan (actual direct public expenditure was given up almost from the start).

To the extent infrastructure needs are deficient - not a highly contested fact AFAIK - continuing to under-build or under maintain is a form of increasing debt  - i.e. it is deferring spending to a later date and likely in a larger amount. 

The tax proposal thus worsens the fiscal position in two ways - directly by increasing year-on-year deficits, and indirectly by blowing up future spending requirements.

[DGuller]

For that to lead me to support the Democratic Party, you'll have to convince me that the Democrats are pursuing policies that will actually help anyone.  As it stands right now, the Democratic Party is as bad as the Trumpinistas when it comes to pushing economic policies that are deleterious for everyone in the long run.  The only hope I see is with anti-Trump Republicans (and only some of them).

Right now I can't in good conscience support either party, and tbh, I can't see how anyone who isn't a fool or a jackass can do so.  Reluctantly vote for some candidates of one party or another, yeah, but support either party itself, no.

Ooh, here goes that self-important "I'm too smart to actually support either of the two parties, I'm wise enough to know they're both shit".  Wise geniuses like that may not be in the majority of the electorate, but they're the kingmakers, and they enabled the worst elements in US politics through their intellect and wisdom.

[crazy canuck]

For that to lead me to support the Democratic Party, you'll have to convince me that the Democrats are pursuing policies that will actually help anyone.

How do policies which are designed help the people not help people?

[Jacob]

For that to lead me to support the Democratic Party, you'll have to convince me that the Democrats are pursuing policies that will actually help anyone.

How do policies which are designed help the people not help people?

I think it's the old "people become dependent on social services, so it's actually harmful to help them" logic at work here.

[CountDeMoney]

Ooh, here goes that self-important "I'm too smart to actually support either of the two parties, I'm wise enough to know they're both shit".

"I hate them both...but I'm going to vote Republican anyway."

[CountDeMoney]

I think it's the old "people become dependent on social services, so it's actually harmful to help them" logic at work here.

It's not even that esoteric. The politics of petulance and punishment aren't that complex.

[Jacob]

Ooh, here goes that self-important "I'm too smart to actually support either of the two parties, I'm wise enough to know they're both shit".

"I hate them both...but I'm going to vote Republican anyway."

Yeah I think the hate for the Democrats is basically defined as [hate for GOP] + 1. No matter what stupid crap the GOP does (and no matter what the Democrats do, good or bad), reasons will always found for loathing for the Democrats a little bit more to justify staying with the GOP.

[garbon]

Ooh, here goes that self-important "I'm too smart to actually support either of the two parties, I'm wise enough to know they're both shit".

"I hate them both...but I'm going to vote Republican anyway."

Yeah I think the hate for the Democrats is basically defined as [hate for GOP] + 1. No matter what stupid crap the GOP does (and no matter what the Democrats do, good or bad), reasons will always found for loathing for the Democrats a little bit more to justify staying with the GOP.

Which is so odd given that the GOP is basically just a collection of cartoon villains.

[CountDeMoney]

Yeah I think the hate for the Democrats is basically defined as [hate for GOP] + 1. No matter what stupid crap the GOP does (and no matter what the Democrats do, good or bad), reasons will always found for loathing for the Democrats a little bit more to justify staying with the GOP.

Plenty of reasons, actually.

Negros.
Womens.
Unions.
Jews and their cabals.
Fags.
Furringers.


No, see, it's OK:  you can say the reasons why.   
Because until lefties figure out that it's not much more complicated than that, and until they realize that saying what they don't want to say out of politeness doesn't fucking work, paralysis by lefty navel-gazing will continue.

"Reasons will always found for loathing for the Democrats a little bit more."  Whatever.  Fucking pussy.