What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Valmy]

I have to hope his lifetime of public service at least has given him some pragmatism in running things should he win.

Well apparently he could be pragmatic back when he was mayor of Burlington (in between honeymooning in the USSR and praising the Sandinistas in Nicaragua).  But that was 30 years ago.  Since coming to Congress he's been mostly unconcerned with being pragmatic.

Yeah and this is who the people want dude. I mean you can throw your hands up in exasperation all you want but Sanders might just win Texas which blows my mind. So you can lecture me all you want but I live here and I have to think about the implications of the last two Presidential elections. My very conservative prosperous state voted for Trump last time and might end up voting for Sanders this time. That's crazy. If people in this economy are thinking like this well...

So in this atmosphere where people are turning out for wall builders and left wing cranks we want to send ol' barely coherent Joe Biden up there? It makes me nervous.

[Sheilbh]

Well apparently he could be pragmatic back when he was mayor of Burlington (in between honeymooning in the USSR and praising the Sandinistas in Nicaragua).  But that was 30 years ago.  Since coming to Congress he's been mostly unconcerned with being pragmatic.

It's easier to be a purist if you are, effectively a single Senator with little pull. His record in an executive office is, I think, interesting and relevant.

[Barrister]

Yeah and this is who the people want dude. I mean you can throw your hands up in exasperation all you want but Sanders might just win Texas which blows my mind.

There appears to be a huge swing in the last few days, with Biden getting massive momentum.

RCP average has Sanders only 1.5 points ahead of Biden, and that's with Buttigieg and Klobuchar still included.  They only had 8 points between them, but that could be enough to put Biden over the edge.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/tx/texas_democratic_primary-6875.html

[Syt]

Daily Caller doing The Lord's Trump's work on Facebook.



See also this thread: https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1234845263786840074

[The Minsky Moment]

Politico made the mistake of quoting things Donald Trump says - of course there is false information in there.

[Valmy]

Yeah and this is who the people want dude. I mean you can throw your hands up in exasperation all you want but Sanders might just win Texas which blows my mind.

There appears to be a huge swing in the last few days, with Biden getting massive momentum.

RCP average has Sanders only 1.5 points ahead of Biden, and that's with Buttigieg and Klobuchar still included.  They only had 8 points between them, but that could be enough to put Biden over the edge.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/tx/texas_democratic_primary-6875.html

I get that and Biden might still win, but I think you are kind of minimizing the phenomenon here. The very fact this guy won 20+ states in 2016 and, almost unbelievably, is considered a front runner right now is a big red flag ()

[The Minsky Moment]

One thing that shocked me here on Languish is lack of support for pragmatism.  Yang? Sanders? You're choosing the country's top executive, you're not making a statement.  If we're that practical here, then it's not looking good for the country.  We need to make politics a little more boring again, it's not a bad thing to leave some things to elites.

I had no intention of voting for Yang, but I don't see any reason to think we would be incapable of being a top executive.  He's smart, he's got a law degree, he ran a company and a non-profit. He seems hard working and well-organized.

Sander is a US senator, we've had less experienced and credentialed Presidents then him that have been reasonably successful.

[DGuller]

I'm not saying any of them are stupid.  Politicians are typically very smart as a general rule (I know some stupid people like to think otherwise to feel better about themselves, but sorry, that's true).  However, there is a lot of skill involved in being an effective executive in a political and bureaucratic environment.  I'm not sure it's wise to see whether someone's skills translate to those by starting with a presidency.

[Valmy]

I'm not saying any of them are stupid.  Politicians are typically very smart as a general rule (I know some stupid people like to think otherwise to feel better about themselves, but sorry, that's true).  However, there is a lot of skill involved in being an effective executive in a political and bureaucratic environment.  I'm not sure it's wise to see whether someone's skills translate to those by starting with a presidency.

His non-profit was a very political and bureaucratic environment.

Polticians are very smart about matters of politics, I think Yang is also smart in many other areas that would make him an excellent President. I certainly do not hold the same opinion of any other of the non-office holders out there.

[dps]

Historically, some of our worst Presidents have been guys who, on paper, seemed to have everything you'd want in the office (say, Buchanan, for example);  and we've also had men who were very good Presidents but, on paper, had very little in the way of past positive achievements (Truman might be the best example).

[The Minsky Moment]

Lincoln's experience was light. One term in the House, a failed Senate campaign, a few years as state legislator in Illinois.

[Admiral Yi]

Historically, some of our worst Presidents have been guys who, on paper, seemed to have everything you'd want in the office (say, Buchanan, for example);  and we've also had men who were very good Presidents but, on paper, had very little in the way of past positive achievements (Truman might be the best example).

I didn't read this carefully the first time, thought you were talking about Pat Buchanan, and wondered what the hell you had been smoking.

[Razgovory]

I'm not saying any of them are stupid.  Politicians are typically very smart as a general rule (I know some stupid people like to think otherwise to feel better about themselves, but sorry, that's true).  However, there is a lot of skill involved in being an effective executive in a political and bureaucratic environment.  I'm not sure it's wise to see whether someone's skills translate to those by starting with a presidency.

Yeah, Democrats were convinced that George W. was stupid and allowed him to run circles around them as a result.

[dps]

Historically, some of our worst Presidents have been guys who, on paper, seemed to have everything you'd want in the office (say, Buchanan, for example);  and we've also had men who were very good Presidents but, on paper, had very little in the way of past positive achievements (Truman might be the best example).

I didn't read this carefully the first time, thought you were talking about Pat Buchanan, and wondered what the hell you had been smoking.

Yeah, wrong Buchanan there.  I thought about clarifying who I had in mind when I was posting it, but figured that since I was referring to people who actually served as President, it would be obvious which Buchanan I meant.

[Eddie Teach]

Here, I thought you meant Daisy.