If you want to dump Trump....

[mzilliox]

If you want to defeat Trump then read this article and start writing letters to newspapers and magazines all over the country, but especially in the important EC states, that addresses it's thrust:

'I'd like to vote Democratic': the swing voters who want a reason not to back Trump again | US news | The Guardian

This is my take-away summary of the article but read it yourself; you may glean additional perspective on the concerns of the people that we need to reach, and need to win:
1) Folks know that Trump is a huckster and liar and they'd prefer to vote democratic but they see/think that the job outlook and economy have improved.
2) They note that other countries have affordable healthcare for everybody and wonder why we can't copy and deploy the best one here?
3) They don't trust politicians,
4) But Bernie and Warren too socialist!

Clearly those issues need to be sussed out for them. In a nutshell I think of it thusly:
1) Look at the unemployment chart since, say, 2000 and note who's policies clearly did the heavy lift of reducing the UE rate. The decline in the UE rate and the sky high stock market valuations are based on Obama era actions. Trump didn't do it, he merely didn't change it. His other efforts, as they relate to regular working folks, have ranged from harming them to nibbling around the edges of existing programs while failing to address some of the emerging existential threats. There should be an economist on the Salon who can explain why continuing extremely low Fed rates is a long term terrible idea.
2) For affordable, national, cradle to grave healthcare Bernie and 'Liz propose a proven (here and abroad), cost effective (here and abroad) single payer system that already covers a large portion of our population. We have the system in place and operational and it wouldn't require replowing constitutional grounds to scale it up. Phase it in over a reasonable time frame so that insurance companies can adjust their biz models. Possibly subcontract to them to perform the administrative work since they would gradually be phased out of the underwriting.
3) They don't trust politicians and that includes Trump. Bernie's message has been consistent for ever, 'Liz makes sense and both have been walking the trust talk for a long time. Neither propose turning our economy into a socialist construct. Medicare didn't make us a socialist state as was asserted back in the day and making it the basis of a tax funded national healthcare system won't do it either. Support for unions, vastly higher taxes on billionaires and sensible regulation of industry, the financial world and environment won't do it either but those things will help working folks. And we'll still retain an enormous and beneficial capitalistic engine...but better regulated (like reinstating Glass Steagal, protecting the environment and workers).
4) If you want the benefits to society of healthcare for all, unions, a military and an economy that results in a wide distribution of wealth (which is what made the USA the envy of much of the world when I was a kid) then you intrinsically support, and we require, a fair chunk of our economic activity to be based on public programs, AKA "socialized" activities, along with well regulated capitalism. That doesn't make us a socialist state. It makes us a better version of what we already are!
5) Bern and 'Liz's proposals address all of the above and have done for a long time. They aren't "commies".

Rather than utterly wasting your time arguing with Trump supporters here or anywhere else, spend your efforts advancing those ideas, and others that are key, everywhere you can. Or work to get folks registered. The types of folks in the interview are the people that are available to win over. Die-hard Trump supporters are not. Newspapers from small & rural through large and cosmopolitan need to be running cogent pieces on this stuff, or we lose, and the USA loses.

Now, go get to it.

well said. im getting to it brother, i have written many letters, and will be hosting an event where we will be registering voters. this isnt my only political outlet. more like a place to test ideas

[Matthew Strongin]

The strongest we’ve seen as president for quite some some time. He will be re-elected for a 2nd term. He ushered in some of the best economic numbers in history with his tax cuts, trade policy, and deregulation. He reset the trade relationship with China through strength, we’ve been told to simply accept that the trade relations with China will always be unfair. He reset the relationship with the Middle East after the last president drew a red line then didn’t react when it was crossed. He has dramatically reduced illegal immigration. Record stock market highs.

Maybe these things aren’t important to you, but to most folks jobs, opportunity, increased wages, growing 401k are the foundation of their lives and the lives of their families. Maybe you’re the recipient of tremendous opportunity & privilege that these things aren’t important to you. Kudos to you and/or your family that put you in a position where these are not a very high priority in your life.

But they are to most people. Good people. Working people.

You’re entitled to your opinions, but the blind hatred of trump since the moment he was elected reeks of indoctrination and entitlement.

But look on the bright side, all of the hatred & efforts don’t seem to be affecting his ability to achieve results or his re-election chances. So let me know how that works out for you.

Those things are important to many, if not most people. The disagreement is rooted in attribution and consequences. Attribution of the root cause or origin of what you describe as a Trump accomplishment. Take unemployment or the stock market for an example. It's not like he inherited a declining market or ballooning unemployment. Other's have touched on the Fed and buybacks and other factors at play; it's disingenuous to attribute the current state of the DOWJ to Trump's trade war or tax cuts or deregulation. The charts are clear that the trends started well before him. And, with regards to consequences, many believe (and rightfully so, IMO) that the long terms implication of stock market influence, deregulation, tax cuts/deficit, etc. will result in a backlash in the economy that will see many of these "gains" wiped out with other economic consequences that will hurt nearly everyone. And the impacts of deregulation or illegally limiting asylum seekers or ignoring the root cause of underlying economic issues like underemployment will have long term negative effects on our environment, our economic stability and the quality of life that we're all deserving of.

The implication that dislike of Trump comes from a place of entitlement is absurd. Government should be about stewardship. About building a durable society that can sustain us all through good and bad. Trump's policies lack an appreciation for the future he'll leave behind, they are focused on political wins, self-dealing (or for his wealthy supporters), and short term gains at the expense of anything that gets in the way. And that doesn't align with my desire to ensure my 3 year old son has a world worth living in as he grows up.

One thing we do agree on, though, is that he'll win a second term.

[mzilliox]

Those things are important to many, if not most people. The disagreement is rooted in attribution and consequences. Attribution of the root cause or origin of what you describe as a Trump accomplishment. Take unemployment or the stock market for an example. It's not like he inherited a declining market or ballooning unemployment. Other's have touched on the Fed and buybacks and other factors at play; it's disingenuous to attribute the current state of the DOWJ to Trump's trade war or tax cuts or deregulation. The charts are clear that the trends started well before him. And, with regards to consequences, many believe (and rightfully so, IMO) that the long terms implication of stock market influence, deregulation, tax cuts/deficit, etc. will result in a backlash in the economy that will see many of these "gains" wiped out with other economic consequences that will hurt nearly everyone. And the impacts of deregulation or illegally limiting asylum seekers or ignoring the root cause of underlying economic issues like underemployment will have long term negative effects on our environment, our economic stability and the quality of life that we're all deserving of.

The implication that dislike of Trump comes from a place of entitlement is absurd. Government should be about stewardship. About building a durable society that can sustain us all through good and bad. Trump's policies lack an appreciation for the future he'll leave behind, they are focused on political wins, self-dealing (or for his wealthy supporters), and short term gains at the expense of anything that gets in the way. And that doesn't align with my desire to ensure my 3 year old son has a world worth living in as he grows up.

One thing we do agree on, though, is that he'll win a second term.

well stated. this comes very much down to ability to think in long term and short term. Trump is a short term, give me optics now kind of person. it seems a mistake to accept short term gains in trade for long term question mark pointing toward uncertainty and decline. we are a long lived species with brains capable of critical thought beyond our own tiny individual existence. its rare among animals to be able to reduce ego to zero in theory, we should be able to take advantage of that, alas, there are too many folks getting rich of short term gains, and this getting rich prospect is too much to turn down for average folks.

at the end of the day, there needs to be a balance of economic viability (it doesn't require growth) and a sensible approach to our life sustaining environment. money is man made, the environment is a truth separate from man.

Matt touches on the points about the economy costs vs benefits of deregulation, etc. smart and rich folks will always keep that engine running, and here we will always have the opportunity you mention, until climate change makes it impossible to carry on with business as usual (estimates are around 40% GDP loss worldwide. its never been different under any party, ever, except that one time when bad actors cheated and crashed the housing market. and now your short term thinking boy is working to take away the protections put in place to avoid this very type of crash. so im just not seeing any evidence that we need trump to have economic success. however i do see a need to have someone else as president to do all of the rest of the things the majority of Americans desire, like health care, common sense gun laws like in Virginia, and a leadership team who has a long term vision for a world that is rapidly changing, no mater how much you dont want it to. the days of undervaluing future well being and non money variables needs to end. We have to start accounting for environmental destruction properly, and we have to at least pretend to care about the next generations of humans. we are too selfish

[ides1056]

"But Trump is proposing something new here, even if it’s wholly un-theorized and not thought through. He’s proposing a presidency that does not enforce unity, in which the president imposes no discipline on agencies, staff, or cabinet secretaries—even while demanding unswerving personal loyalty. The executive is characterized less by energy than by mania; meanwhile, the president tolerates the propagation of multiple policies and the undermining of his own authority, thus eroding the core value of accountability that executive control is supposed to bring."

How Trump Busted the Myth of the Unitary Executive - The Atlantic

[mzilliox]

"But Trump is proposing something new here, even if it’s wholly un-theorized and not thought through. He’s proposing a presidency that does not enforce unity, in which the president imposes no discipline on agencies, staff, or cabinet secretaries—even while demanding unswerving personal loyalty. The executive is characterized less by energy than by mania; meanwhile, the president tolerates the propagation of multiple policies and the undermining of his own authority, thus eroding the core value of accountability that executive control is supposed to bring."

How Trump Busted the Myth of the Unitary Executive - The Atlantic

i posted this one somewhere today too, i found it a fascinating look into how "tough" trump is.

how did we get here? what a shame, so much potential...

[HorsCat]

he'll win a second term.

IMO, this is an open question. There is no doubt that he could win a second term; several factors augur in favor of that. But it is not guaranteed. He will need to, at a minimum, replicate his 2016 performance, where he lost the popular vote by a wide margin and eked out wins in WI, MI and PA based on a total of ~70,000 votes out of 120+ million cast. All states that went blue in 2016 will remain blue. Most states that went red in 2016 will remain red. TX, GA and AZ are showing signs of possibly maybe sorta being competitive for Ds. Here's hoping at least one of WI, MI and PA have a moment of lucidity. A reelected Trump would be (even more of) a nightmare for the country.

[Matthew Strongin]

IMO, this is an open question. There is no doubt that he could win a second term; several factors augur in favor of that. But it is not guaranteed. He will need to, at a minimum, replicate his 2016 performance, where he lost the popular vote by a wide margin and eked out wins in WI, MI and PA based on a total of ~70,000 votes out of 120+ million cast. All states that went blue in 2016 will remain blue. Most states that went red in 2016 will remain red. TX, GA and AZ are showing signs of possibly maybe sorta being competitive for Ds. Here's hoping at least one of WI, MI and PA have a moment of lucidity. A reelected Trump would be (even more of) a nightmare for the country.

I really, really hope you're right. I do.

[zachateseverything]

The strongest we’ve seen as president for quite some some time. He will be re-elected for a 2nd term. He ushered in some of the best economic numbers in history with his tax cuts, trade policy, and deregulation. He reset the trade relationship with China through strength, we’ve been told to simply accept that the trade relations with China will always be unfair. He reset the relationship with the Middle East after the last president drew a red line then didn’t react when it was crossed. He has dramatically reduced illegal immigration. Record stock market highs.

Maybe these things aren’t important to you, but to most folks jobs, opportunity, increased wages, growing 401k are the foundation of their lives and the lives of their families. Maybe you’re the recipient of tremendous opportunity & privilege that these things aren’t important to you. Kudos to you and/or your family that put you in a position where these are not a very high priority in your life.

But they are to most people. Good people. Working people.

You’re entitled to your opinions, but the blind hatred of trump since the moment he was elected reeks of indoctrination and entitlement.

But look on the bright side, all of the hatred & efforts don’t seem to be affecting his ability to achieve results or his re-election chances. So let me know how that works out for you.

How is someone that's unable to accept blame or be held accountable for anything in his life strong? Again, this has nothing to do with policy positions. The guy straight up can't admit a mistake much less learn from one.

And as others have noted, we've had steady economic and jobs growth for a decade. The US economy bottomed out in 2009 only a couple months into Obama's first term. The unemployment rate followed a similar trend.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

How on earth is any of that growth attributable to Trump?

[guido]

Don't waste your time. I've been through all the numbers for Glenn in several threads now. Fox says Trump is a hero so he must be.

Why don't we shut these threads down? It is like a broken record.

[Dallas Tex]

How is someone that's unable to accept blame or be held accountable for anything in his life strong? Again, this has nothing to do with policy positions. The guy straight up can't admit a mistake much less learn from one.

And as others have noted, we've had steady economic and jobs growth for a decade. The US economy bottomed out in 2009 only a couple months into Obama's first term. The unemployment rate followed a similar trend.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

How on earth is any of that growth attributable to Trump?

You're proposing that since the economy was not receding but had begun to grow 'only months into obamas first term' in 2009 that it is completely logical to assume it would continue to grow unimpeded through 2020. Does that make sense to you?

Using that logic, since the economy had already begun to grow 'only months into obamas first term', it'd be fair to say any economic gains made by the obama administration are the result of the bush administration? Does that make sense to you?

Taking it a step further, are you saying that the corporate tax cut to 21% from 35% in no way contributed to unemployment at 50 year lows, stock market at historical new highs, and a thriving economy? Would that make sense to you?


Ask yourselves an honest question. If the economy was in the shitter right now, would you be saying well the trending dictated that we are way overdue for a recession so none of it is related to trump? Seriously, post your answers here:

[theflashunc]

You're proposing that since the economy was not receding but had begun to grow 'only months into obamas first term' in 2009 that it is completely logical to assume it would continue to grow unimpeded through 2020. Does that make sense to you?

Using that logic, since the economy had already begun to grow 'only months into obamas first term', it'd be fair to say any economic gains made by the obama administration are the result of the bush administration? Does that make sense to you?

Taking it a step further, are you saying that the corporate tax cut to 21% from 35% in no way contributed to unemployment at 50 lows, stock market at historical new highs, and a thriving economy? Would that make sense to you?

No one's saying the tax cuts and other policy choices the Trump administration has made have not continued or goosed the gains the economy has been showing for nigh on the past decade.

What people, myself included, question is the nature of the tax cut (did corporations really need another giveaway when many already pay zero in taxes?), how it was financed (adding an estimated trillion dollars to the deficit over the next decade), and providing little tax relief for middle and working class Americans while giving away huge sums to the already wealthy. This did provide a bit of a sugar high to the economy through 2018 and into 2019, but that's begun to slow. And paired with Fed rate cuts that the President was screaming for constantly, has all left policymakers and the administration with little ammunition in reserve to fight the next economic downturn. The overwhelming consensus is the 2008 Great Recession didn't explode into a full global Depression because of the forceful, sizable action from central bankers across the world to leverage massive resources at their disposal -- built up over years of boom -- to respond when the worst struck.

And that's the crux of the argument. The President is only concerned about the DJIA and the short term. He has little care for how these policies could leave us with zero or negative interest rates, stagflation or deflation, and a Congress and Federal Reserve with little ability to respond to kickstart the economy again. Ask the Japanese how much fun the Lost Decade was.

The moves all in vacuum are totally and completely defensible. But in aggregate they paint a picture of someone both incredibly self-interested and dangerously myopic about what will happen, in part because he knows the economic story is the only one he can use to attract any kind of unaffiliated voters in 2020.

[zachateseverything]

You're proposing that since the economy was not receding but had begun to grow 'only months into obamas first term' in 2009 that it is completely logical to assume it would continue to grow unimpeded through 2020. Does that make sense to you?

Using that logic, since the economy had already begun to grow 'only months into obamas first term', it'd be fair to say any economic gains made by the obama administration are the result of the bush administration? Does that make sense to you?

Taking it a step further, are you saying that the corporate tax cut to 21% from 35% in no way contributed to unemployment at 50 year lows, stock market at historical new highs, and a thriving economy? Would that make sense to you?


Ask yourselves an honest question. If the economy was in the shitter right now, would you be saying well the trending dictated that we are way overdue for a recession so none of it is related to trump? Seriously, post your answers here:

I don't know that you're using logic here as much as you are arguing a strawman and leaping to conclusions. We've had steady growth since 2009. It's difficult to attribute that to a single politician or policy much less give all of the credit to one person who wasn't in office for the bulk of the growth.

Economic gains under Obama, especially early in his first term were due to the bi-partisan EES act of 2008, the Economic Stimulus package of 2009, and smart monetary policy (decried by the Right wing echo chamber as quantitative easing).

The tax bill hasn't really had that much of an impact on economic growth or employment rates. Companies are just holding onto those tax savings and not using the money to make investments in people or capital. But the tax bill certainly has driven the deficit upwards.

because I understand that the business cycle is a thing I'm not sure I would default to blaming Trump if the economy went into a recession. but between trying to get the Fed to keep interest rates low, and ramming through both tax cut bills and an increase in spending, he's certainly hampered our ability to react to another recession with either monetary or fiscal policy. that's a source of concern. When the economy is good the government should be trying to increase interest rates and shave down the deficit. The opposite is currently happening.

Now ask yourself an honest question. Is Trump someone that you would want to have captain your beer league softball team? manage your project at work?

[zachateseverything]

no one's saying the tax cuts and other policy choices the trump administration has made have not continued or goosed the gains the economy has been showing for nigh on the past decade.

What people, myself included, question is the nature of the tax cut (did corporations really need another giveaway when many already pay zero in taxes?), how it was financed (adding an estimated trillion dollars to the deficit over the next decade), and providing little tax relief for middle and working class americans while giving away huge sums to the already wealthy. This did provide a bit of a sugar high to the economy through 2018 and into 2019, but that's begun to slow. And paired with fed rate cuts that the president was screaming for constantly, has all left policymakers and the administration with little ammunition in reserve to fight the next economic downturn. The overwhelming consensus is the 2008 great recession didn't explode into a full global depression because of the forceful, sizable action from central bankers across the world to leverage massive resources at their disposal -- built up over years of boom -- to respond when the worst struck.

And that's the crux of the argument. The president is only concerned about the djia and the short term. He has little care for how these policies could leave us with zero or negative interest rates, stagflation or deflation, and a congress and federal reserve with little ability to respond to kickstart the economy again. Ask the japanese how much fun the lost decade was.

The moves all in vacuum are totally and completely defensible. But in aggregate they paint a picture of someone both incredibly self-interested and dangerously myopic about what will happen, in part because he knows the economic story is the only one he can use to attract any kind of unaffiliated voters in 2020.

ding! Ding! Ding!

[HorsCat]

have captain your beer league softball team? manage your project at work?

I'll add . . . babysit your daughter?

[Colinmclelland]

Are you saying the the economy is juiced?

That the pyramid is upside down and the base is weak?

That things will crumble and crumble quickly?

I thought that manufacturing was coming back. He promised.

I don't know the answer to any of that. The market can stay irrational for a lot longer than you can stay liquid. But, asking for a friend, what's the government action plan if things do go to shit?

BUT...if the economy (any economy) were going gang busters government interest rates wouldn't be where they are. You can't have you cake and eat it too. You can bullshit about doing it, but you can't do it.

Globally (it's not just the US, and Trump is not alone in bullshitting about it) stock markets have disconnected from economic fundamentals because debt has such a low cost (or a gain!). There was a saying back in the days of the Greenspan Put, "Don't bet against the Fed".

Australia is same same. Stock market at record highs. Economy - not so much. House prices are insane. You put rates up, house prices drop. Lower rates, house prices rise. But you can't afford to get some sanity back in prices because the economy is too weak to cope with reasonable interest levels. US is the same - the economy can't handle the rates being where they should be.

You can't keep throwing money at people through debt and expect no consequences. High stock markets are just one of them. It's got SFA to do with fundamentals of the economy.

Oh and what proportion of the stock market does US manufacturing actually make up?

[Matthew Strongin]

guido posted this in the Read Me thread, but it's relevant here:

How to Debunk Trump’s False Claims About the Economy | The New Yorker

[Blue Jays]

Happy 15th Wedding Anniversary to President Trump and First Lady Trump.

[HorsCat]

Happy 15th Wedding Anniversary to President Trump and First Lady Trump.

Here’s wishing them both also a Happy 13th Boning of Porn Star Shortly After Birth of Fifth Child to Third Wife Anniversary.

[theflashunc]

It's amazing to watch Mitch abdicate any responsibility in the Senate, shirk Constitutional duty and supplicate the entire party to Trump. There are no moderate Republicans anymore. Time to dismantle the entire party.

[monadnocky]

It's amazing to watch Mitch abdicate any responsibility in the Senate, shirk Constitutional duty and supplicate the entire party to Trump. There are no moderate Republicans anymore. Time to dismantle the entire party.

Oh come on man. I mean Susan Collins will express some sort of vague concerns, and then end up voting with her party like she always does:

Susan Collins Takes Hours to Decide on Lunch Before Ordering Exactly What Mitch McConnell Is Having | The New Yorker