Election 2020

[Kinser79]

(04-30-2019, 10:32 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(04-30-2019, 09:00 AM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(04-22-2019, 11:41 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(04-20-2019, 11:39 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: The fault with Donald Trump is obviously not in his stars, as the Mueller report shows. We have no Presidency with this level of known scandal, but also no precedent for the consequence of so many and so pervasive scandals.

He got elected with the aid of electoral misconduct in which he is complicit. Close as the 2016 election was,  Trump may have little legitimacy as President except for the legal presumption that electoral results are valid even if they prove wrong after the fact.

Scandal only counts if people can be scandalized.  Trump has managed to make scandal into a social game by playing it in the press as theater with lines that change at every performance.  10 years from now, we may look back and be embarrassed.  But, for now, hoi polloi thinks it's all fun and games.

Perhaps.  Or perhaps more accurately, PBR only sees what he wants to see and believes only things that he wants to believe like everyone else does.

It is a fact that Mueller found nothing on the President worthy of further investigation.  He couldn't find much dirt on his cronys either (and yes all presidents have those--don't let PBR try to persuade you otherwise) other than a ten year old money laundering charge (that cost more to investigate than they will ever recover) and he hired a dumbass as a lawyer once, oh and his tenants might have some scandals (seriously do we drag the local slum lord out and try and lynch him cause his tenants are smoking the crack in the stair well?  No.).

Mueller did what he was supposed to do: he investigated interference by the Russians, and referred the rest to other offices.  That hardly qualifies as an exoneration.  Several career prosecutors have stated unequivocally that they have successfully prosecuted others with much less than the incomplete info in Mueller's report.

Yes.  And Muller found nothing because it is virtually impossible for a foreign power to hijack the decentralized system the US uses. Exactly how Obama said it couldn't be hijacked before the first Tuesday in November in 2016.  Since it can't be both hijackable and not hijackable either Obama lied or he told the truth until it became politically expedient not to.

And yet there aren't any indictments.  Personally I don't care what some random prosecutor has to say; unless they are directly involved with they don't know the details and thus do not know what the situation is.  

Quote:

Kinser Wrote:I would argue that the President is able to "play the press" the way he does because he knows how the Lame Stream media ticks.  He's been playing them for years.  Indeed if one really wants to know what the President is doing, saying or thinking one would be better servedjust following him on Twitter.

Not to be missed: POTUS TV, also known as Fox News, is no longer the most followed.  Now it's MSNBC.  I suspect that's telling.

It really isn't telling us anything other than much of the Silent Generation has died out.  I occasionally do glance at MSDNC...er...I mean MSNBC.  I find it telling that most of their commercials are for denture cream and bathtub replacements for those with mobility conditions most often associated with advanced age.

In short it tells us only that Boomers watch MSNBC--since you guys are the oldies now.  Across the board cable news viewership skews old and except for the very few GIs around and the slightly more numerous Silents that means that Boomers are still watching the Tee-vee.  Everyone else gets their news from other sources.

Quote:

Kinser Wrote:Indeed if one simply sits back and observes the Democrats they are defeating themselves at every turn.

There's is truth here.  The Dems have a genetic death wish that seems to emerge when things are looking brightest for them.

I would say it would take a miracle on their part for Trump to not be re-elected.  Lets see how many of the keys to the White House he has currently.

   Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.

Not really relevant.  Most Presidents lose seats in Congress during their first mid-term.  This key should be removed actually because it isn't a key at all--rather I'd argue that Congressional Mid-term elections largely are based on the locality in question and do not reflect on the chances of any Presidential candidate.  Incumbent or otherwise.

   Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.

There is some rando attempting to run on the Republican Primary.  I've forgotten his name because that is how important he is.  He will be no challange to the President.  Unlike say when then Governor Reagan primary-ed Ford.
 
Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.

Donald Trump is the current President and baring him being assassinated, or dying in next year he will be running for a second term.

   Third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.

The only third party that is significant at the moment is the Green Party and they are threat to the Democrats and not the Republicans.

   Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.

The economy is not in recession now, and indicators look like 2019 will be another good year economically.  But a year is an eterity in business and politics.

   Long term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.

Over Trump's term mean GDP growth has been fairly good.  As long as the GDP continues to grow at 2% or better per year the economy will not be sputtering.

   Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.

The President has spearheaded deregulation (which is good for the economy), and made headway in foreign affairs with powers that are usually antagonistic to the US's interests.  The other, and most important change in national policy is currently being twarted by Congress but that should change soon.

   Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.

The only social unrest in the country is coming from the antifa type and other assorted groups of radical leftists acting like the terrorists they are.  It makes the Democrats who are pandering to the Left look bad.

   Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.

The Present Administration doesn't have any real scandals.  Russia-gate was a giant nothing burger.  Now Schiff wants to investigate the President's taxes.  What a big scandal it will be when the IRS reports that he paid them.  Seriously the man is a billionaire and gets audited every year (because he's a billionaire).  If he was cheating on his taxes the IRS should have found out about it by now and if they haven't then they all should be fired and replaced.

The only scandals in the White House happening right now are in the fevered mind of the lamestream media and the congress critters who have a D after their name.  Everyone else knows that they are just witch hunting.

   Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.

There hasn't been any military failures yet, unless you count not completely pulling out of Syria a failure.  But that can be blamed on Congress because they won't vote the money to repatriate the troops.  On foreign affairs the President has a consistant winning streak.  Mr. Kim has been pretty quiet since he and The Donald had a sit down.  I wonder if it is because he appreciates the President's business style.  It also works with Mr. Xi and Mr. Duarte as well, even if it does piss off the likes of Macron and Merkle.  But what are their options?  NATO is run by the US and NATO protects them from that big bad Soviet--er I mean--Russian Bear to the east that is oh so threatening.

   Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.

Making deals with Xi and Kim.  More than enough but he has at least another year for more winning.  And Xers like winning, since the world is composed of winners and losers and if you aren't a winner, you are a loser by definition.

   Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.

The President is very charismatic.  I would argue that becoming president without being charismatic is impossible unless we're talking about a person who becomes president due to unfortunate circumstances.  Ford for example.

   Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.

I've looked at the Democrat roster....Biden is the best they have and he's neither charismatic nor a national hero.  His sons might or might not be but the Biden I'm talking about is Creepy Uncle Joe who makes #MeToo jokes on stage with children after sniffing their hair.

Quote:

Kinser Wrote:Kinser's Prediction for 2020:  Donald Trump will be re-elected (with the Popular and Electoral vote) defeating any Democrat that the DNC manages to come up with. 

Possible but not likely.

From where things sit now the Democrats have to find someone who isn't Sanders, isn't Biden, isn't Fauxahantas--er I mean Warren and isn't a rabid leftist.  Patrick Francis O'Rourke might be charismatic (to somebody) but he can't even beat Greaseball--I mean Cruz in Texas.  The rest of the country will have even less time for his antics.  

Kinser Wrote:And it will likely be Biden--who was Obama's Gaffmaster and is seen by many who aren't true blue Dims as "Creepy Uncle Joe".

This isn't even the pot calling the kettle black.  This is the cesspool pointing fingers at the swimming pool for not being crystal clear.
[/quote]

I don't know about you but I've yet to see the President sniffing the hair of children while making #MeToo jokes, or being chided for swearing on the Senate Floor by the sitting US President.  As for his own affairs, I personally don't care if he fucks every whore in Washington (just like I didn't care with Bill Clinton) provided he's running the country right.

So is he?
Well Employment is up.  Welfare is down.  Wages are rising.  My retirement fund never looked better.  And the wars are winding down and the US is slowly extracating itself from those entangling alliances that President Washington warned us about.  So yes he's is running the country right.

At most those that complain about the President either simply don't like his style (He's an unreformed New Yorker and acts like it) or his personal tastes (which is very nouveau riche--Trump's tastes seem to be less what rich people like and more what trailer trash thinks rich people should like).  There is no accounting for style, taste, or the lack thereof.  

Personally I'm glad he's President and not say my interior decorator.