Who Can Beat Trump?

[Kinser79]

(08-21-2018, 09:36 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(08-21-2018, 03:40 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: FIW Mr. Horn you were likely to vote for the Democrats anyway.  From what I can tell you're in line with most Boomers who have yet to realize that their particular paradigm is over and has been over for a long time now.  So far the only thing that Daddy hasn't delivered on is the Wall(s) but I blame the Congress Critters (and Paul "Eddie Munster" Ryan in particular) for that.

If there is a New Democrats to emerge, they will have to be substantially different from the offerings of that party now, and they will likely have to reject the positions of even the least offensive (IE the Blue Dogs) of their party currently.  Last time the GOP had to accept the New Deal.  This time the Democrats will have to accept Nationalist Populism, the Wall, Tariffs and America First.

No one ever has to accept an unworkable paradigm, just because it's popular at the moment … and Trumpism even fails the popularity contest.

Really?  Lets take a look at the President's poll numbers.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/pres...trump.aspx

It should be noted that Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. are outliers as one was involved in a gear up to a short war, and the latter was still in the afterglow of 9-11.  Right now the President is on par with every other president since Nixon that has had a seventh quarter in office.  It should be noted that Gallup is noted to lean Democratic by the way.

If the economy keeps growing at just 2% the President's popularity will continue to increase.  Just about everyone who voted for him did so for one or two reasons--rejection of the Dimocrat vision (if they even have one besides shitting on Western Civilization) or because they believed a billionaire might know something about making a rich country even richer.

I'm a bit of an outlier in that I see Trump as a Gorbachev like figure who can manage a soft landing in an imperial collapse.  But then again that would require one to essentially subscribe to the vast majority of Dimitri Orlov's work which few people on this forum do, and even fewer people out on the street have even heard of the man.

 

Quote:The Dems are still out to lunch,

The Dims have been out to lunch for quite some time now.  I've not considered them to be a serious party in ages, and their establishment is even more out to lunch than the laity.

Quote:but the GOP has thrown-in with the closet thing to a true Fascist we've ever produced in this country.

I suppose for you a fascist is anyone slightly to the right of Mao Zedong.  I, however, have studied fascism.  It has distinct features, Nationalist Populism displays none of them.  Possibly unfortunately.  Believe me, if Trump were a fascist, he is a rather poor one because liberal Boomers, and their pink haired SJW brats with degrees in underwater lesbian dance thearpy would have been sent to concentration camps long ago.

That being said, if Trump's mild reforms are thwarted you can be assured that a real fascist will come along, and HE will send those types off to joyous places for their re-education.

Quote:S&H never stated that their theory could predict outcome, only process.  Right now, it's the 4T process, but the end of this cycle is still in play.  Even Hillary, as poor a candidate as she was, managed to out-poll Trump by 3 Million votes.  We'll see how that plays on November 7th.

I agree that S&H describes process rather than outcome.  That being said, there has to be an understanding as to how mid-term elections work.  All of the House is in play (it is every two years anyway) and a third of the Senate.  This time around it is mostly Democrat legislators that are facing challenges.  The one GOP Senator is believed to be in a relatively safe seat and there isn't going to be the traditional Summer Recess for campaigning providing challenger's greater ground time.

Can the Democrats take the House?  Maybe.  I think it unlikely.  But the GOP and Trumpian GOP Members picking up Senate seats is likely and that means he will be able to get his appointments through, and other essential executive functions.

As to HRC's 3 Million more votes/whatever.  Those were all in New York and California.  I hope I don't have to explain how the electorial college works and why having one is a good idea.

Quote:I see you prefer alternate facts to real ones.  Fact: GDP growth is not 5%, even in the short term.  Check the graph over the last 5 or 10 years, and the current growth rate (4.1%) seems unremarkable.  Facts: unemployment is ~3.9%, but workforce penetration is down.  Hiring has actually cooled and pay raises are less than the rate of inflation.  Growth in an era of trade wars is even less likely.

Ultimately it is irrelevant what the day to day rate is.  The fact remains that Obama himself claimed that the days of even 2% growth were over.  Even a rate of 4.1% is twice that and blows that hypothesis out of the water.

I'm unsure what you mean by "workforce penetration" so I Duck Duck Go-ed it.  I'm fairly certain that you didn't mean the various forms of porn that were provided to my engine.  Employer penetration for which information is available from the various labor departments of the several states largely only have online records as recent as December 2017 (which makes them very old news).

As to trade wars...the US is the country most capable of going full autarky and growth in import substitutes and repairs for those things which can't be substituted (minus tea and coffee as those are the two consumer goods not easily substituted by US production) will also constitute economic growth.

Indeed, these trade wars will in the long run prove beneficial.
1.  New business in import substitution
2.  Weakening competitors
3.  Gaining more advantageous trade deals since they are being negotiated by a competent negotiator.