US election 2016

[Park Life 70]

Any need for the misogynist language? 

[ewerk 26762]

And?

[Park Life 70]

I don't really see Trump as 'Republican'. He's more of an anti-establishment candidate. I doubt the republicans want him in power any more than they want Hillary. To think that they'll go along with everything he wants is a bit pessimistic.

 

On that note, the guy has no concrete policies anyway. He might do fuck all.

 

As you say though, he's unlikely to win. I saw one poll had him in front yesterday but people tend to go for the safe option in the end.

In fact he wiped out the mainstream GOP candidates and they did everything they could to stop him getting the nomination. The GOP never wanted him.

[Park Life 70]

And?

And?

[Gemmill 35330]

Any need for the misogynist language?

[emoji38] ewerk setting bras on fire itt.

[ewerk 26762]

There's simply no justification for it. He thinks he's Snoopy Dog Dog or whoever.

[Kid Dynamite 6068]

Parky, when did you turn from a normal bloke who took an interest in conspiracy theories into a full blown Wolfy? It's a worry

[Park Life 70]

There's simply no justification for it. He thinks he's Snoopy Dog Dog or whoever.

Is that a racist caricature?

Edited November 2, 2016 by Park Life

[Park Life 70]

Parky, when did you turn from a normal bloke who took an interest in conspiracy theories into a full blown Wolfy? It's a worry

Yeah quoting the Washington Times, The NY Post, Time magazine, The Economist and other full blown conspiracy propagators is going to get me into trouble.

[Happy Face 29]

 there is a whole legal infrastructure in place to curtail Presidents doing what they want as Obama found out. .

 

 

Apart from getting to pick the next supreme court appointment, what has Obama been stifled from achieving?

 

Closing Guantanamo was a pillar of his election, but when it came to planning that he proposed just moving it to the US.  Not sure where else you're thinking of that he was blocked?

[Park Life 70]

Apart from getting to pick the next supreme court appointment, what has Obama been stifled from achieving?

 

Closing Guantanamo was a pillar of his election, but when it came to planning that he proposed just moving it to the US.  Not sure where else you're thinking of that he was blocked?

About 500 bills.

 

I concur with some of your criticism of Obama (drone strikes etc) but pretending he hasn't been stymied by the political architecture is stretching it.

Edited November 2, 2016 by Park Life

[Happy Face 29]

About 500 bills.

 

I know Obama likes to quote that number, but it means nothing on it's own.

 

How many bills are blocked in a normal presidency?

[Park Life 70]

I know Obama likes to quote that number, but it means nothing on it's own.

 

How many bills are blocked in a normal presidency?

Presidents are normally held hostage by the houses so things can get done for both sides. Or nothing gets done. It will be the same for Trump.

[Happy Face 29]

About 500 bills.

 

I concur with some of your criticism of Obama (drone strikes etc) but pretending he hasn't been stymied by the political architecture is stretching it.

 

It's somewhat true, to a small degree.

 

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/statistics

 

Obama has certainly enacted fewer laws than in previous administrations, but that follows a downward trend that goes back to the 70s.

 

Less than half the number of laws enacted in the 1977 Congress (804) were enacted in the  first Bush Congrress of 2001 (383) for example.  Obama's first 2 years saw more laws enacted than Bush's too (385).

 

More legislation failed in the 97/98, 99/00, 05/06 and 07/09 congress than in three quarters of those under Obama.

 

Pure numbers bore people though, if there were a multitude of examples of high profile changes that Obama was prevented from implementing they could be reeled off.  There's not though.

 

If anything the presidents are the ones with all the power.  They get to veto bills that could become law.  Bill Clinton used that power more than any other president (36 times).  Obama has used it as many times as Bush (12) before his presidency ends.

[Park Life 70]

Broadly agree but Obama figures are skewed because he got a lot of 'small' things through and the larger ones like Obamacare ended up being nothing like what was initially intended. GOP got rid of the 'safe corridor' funding that would help insurance companies in danger of being overwhelmed etc...

 

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/12/17/Congress-Weakens-Obamacare-Limiting-Bailout-Funds-Insurers

 

 

American Jobs Act. In the minority, Republicans still shut down President Obama’s 2011 jobs plan. It would have imposed a 5.6-percent tax on all income over $1 million to pay for new “stimulus” spending by the government. The Democrats’ majority couldn’t pass the measure, which failed 50-49.

 

 

Cap and Trade. Democrats controlled both houses of Congress in 2010, but their “cap-and-trade” legislation stalled in the Senate. Republicans filibustered sweeping restrictions on the use of fossil fuels aimed at cutting carbon emissions and the measure failed to reach Obama’s desk

 

 

 Minimum Wage. Republicans launched a filibuster in 2014 to derail a Democrat proposal that would have mandated an across-the-board federal minimum wage of $10.10.

 

 

Paycheck Fairness Act. Republicans blocked the 2014 Paycheck Fairness Act four separate times. The bill would have leveled harsher penalties for discrimination and required employers to account for any pay gap between male and female employees. The bill never made it to a final vote, though, failing 52 to 40. 

 

 

The last thing I want to be doing is defending Obama up in here.

Edited November 2, 2016 by Park Life

[Happy Face 29]

Broadly agree but Obama figures are skewed because he got a lot of 'small' things through and the larger ones like Obamacare ended up being nothing like what was initially intended. GOP got rid of the 'safe corridor' funding that would help insurance companies in danger of being overwhelmed etc...

 

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/12/17/Congress-Weakens-Obamacare-Limiting-Bailout-Funds-Insurers

 

On day one of the Obamacare negotiations the democrats agreed single payer and drug price limits would be off the table didn't they?  It was hardly a battle that got close to vote but defeated by obstructionism.

[ewerk 26762]

Apart from getting to pick the next supreme court appointment, what has Obama been stifled from achieving?

 

Closing Guantanamo was a pillar of his election, but when it came to planning that he proposed just moving it to the US.  Not sure where else you're thinking of that he was blocked?

 

Moving the prison to the US would have made a massive difference though. It wouldn't have been a case of the same shit in a different location.

 

And if you want a suggestion, he hasn't had much luck in getting gun control laws passed.

[Park Life 70]

Gun Control. The gun control legislation sponsored by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., backfired in the Senate after Republicans filibustered the measure. The bipartisan bill would have significantly expanded background checks in gun sales but fell shy of the 60-vote threshold to end debate, receiving only 54 votes. "

[Dr Gloom 20103]

trump's rhetoric is striking because there's never any detail in how he plans to do any of it. he just says shit like "trust me" and "i alone can fix it". this is the language of a dictator. he's already on record expressing admiration for putin and saddam hussein for how they fought terrorism and he says he admired the show of strength from china when they cracked down on the tianamen square pro democracy protestors. unbelievable, really.

 

some of his proposals, like repealing obama care and his tax cut plans would require working with congress.

 

But... congress has granted he POTUS the authority to negotiate trade deals. that is pretty scary given the protectionist policies he's pushing. he could also renegotiate the nuclear deal with iran.

 

then there's his promise to bomb isis, circle their territory (boots on the ground?), and take their oil. he could try to do that without congressional approval too. how many presidents in recent times have ordered military action without first getting the goahead from congress?

[Dr Gloom 20103]

It's somewhat true, to a small degree.

 

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/statistics

 

Obama has certainly enacted fewer laws than in previous administrations, but that follows a downward trend that goes back to the 70s.

 

Less than half the number of laws enacted in the 1977 Congress (804) were enacted in the first Bush Congrress of 2001 (383) for example. Obama's first 2 years saw more laws enacted than Bush's too (385).

 

More legislation failed in the 97/98, 99/00, 05/06 and 07/09 congress than in three quarters of those under Obama.

 

Pure numbers bore people though, if there were a multitude of examples of high profile changes that Obama was prevented from implementing they could be reeled off. There's not though.

 

If anything the presidents are the ones with all the power. They get to veto bills that could become law. Bill Clinton used that power more than any other president (36 times). Obama has used it as many times as Bush (12) before his presidency ends.

All presidents seek to grant the office more power. It's a trend that continues with every new commander in chief.

[Dr Gloom 20103]

Broadly agree but Obama figures are skewed because he got a lot of 'small' things through and the larger ones like Obamacare ended up being nothing like what was initially intended. GOP got rid of the 'safe corridor' funding that would help insurance companies in danger of being overwhelmed etc...

 

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/12/17/Congress-Weakens-Obamacare-Limiting-Bailout-Funds-Insurers

 

 

American Jobs Act. In the minority, Republicans still shut down President Obama’s 2011 jobs plan. It would have imposed a 5.6-percent tax on all income over $1 million to pay for new “stimulus” spending by the government. The Democrats’ majority couldn’t pass the measure, which failed 50-49.

 

 

Cap and Trade. Democrats controlled both houses of Congress in 2010, but their “cap-and-trade” legislation stalled in the Senate. Republicans filibustered sweeping restrictions on the use of fossil fuels aimed at cutting carbon emissions and the measure failed to reach Obama’s desk

 

 

Minimum Wage. Republicans launched a filibuster in 2014 to derail a Democrat proposal that would have mandated an across-the-board federal minimum wage of $10.10.

 

 

Paycheck Fairness Act. Republicans blocked the 2014 Paycheck Fairness Act four separate times. The bill would have leveled harsher penalties for discrimination and required employers to account for any pay gap between male and female employees. The bill never made it to a final vote, though, failing 52 to 40.

 

 

The last thing I want to be doing is defending Obama up in here.

Obama won't be truly appreciated till he's gone. There's a lot worse to come

[Rayvin 4964]

trump's rhetoric is striking because there's never any detail in how he plans to do any of it. he just says shit like "trust me" and "i alone can fix it". this is the language of a dictator. he's already on record expressing admiration for putin and saddam hussein for how they fought terrorism and he says he admired the show of strength from china when they cracked down on the tianamen square pro democracy protestors. unbelievable, really.

 

some of his proposals, like repealing obama care and his tax cut plans would require working with congress.

 

But... congress has granted he POTUS the authority to negotiate trade deals. that is pretty scary given the protectionist policies he's pushing. he could also renegotiate the nuclear deal with iran.

 

then there's his promise to bomb isis, circle their territory (boots on the ground?), and take their oil. he could try to do that without congressional approval too. how many presidents in recent times have ordered military action without first getting the goahead from congress?

 

 

Do we disagree that Russia and Saddam's stances on terrorism are effective? Without Saddam, we've created ISIS. Russia is a different consideration since they're actually fighting against US interests, but I'd have more faith in them eliminating terrorism than the US. With that said, it'd be bloody and horrifying. It'd work, though. NB - this is not an endorsement of the action, more a statement of my interpretation of reality.

 

Dictatorships can be much more efficient than democracies, so we might find ourselves kowtowing to many countries that are set up in such a way in due course. We already are with China.

 

As a general point, this thread has been pretty informative over the past page or so! If Trump is elected, it'll be interesting to see whether Parky's view that he'll be constrained, or HF and Gloom's views that he'll be rampant, will come to pass.

 

 

Obama won't be truly appreciated till he's gone. There's a lot worse to come

 

I sort of see this point, and agree that he's been a capable administrator compared to some, but he's still part of the problem. The centre needs to tackle its demons, and it's obstinately refusing to do so. Until it does, they're going to deliver us into the hands of people like Trump.

[Dr Gloom 20103]

Do we disagree that Russia and Saddam's stances on terrorism are effective? Without Saddam, we've created ISIS. Russia is a different consideration since they're actually fighting against US interests, but I'd have more faith in them eliminating terrorism than the US. With that said, it'd be bloody and horrifying. It'd work, though. NB - this is not an endorsement of the action, more a statement of my interpretation of reality.

 

Dictatorships can be much more efficient than democracies, so we might find ourselves kowtowing to many countries that are set up in such a way in due course. We already are with China.

 

As a general point, this thread has been pretty informative over the past page or so! If Trump is elected, it'll be interesting to see whether Parky's view that he'll be constrained, or HF and Gloom's views that he'll be rampant, will come to pass.

 

 

 

I sort of see this point, and agree that he's been a capable administrator compared to some, but he's still part of the problem. The centre needs to tackle its demons, and it's obstinately refusing to do so. Until it does, they're going to deliver us into the hands of people like Trump.

Republicans thought and hoped he would become more restrained after the primaries but he only has one setting. He's a loose cannon and a terrifying potential president

[Renton 18013]

Aye what the fuck. That post was bang up his street, as was the one that Parky posted. I think he just skim read it and assumed you were talking about Hillary.

 

Time to get out from behind the sofa, Renton.

Well okay my post was over the top but if you read HF's post again you'll see it contained barbed criticism of Obama which cast him as an imperialist warmonger and suggested moral equivalence with Trump. Subtle, but as with most his posts it's there. You of course have been less subtle in declaring your overt support for Trump.

[Dr Gloom 20103]

perhaps he's promised to make accountancy great again too