Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
3 Things to Like About President Trump; 3 Things Not to Like
We’re six months into the Trump Era, and there’s no sign of the gay concentration camps Rachel Maddow said were forthcoming. But surely we must be developing some opinions on how he’s doing so far. So here’s my list(icle) of three things I like about PDT so far, and three things I really don’t care for. First, what I likes:
- I like that he doesn’t let himself be a punching bag for the Democrat Media Complex. The last two Republican presidents seemed to think that defending their administration’s policies from Democrat attacks was ungentlemanly. Trump has also identified the weak point of the media establishment — their egos. Most of the media operatives, especially on television, are dumb, vain, and egomaniacal. Trump knows that if he pokes them, they will go into paroxysms of “How Dare He Criticize Us” vituperation. He provokes the very media temper tantrums that discredit the media.
- I like that some of Obama’s executive overreach has been repealed, and that some of Obama’s worst policy decisions are being revoked. We’re out of the Paris “Redistribution of Wealth to the Third World” Accords. Criminal aliens are being deported once again. Israel isn’t being treated as a pariah state. More of this, please.
- Neil Gorsuch was an outstanding Supreme Court appointment. Good Lord, can you imagine the horrible people Hillary would be putting on the court? Sotomayor and Kagan were bad enough. Try Justice Kamala Harris on for size. (Not that it would be her, but it would be someone just as hard left, just as hyperpartisan, and just as corrupt). Democrat presidents never nominate swing votes.
Now, three things that I don’t like about Trump’s presidency so far:
- I don’t care for the Tweeting. It’s not the Tweeting itself I mind. I understand that PDT needs a way to get his side directly to the people because the Democrat Media Complex is bent on his destruction. But there’s too much “Angry Old Man” and not enough “Leader of the Free World” in his Tweets for my taste.
- It doesn’t really seem like the Swamp is being drained. Maybe it’s part of a longer term strategy, but so far, there seems to be very little movement in the direction of changing the way the political class conducts business. The bureaucracy remains out of control, and his cabinet picks have done little to reform their departments.
- Being a deficit hawk, I’m disappointed that Trump signed off on the massive omnibus bill. (Remember when Paul Ryan promised no more omnibuses? That federal departments would be funded by individual appropriations bills once the Republicans took over? Yeah, that. Trump doesn’t seem, on the whole, very concerned about debt or deficits.
I could have made other choices in either category, but I think those are my top three. What are yours?
Published in General
Actually, I would say there’s too much, “Embarrassing psychotic fool” rather than too much “Angry old man”.
Somebody gets me <3
Yes, bad day for Trump, he chose poorly.
This is my 1,2 and 3 of what I dont like.
However, I will grin and bear this for the higher good. If the higher good needs to be explained to you. Well, you probably hate him and no explaining will work.
Karl, the last paragraph is for general consumption, no assumptions made toward you.
Unfortunately, we all have to “bear this”. Pardon me if I don’t grin while doing so, however.
I just got a case of Deja Vu.
I have not always supported your “glass is totally empty” view of Trump, sir, but, in this instance, I’d say you’re on the mark. The “let Donald be Donald” folks will likely disagree, but these tweets are pretty inexcusable.
I was against the Trump tweet at first. Then my wife did a period of time working in the library tech department leasing out free time on public computers. Everyday she brought back stories of her connecting, homeless, low income and other people to twitter for the purposes of interacting with Trump. I am not exactly sure what is happening at this level but Trump is connecting with a very disenchanted group of people and they love him for it. He is having a dialogue with America. If I do not understand it, it may be that I am not the person his dialogue is with.
Fake, at some level I think your assessment is accurate. But this means our society has to look up to a turtle. They normally stand at 1 inch.
He’s not having a dialogue with America. He’s embarrassingly obsessing over cable TV personalities. He is a petty, self-obsessed, petulant fool who has no sense of the position he holds or what he is supposed to be doing while he holds it.
In Ryan and Trump’s defense, that bill was really a leftover from the Boehner era. The real test comes next year when Ryan has to produce his own budget.
I also hear that he puts ketchup on steak and can’t tell a Châteauneuf-du-Pape from a Two Buck Chuck, especially since he doesn’t drink. Muffy and I were simply appalled.
My list:
The Good: I agree with the OP’s 1 and 3, but I’d add “Understanding that making America great again means reclaiming our leadership position in international affairs and thus abandoning the near-isolationism he ran on.”
The Bad:
There is a very large underbelly of society that either don’t vote or would never vote for a republican. This is the audience Fake refers to. These people are not offended by this kind of talk. It endears Trump to them. It is the rust belt that gave Trump the win after all. Fake’s point is perhaps he is keeping his base entertained and therefore assuring their vote next time.
Only time will tell.
I dislike you never Trumpers as much as I dislike Pelosi and Schumer. You’re all the same.
Embarassingly obsessing — you are funny.
Thank you, sir, for illustrating my point.
You and basket-of-deplorables Hillary have something in common.
I’ll change my mind when they stop telling me to shut up.
Link, please, where you were told to “shut up.” And even if you can find one or two who told you to shut up, that doesn’t mean all or even most told you to shut up. Yet you make blanket condemnation of “his supporters.”
I’ll revise my original statement: You and basket-of-deplorables Hillary have much in common.
Every time someone tries to shame me into silence by accusing me of making common cause with our opponents they are telling me to shut up. As I said before, thank you, sir, for illustrating my point.
Your list is close enough for government work. I’d add on the good list that he isn’t too hung up on the “dignity” of the office. Maybe someday that will be a bad thing, too.
Ah, I see. So any time someone disagrees with you is equivalent to telling you to shut up.
My statement was factual: you used the same technique that Mrs. Clinton did: a condemnation of tens of millions of your fellow citizens based solely upon the fact that they disagree with your choice of political candidate. Then you doubled down on it.
I don’t want you to shut up. Quite the contrary: I want you to give your opinions candidly rather than mask them with circumlocutions. It is illuminating.
The real test is always next year.
Not at all. Lots of people disagree with me civilly, by which I mean they respond to my points with logic, not by trying to link them to the worst political candidate in history.
Again, not at all. I condemn those who insist on linking me with someone with whom I have nothing in common based on nothing more than my refusal to make excuses for one man.
Same here. Trump supporters’ insistence on responding to criticism by attacking the critic’s motives and/or loyalties, as you have so capably illustrated in this thread, is very illuminating, and pretty much exactly the reason I included them in my list.
It is not mutually exclusive to the possibility that doing this is also a means of degrading and lowering public discourse, and ignoring actual governance. Winning elections is no indication of leadership. Obama won all his elections hardly did any good for the country. Trump may speak to these people, but is he saying anything of worth to them? Entertainment is not the same as leadership.
You don’t think that the office is worthy of being served with dignity? Perhaps we just disagree as to the nature of “dignity,” but I’m reasonably sure that those tweets aren’t it.
Agree completely with your assessment. I think though peculiarly, the right well get more good policies with Trump than they got with Bush. This is the grin part. ?
Agreed. However, I think that another worthy question is whether the right will get as much from the petulant Trump exhibited in those tweets as they would from a Trump who simply carries a big stick and who has the nerve to do so.
To be fair: If we had President Bush + Speaker Ryan, we might be well on our way to Social Security privatization.