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- I like that some of Obama’s executive overreach has been repealed, and that some of Obama’s worst policy decisions are being revoked.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
I think we endow the Presidency with far too much majesty and deference – the so-called “imperial Presidency”.
Maybe having a guy who publicly acts like a jackass in there will help take that down a few notches for the future.
I once thought this highly of these two men. No longer.
YOu mean like we did when he had, say, Tom Delay (supposedly Mr. Conservative) whipping the Congress? Oh no, wait, those two brought an expansion of an entitlement program and failed to even hold a vote on privatization of Social Security.
Point is, that there isn’t a Republican in a leadership position that wants limited, scaled back, or even slightly smaller government. Ryan is among those.
There’s a “lie down with dogs, get up with fleas” element to the tweeting that, at least for me, doesn’t have anything to do with grandeur or an “Imperial Presidency.” Like the Founders, I don’t believe the office is worthy of worship, but I do believe that it is deserving of respect. At some point, I think we’re going to have to acknowledge that there’s a connection between Trump’s “lie down with dogs” performances on Twitter and some of the abominable “get up with fleas” treatment he receives in popular culture.
That would also include the President.
I don’t think the President should be some sort of imperial god-figure who operates far above the level of mere mortals. I didn’t mind that Jimmy Carter wore sweaters in the inner sanctum, and the fact that President Reagan would not demean the Oval Office by wearing anything less than a coat and tie was not one of the endearing things about him. President Trump succeeds in not providing the atmospherics for such a god-figure.
If I had thought there was the slightest shadow of a chance of that, I wouldn’t have been NeverBush.
I’m not sure I need the higher good explained to me, but I would appreciate a clarification. Do you mean the implementation of sound policy, or simply actions that can be counted as a win for Trump and/or the Republican Party?
What I do think I need explained is what you mean by “grin and bear this?” Do you mean being generally supportive of Trump while criticizing him when he does something wrong? Do you mean supporting him, but remaining silent when he does something wrong? Or do you mean supporting him and excusing/defending his screw ups on the grounds of the “higher good?”
That’s one way to look at it, I suppose.
I meant George, not Jeb. W pushed for Social Security privatization early in his second term, and Ryan has made entitlement reform his signature issue.
I think it’s important to note that it’s not just that Ryan is better on this than speakers before Boehner, but also that Congress moved to the right on this stuff. Ryan and Boehner prepared the ground so effectively. Healthcare reform has been a mess because we didn’t have a clear plan and because expectations were set absurdly high; whoever became President would have been a crushing disapointment on this front. It’s also one of the areas where media bias is at its most effective, with the selection of stories that get told being of critical importance.
With the Ryan Plan, there were details of entitlement reform. Boehner got people to vote on specifics, and they did. He had people pre-committed such that when we got a Republican President (even Jeb), we’d have substantial Social Security and Medicaid reform. Sadly, one of the few who ran against him on the issue was Trump. It’s possible that we’ll get Medicaid reform, but SS is probably off the table for the rest of the term.
Perhaps I missed it, but is your double posting of the OP intentional, V?
Never said otherwise.
Oh we never do that, as long as you’re just expressing an opinion about politics. We can stand to hear from people who don’t agree with us.
But, y’know, when you call us “bad”…then indeed you deserve it.
It’s good to be bad. 8-)
Nope. I call foul on this – it is perfectly possible to be no kind of elitist, actually prefer ketchup on your own steak, drink jug wine, and still think that these tweets from Trump were utterly beneath him, the office, and a terrible reflection on his character. Is it really too much to ask that the President of the United States attack the leftist press on substance, instead of schoolyard taunts about low IQs?
If you pull a tiger by the tail, you’d better have a plan for dealing with the claws.
President Trump is not succeeding when he acts like a jerk like he did with his recent tweets. It’s juvenile. There is a difference between not wanting to regard Presidents as imperial god-figure or Lightworker and having them act like fools. When Trump acts like a fool I’ve got no problem criticizing him for it. Why waste time defending the indefensible?
Claws? . . . well I guess they were kind of girly man tweets. Had he just been watching Mean Girls?
Trump is an imperfect vessel, this I acknowledge as being charitable. You don’t get strong man champion Trump without the flawed other half. It is who he is. The other half is the bear it part. If you read my other impute in this thread you will see I do not condone tweets like today’s. However many of his tweets have been criticized viciously that turned out spot on. I Grin over those.
Part two below
Part two.
Until Trumps conduct crosses the line from immature to crisis I do not see it beneficial for our side to whale on him. The left will do that all day long. I also think we give aid and comfort doing so. As long as he keeps moving the ball forward to the right I will bear his ugly half.
Just ponder what prim and proper Bush family left us. Did they move the ball to the right in any significant way ? I say hell no. I will take the clod who moves the ball until he stops moving the ball.
Maybe it’s because the kitty wrote the same one as the viking. Note that the viking has gone missing.
I see nothing wrong with asking him to do that. It’s a free country, and we still have the right to petition for redress of grievances.
That’s an artifact of my habit of typing posts out in WordPad and then copy/pasting. Sorry.
Oh. I thought it had something to do with the way you were trying to emulate Pseudodionysius in the art of Riconym jiu jitsu.
Pot stirring time. I’m intrigued that some of the President’s more notable defenders on Ricochet are absent here–which is their right of course.
For fence sitters like me, I’d be interested to know whether there is any feeling that these Twitter blasts diminish his overall effectiveness as a leader. And let’s stipulate that we all want him to succeed.
What would be the use of knowing that?
Why? Trump the Tiger may be quick with his claws, but he’s mostly been using them to self-harm since inauguration. Or do you really think he helps himself with tweets like today’s?
I feel that they do diminish his effectiveness. But I’m willing to be convinced by those who don’t, as I have been on other Trump-related issues. For me, that’s useful.