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.
It’s Time for the President to Address the Nation, What Should He Say?
Personally I’d love a pimp-slapping to everyone obstructing him. Obviously he can do better but we are witnessing unprecedented behavior on the part of Democrats in congress, the media, and government in general. I doubt our President is going to take this coup lightly and I suspect it might get pretty ugly, including our President’s reactions to the non-stop assault on his family, regardless of what level of justification there may be. I expect him to fight and I hope he fights intelligently. But even if he throws wild haymakers, I want people hurt because of their actions. The opponents of democracy have made their beds, I hope there are nails waiting for them when they are forced to lie in them.
I do seriously want your ideas about what he should say. Health care, tax reform, budgets, foreign policy, terrorism, Russia, media, intelligence agency issues, Obama’s spy machine, leaks, trade deals, immigration, walls, and the lot of it. NT’s and skeptics I hope can come up with something better than resignation because that’s not happening.
So what would you like the President to say?
Published in General
You know I am actually coming around to the idea of him being impeached or forced to resign because of a do nothing GOP Congress. I think it would be the best thing for the liberty movement because it would completely destroy the GOP as a national Party, particularly in terms of winning the presidency. It might even encourage some of the more liberty minded Congressmen to break away, folks like Rep. Tom Massey for instance. The more Trump can do to rip the fraudulent mask of “Conservatism” and “liberty” off of the face of the GOP, the better off we will be in finally separating those who really want to pursue freedom and those who just want to incrementalize the Leftist lurch we are currently on. So, please, let’s go ahead and push for President Pence and then watch as the GOP is locked out of the presidency for the foreseeable future.
Okay, I get this. But isn’t (or is?) Trump the reason we’ve got the left on the ropes?
No. Trump had negative coattails – if you recall, we won the Presidency but lost House and Senate seats in 2016.
Trump ran behind most Conservatives and Republicans across the country with the exception of some of those low-income counties in places like Pennsylvania.
The argument that only Trump could have won some of these areas is one I’m willing to hear. But it’s obviously impossible to know. I think the Trump/Clinton dynamic somewhat suppressed voter turnout. The left were clearly not enthusiastic about Clinton and the Right weren’t in love with Trump.
A popular Republican could have beaten Clinton with even Bush-like enthusiasm from 2000.
There’s two problems with this:
I’ve pointed to it many times already on this site, but I’ll do it one more time. Look at Michael Barone’s post-election analysis (3-4 weeks after the election). His conclusion was that while other Republicans would have gotten higher vote totals, they would have been concentrated in states that Trump won anyway. What they wouldn’t have done is pick up a bunch of Dem crossover votes in places like MI, WI and PA. And they would have lost. Any of them. All of them.
Same story with the items that you yourself acknowledge as positive accomplishments. Simply by taking a position that immigration laws will be enforced, and removing the handcuffs on ICE, we’ve seen a drop in border crossings between (depending on the source) 60% and 90%. Do you really believe that Marco Rubio, with a position on immigration virtually identical to Barack Obama, would have produced that result? He would be talking about Comprehensive Immigration Reform, with full amnesty, while record numbers streamed across the border.
To pretend that any of the others could have done the same things as Trump, and gotten the same results, is just fantasy. They could not have done those things, and more importantly, they wouldn’t have even tried.
I disagree. IMHO Trump is the only candidate who had an even chance against the Clinton dirty tricks machine. That said, none of us are clairvoyant here, so all opinions are simply guesses. Furthermore, all this back and forth is for naught as the election is over.
I just disassembled and reassembled two active honeybee hives. I was installing better frames and adding another brood box to each. As you can imagine, the bees were pretty agitated.
But they were almost rational in comparison.
Fred, since you can see the future so well, can you tell me the Super Bowl winners for the next 4-8 years? My retirement portfolio could use the extra cash.
Truer words were never spoken.
Okay, so let’s say for the sake of argument that Trump has been a good thing so far—defeated Hillary, immigration, Gorsuch, etc.
What do we want the next president to be able to do/be? What’s the best set-up for another (or dare we say a better) conservative for 2020?
The Lyle Alzado rule was made just for him. “It is illegal to rip off the helmet off an opponent and throw it at him”. Man I love football.
Even stipulating the rest for the sake of argument, the devil is in the “however that happens.” The long-term damage would be far, far worse, in my estimation, were he to be impeached. The country won’t react to that with “oh good, the ‘cancer’ has been excised, and now the ‘good’ Republicans can again be trusted to lead.’ It will more likely be a catastrophe for both the Republican Party and for conservatism/libertarianism generally, unfair though that may be to conservatism/libertarianism.
It’s also hard to see how four to eight years of Trump’s erratic but sometimes good policies and appointments would be somehow worse than Obama’s pretty much terrible all-around policies and appointments.
Now, what damage Trump does/has done to the office of President is harder to measure. My gut says that the damage has already been done and there may be no going back from considering bombastic reality-show stars for the highest office in the land. And if that’s the case, trying to get him removed from office for that reason becomes a lot less compelling.
But returning to my earlier point, what does your “opposition” to Trump consist of at this point, Fred, other than trying to persuade others of the rightness of your point of view?
Back when football was football. Love it.
Fresh was willing to have the Electoral College overturn the vote when that wasn’t the air. Free thinks Trump is so bad, that he wanted to overturn 200 years of ow we choose the president.
Now, that shows how much Fred thinks Trump is a danger. I think that is over the top hysterical thinking from someone who thinks he is Mr. Rational.
I agree that Trump must change. If he doesn’t, he will fail. But I support trump in that I want him to succeed. I don’t think he’s some sort of genius… he wasn’t prepared to win, and he still has time to rise to the position. I hope he does. Opposing him now is pointless.
I disagree with that. If you look at what happened in the 1974 midterms, which took place less than three months after Nixon resigned, Republicans lost six Senate seats and 48 House seats. However, if you look at the 1976 elections, yes Carter won, but just barely. The Republicans only lost one House seat and picked up one Senate seat. The stain was there, but Republicans had started to recover. And by 1980, well, we know what happened.
Are there problems with this comparison? Yes. Legions of them. But the less time Trump spends in office, the more resounding his repudiation, the better it will be for the cause of conservatism.
I don’t how what to say to this other than: we’re about to find out.
The swifter and the more thorough his repudiation, the less long term his impact will be and the fewer imitators we will find. If someone with integrity who believes in the Constitution is elected to follow Trump, they may be able to set things right. The contrast is will be stark.
What do you want me to do? Throw rocks at people? The way I see it, there are only two ways to deal with other people: persuasion or coercion. Either violence or words. I reject violence, so that leaves words.
Well, one out of three ain’t bad, I suppose.
I agree with the Founding Fathers that the Electoral College should not be a rubber stamp. And I think that in extraordinary circumstances, when all other institutional barriers have failed, that Electors should use their power to stop a man who clearly is unfit to be President from being elected.
Clearly you think otherwise.
Not that we were talking about this at all in this thread. But please continue to bring it up and throw it in my face in order to try to discredit me.
That is true, but how many more years was Congress lost to the Rs, and what damage did the Watergate-emboldened Congress do in the interim? I’m not as sanguine about it.
But returning to my earlier point, what does your “opposition” to Trump consist of at this point, Fred, other than trying to persuade others of the rightness of your point of view?
Sorry, I didn’t mean it that way. I wasn’t tying to goad you there, but was genuinely curious about what else you thought should be done. It sounds like what I thought, which is that there isn’t much.
My auto spell does not appear to like your name. :)
Discredit you? That was not my intention at all. It was to help explain where you are coming from based on your past posts. I think it shows where you are.
I also think where you are is hysterical in its content. The willingness to do significant damage to our political structure in order to change the outcome of an election does not seem to be in the best interest of this nation. Contemplation of it was not, to me and my understanding of the situation, rational.
In this thread, you have very much said you are against Trump and want him gone. Despite being asked by more than one person, you have yet to articulate how you think this will work out better than what we have now. We all understand you are anti-Trump with every fiber of your being.
Now, if you want to be rational, lay out step two from Trump resigning, o and how that works out better for Republicans and Conservatives than Trump staying in power. Instead of implying anyone who is not with you is not a decent person, why not try to sell us on your point of view? Thus far, your actions do not seem designed to change minds, but to either pump yourself up as the noble, clear seeing man, or just to stir things up. None of it appears created to sell your point, that what Trump should do is resign. I get that it was a cute thing to say. Moving past that, defend your point.
That’s not what I said. Please see comment #72.
That does not help, Fred. Saying what decent people should do, is the same as saying if you don’t do it, you are not decent. You are just changing the words around. You have still implied that if I am not on board with you, something is wrong with me.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/should
used in auxiliary function to express obligation, propriety, or expediency’tis commanded I should do so — William Shakespearethis is as it should be — H. L. Savageyou should brush your teeth after each meal
Now that we have that out of the way, do you dare to actually live up to answer the many people asking what your game plan is? I am not holding my breath.
Look Fred, if Hillary was elected I’d be writing about her committing ritual suicide on TV as the best course of action but that wouldn’t happen. I asked what he should say to the country other than “I quit” and you have no answer for your own personal reasons.
The man is going to speak soon. The health care fail makes dems smell blood in the water and the president will likely strike before they do given his natural understanding of this odd game. I was curious what people in the Rico world thought he should say. I got some answers from people who would prefer he quit but they answered the question. It is a relevant one.
That’s because there’s almost no value in anything the man says. He has so utterly destroyed his own credibility that he’s hardly worth listening to.
Really, what’s the point? Either he has no idea what he’s talking about, or he’ll reverse himself in a day or two, or he’s lying, or some combination of those three.
And that’s really remarkable. Usually it takes a president more than a year to burn their credibility to the ground and then salt the earth. Trump has done it in less than six months. But then everything about his entire presidency is remarkable.
I also don’t think anything Trump says will have much effect. I never worked in the Federal government, but I spent almost thirty years in a large corporation whose main customer was the Federal government. I signed a lot of very restrictive non-disclosure agreements, took a lot of polygraphs, and saw quite a bit about how that part of the system worked. Most of what I saw confirmed what I was told by my first mentor, and that is that nothing happens until problems reach what he called “critical mass.” It is my guess that not much Trump says will bring the problems to critical mass. Not much he says will keep the problems from reaching critical mass eventually. Critical mass is ugly.
The other thing I learned is that pretense and adversity are inversely proportional. Adversity reveals the true nature of all things (or something like that). Credit to Ken Fussichen(sp?) who used to have a web page about the Laws of Ducks.
I think we’ll know soon if Trump is the unstable blow-hard he sometimes seems to be, or if he can handle adversity. I hope it’s the latter.
Trump kills 16 regulations for every new one, crushing 2-for-1 goal
But sure, Fred. Keep calling for him to step down.
I’m sorry. I’m unclear what that has at all to do with his dishonesty or total lack of credibility.
Do you not value honesty? Do you not see the problems with a Presidential who is a habitual liar with zero credibility?
Your “total lack of credibility” is a statement of opinion, not fact. As is “habitual liar with zero credibility.”
Meanwhile, the “facts” show his administration to be successful at things you, as a so-called “Libertarian” should seem to want.
Really?
How’s that Obamacare repeal coming? How about tax reform?
Wait. You want to talk about issues now? Because this . . .
. . . has nothing to do with issues and everything to do with your personal distaste for the man.
I’m done. You may have the last word if you need it.