|
Is the "Trump rally" finally
over?
It looks like the misplaced love affair with the clown may be
over. His approval rating is at a record low, and he's already
showing himself to be a lame duck. The risk of geopolitical
uncertainty is rising, and the expected boost from tax cuts is
fading. I expect discord within the GOP to increase as they all
look ahead to their own elections next year and start to distance
themselves from his stink, and so Trump's ability to get anything
done other than "executive order" will get worse. He attacked Obama
relentlessly for doing executive orders, but it's different when
it's him doing it I guess.
Repeal and replace, abject failure. Those "historic" tax cuts,
not happening this year, which the market in recent months appears
to have pinned hopes on. Travel ban, can't even pass the courts.
Now even his biggest fans in the alt-right are turning on him for
his rapid 180 on Syria. The Syria situation could easily drag the
US into something much worse, and he seems to have bombed without
strategy (and without asking Congress...) just to score some
feel-good bumps for himself. He said he was so disturbed by the
footage of suffering children but he's not so disturbed that he'll
let any of them into the US, nor did he care after 2013's gas
attacks when he urged Obama not to get involved and not to do
anything without asking Congress (which the Republicans were all
against when it was Obama, but love it now).
He attacked Obama repeatedly for travel while he travels every
weekend and is on pace to rack up more taxpayer costs for travel in
1 year than Obama in 8 years. He attacked Obama for golf, however
at this point Obama hadn't even been on a golf course while Trump
has golfed what 14 or more times already? Unbelievable. Remember
last year he said, "I just wanna stay in the White House and work
my ass off, make great deals, right? Who's gonna leave? I mean,
who's gonna leave?" That would be you, every Friday afternoon, to
play golf all weekend at our expense.
|
|
Jester,
I agree with what you've said about Trump. Logically, if Trump
can't put a tax reform package that congress can pass, I think
that's when everyone wakes up and realizes he can't deliver on any
of his promises. Logically, the market should give back all the
mark-ups of the Trump trade. What it will do.....I no longer know
what will happen.
I have never seen a press so polarized - according to the
Washington Post, he's never done anything right. All the adjectives
used to describe behavior are extremely and unfailingly negative.
At Fox News, he's never done anything wrong. Pisses me off - I'd
like some news, please, not every story as
mini-editorials/opinion pieces.
|
|
Author:
|
Jam
ok
|
|
Subject:
|
Off Topic
|
|
Sentiment:
|
Neutral
|
|
Date:
|
04/12/17 at 2:33 PM CDT
|
|
Jamok,
I agree about the media bias. One thing though, they can be
biased and mislead by omission, or they can be biased and flat out
wrong. Like Fox, I used to love John Stewarts at the Daily Show
take downs of them. He'd show the rampant hypocrisy of Fox hosts
attacking Obama for one thing and the exact same Fox hosts praising
Trump for the exact same thing a few months later.
Fox has the additional bias of wanting to suck up to Trump and
team so they can get access, and they know advertisers will pay
more because they all know Trump watches far too much of it.
|
|
Author:
|
Jester
Debunker
|
|
Subject:
|
Off Topic
|
|
Sentiment:
|
Neutral
|
|
Date:
|
04/12/17 at 3:51 PM CDT
|
|
Jester,
Stewart/Maher/Colbert are priceless. and unfortunately, you're
right about the advert income influencing news, and deeply these
days. It's ironically somewhat funny, but at ABC Brian (can't
recall his last name) - Williams? the chief correspondent was
rushed into retirement for something like lying about being in a
helicopter that was near a hot fire zone when it wasn't.
Hilary-esque mendaciousness. Bill O'Reilly screws possibly more
women where he works than Clinton (Bill) did when he was President.
- and they give $1 million (give or take) for each woman as
hush money? And no consequenses because of the ad revenue? (Least I
haven't heard of any, but I rarely watch news now.) $1/mil for each
woman, give or take. Plus whatever civil suits that might be
brought against him. Man, you're not making a dime sitting in a
courtroom rather than behind a news desk. Unless it's broadcast on
TV, like OJ.
And maybe that's the best answer - start a new TV news network,
hire OJ, Cosby, and Clinton, and they can make the news and then
report about it. How many viewers do you think that would garner?
(Excuse my time-frame - I really don't know if anything was done to
O'Reilly. Funny, I do recall O'Reilly being friends with one of
those 3 leftwing comics.
|
|
Author:
|
Jam
ok
|
|
Subject:
|
Off Topic
|
|
Sentiment:
|
Neutral
|
|
Date:
|
04/12/17 at 5:35 PM CDT
|
|
0
0
