Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

[Jill Kews]

It's one of the reasons I hated the guy, he comes in and you think that this is it that we can finally get past all the bullshit that's been holding us back that having a black president behind the wheel can finally bring peace or atleast some understanding and what does the fagot do. Tanks the economy, Tells us that it can never get better and the best we can do is maintain, stoke racial division, start killing people left and right with drones, uses the IRS to go after republicans, force everyone to pay for healthcare causing the cost to skyrocket, Sends billions to countries that hate us, is so desperate to empty guantanamo he fucking trades six high powered Isis members for a traitor, and on and on and on. To top it all off if you so much as even suggest that he fucked over black people, We were in a worse economic/divorce rate/crime rate sitution during him then before him you get to be the town coon. It was the fucking worst part about his presidency and one of the reasons I fliped to voting republican.

Trump's crew is big and it keeps getting bigger,
The last president was a god-damned hypocrite and fraud who's crimes were covered up and obscured by both his cronies and people desperate to make sure the legacy of the first black president wasn't that of a lazy, dishonest, good-for-nothing nigger.

 

[LightDragonman1]

From what I've gathered, some people hate Trump because of the budget deficit that has continued to grow, and the cutting back on social and safety net programs. That, and some don't think the economy is actually doing well under him:

Trump Economy Truth Slips Out

Trump slips up revealing the truth about his economy. John Iadarola and Jayar Jackson break it down on The Damage Report. Follow The Damage Report on Faceboo...

www.youtube.com

Thoughts?

 

[Gehenna]

From what I've gathered, some people hate Trump because of the budget deficit that has continued to grow, and the cutting back on social and safety net programs. That, and some don't think the economy is actually doing well under him:

Trump Economy Truth Slips Out

Trump slips up revealing the truth about his economy. John Iadarola and Jayar Jackson break it down on The Damage Report. Follow The Damage Report on Faceboo...

www.youtube.com

Thoughts?

The deficit has grown, but tackling that is an issue you need bipartisan support for and Trump has slowed it down.

He has literally not cut back a single program. The MOST you can point to his him wanting to lower the amount of backpay from a year to six months to make the program more financially viable.

If you think the economy is not doing well, you are just an absolute gibbering lunatic. What else can I say? It is up by LITERALLY every single metric we have. It's just denying facts at that point.

 

[Chaptersevenbankruptcy]

From what I've gathered, some people hate Trump because of the budget deficit that has continued to grow, and the cutting back on social and safety net programs. That, and some don't think the economy is actually doing well under him:

Trump Economy Truth Slips Out

Trump slips up revealing the truth about his economy. John Iadarola and Jayar Jackson break it down on The Damage Report. Follow The Damage Report on Faceboo...

www.youtube.com

Thoughts?

There are two ways you can approach this issue; from a political perspective, or from an economic perspective. I'm much stronger on politics than economics, so I'll mostly come from the former angle.

US politicians' promises to trim the fat in government are generally all lies. US politicians' claims to have actually done something about government largess are even more ridiculous. Take for example the supposed budget surplus under president Clinton. Sure; there was a budget surplus if you only count public debt. Naysayers would deny that intragovernmental debt matters. Who cares if the government owes itself money? After all, it's not like there's some gigantic source of money the US government has called Social Security that was moved into the overall Federal Budget in 1968 and the whole thing is fucking obviously Enron accounting.

Here's the thing; while you may in principle agree with fiscal conservatives that US government spending is out of control, and that something ought to be done (there are, so far as I understand them, quite sound theoretical arguments for this), the thing that anyone who pays attention to politics cannot possible have missed is that fiscal conservatives are largely useless people.

US political parties are big-tent affairs. Much as satirists during the Bush and Obama era liked to pretend otherwise, Republicans are not uniform in their beliefs and priorities. Furthermore, the old Republican coalition was big on fiscal responsibility, or more accurately, bitching about fiscal responsibility and then not actually doing anything about it, while the new Republican coalition under Trump considers it far less of a priority.

Trump is also a consummate politician. He's not going to do something nice for someone just because. The moral majority people have largely quietly fallen in line with Trump, so he's thrown them a bone every now and then. The Ben Shapiros of the world? Not so much. They were absolutely politically unreliable during the turbulent early days of the Trump administration, so why the fuck would he give them what they want now? No, fuck those people. They can get in line with everyone else begging favors now that they see Trump is here to stay.

Again, Trump isn't a dictator. He can't just issue a decree or papal bull or whatever and have it be so. Cutting back federal spending is one of the most political capital intensive tasks he could commit himself to. Does that sound like a judicious use of political capital when there are unhinged people demanding his head, and the people that such a move would satisfy are largely shiftless ingrates?

 

[funknuggets]

the annoying thing with trump is really that he isnt really draining the swamp, hes exposing them who they are though.
for a man that campaigned on ending useless wars and getting out of never ending wars its been disappointing to say the least. its really confusing actually. during the campaigned he endlessly said that the iraq war was the biggest mistake ever then he goes on and hires the master peddlers of the lie, john bolton, elliott abrams...etc, the simple fact that people around him recommended these people to advise him shows that the ''deep state'' and ''swamp'' swamps his cabinet tremendously. anywho, i would still vote for him over any other dummycrat running right now. really wish hed get rid of pompeo, and members of his national security council and stop buttfucking netanyahu

 

[Chaptersevenbankruptcy]

the annoying thing with trump is really that he isnt really draining the swamp, hes exposing them who they are though.
for a man that campaigned on ending useless wars and getting out of never ending wars its been disappointing to say the least. its really confusing actually. during the campaigned he endlessly said that the iraq war was the biggest mistake ever then he goes on and hires the master peddlers of the lie, john bolton, elliott abrams...etc, the simple fact that people around him recommended these people to advise him shows that the ''deep state'' and ''swamp'' swamps his cabinet tremendously. anywho, i would still vote for him over any other dummycrat running right now. really wish hed get rid of pompeo, and members of his national security council and stop buttfucking netanyahu

You just saw a coordinated effort by news media, Democrat politicians, slimy lawyers of all descriptions and probable glow-in-the-darks to remove Trump from office, and you're finding it confusing that Trump has apparently made some concessions to the military wing of the government?

Just how fucking naive are you?

 

[Ilmseil]

Jesus Christ.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/local/school-bullying-trump-words/

I was going to quote some choice shit here but the entire thing is so filled with shit that didn't happen.txt I don't even know where to begin. Journalists are absolute fucking scum who belong on the end of a noose lmao

 

[funknuggets]

You just saw a coordinated effort by news media, Democrat politicians, slimy lawyers of all descriptions and probable glow-in-the-darks to remove Trump from office, and you're finding it confusing that Trump has apparently made some concessions to the military wing of the government?

Just how fucking naive are you?

ill clarify that what i was talking about was generally his campaign promises, and how i was disappointed in his judgements. i wasnt in particular talking in fact to the current state of whats going on. of course i saw the recently partisan coup.

 

[Bass]

Do it. Do it, you crazy bastard. Let Trump crush her dreams a second time. He won't even have to type out new tweets, he'll just retweet himself from 2016.

Can you imagine the progressive meltdown if Bloomberg buys the nomination and Clinton gets on the ticket over Bernie again? Trump won't even need to stir the pot, he'll point it out once and the rage will echo for months.

2 problems: Hillary and Bloomberg are both listed as living in New York, and you can't have the president and vp from the same state; and no. 2, I don't think a guy that is smart enough to have made billions of dollars in his lifetime is crazy enough to risk an acute bout of rapid onset lead poisoning in the back of his head.

 

[Flexo]

From what I've gathered, some people hate Trump because of the budget deficit that has continued to grow, and the cutting back on social and safety net programs. That, and some don't think the economy is actually doing well under him:

Trump Economy Truth Slips Out

Trump slips up revealing the truth about his economy. John Iadarola and Jayar Jackson break it down on The Damage Report. Follow The Damage Report on Faceboo...

www.youtube.com

Thoughts?

That and apparently he's responsible for all evils everywhere in the USA.

There are two ways you can approach this issue; from a political perspective, or from an economic perspective. I'm much stronger on politics than economics, so I'll mostly come from the former angle.

US politicians' promises to trim the fat in government are generally all lies. US politicians' claims to have actually done something about government largess are even more ridiculous. Take for example the supposed budget surplus under president Clinton. Sure; there was a budget surplus if you only count public debt. Naysayers would deny that intragovernmental debt matters. Who cares if the government owes itself money? After all, it's not like there's some gigantic source of money the US government has called Social Security that was moved into the overall Federal Budget in 1968 and the whole thing is fucking obviously Enron accounting.

Here's the thing; while you may in principle agree with fiscal conservatives that US government spending is out of control, and that something ought to be done (there are, so far as I understand them, quite sound theoretical arguments for this), the thing that anyone who pays attention to politics cannot possible have missed is that fiscal conservatives are largely useless people.

US political parties are big-tent affairs. Much as satirists during the Bush and Obama era liked to pretend otherwise, Republicans are not uniform in their beliefs and priorities. Furthermore, the old Republican coalition was big on fiscal responsibility, or more accurately, bitching about fiscal responsibility and then not actually doing anything about it, while the new Republican coalition under Trump considers it far less of a priority.

Trump is also a consummate politician. He's not going to do something nice for someone just because. The moral majority people have largely quietly fallen in line with Trump, so he's thrown them a bone every now and then. The Ben Shapiros of the world? Not so much. They were absolutely politically unreliable during the turbulent early days of the Trump administration, so why the fuck would he give them what they want now? No, fuck those people. They can get in line with everyone else begging favors now that they see Trump is here to stay.

Again, Trump isn't a dictator. He can't just issue a decree or papal bull or whatever and have it be so. Cutting back federal spending is one of the most political capital intensive tasks he could commit himself to. Does that sound like a judicious use of political capital when there are unhinged people demanding his head, and the people that such a move would satisfy are largely shiftless ingrates?

Let me add a bit more to this. I'll skip over the econ since it's dull, but if you want to know that detail, I recommend:

Just imagine for a moment that you reading this post right now, you got 1 penny from every person in America every year. However you want to imagine it happens, everybody sends you a shiny new penny every year.

Congrats, you are now getting over 3 million dollars a year.

Some politician comes along and says "hey, we need to trim the budget. Why we paying this [insert your name here]?" Now unless you happen to be Bloomberg or Trump visiting this thread, I'm going to assume that $3,000,000+ a year is a big deal to you. So you're going to fight to keep that money coming to you as hard as you can. You're going to buy lobbyists, you're going to buy commercials and get news reporters to talk about how awful any politician is who considers cutting your funds.

Who's going to fight against you? The voters? To us you're only taking 1 penny a year. By some point, who cares if we have to give up that penny, it will be a small price to pay to get you to shut up.

That's the real problem - the incentive for those who get government funds is a lot higher than those who have to pay for it. And believe it or not, but that's where a lot of the budget goes. There's not just 1 magical thing that we can cut out and be balanced (though social security is getting close), but it's millions of tiny items all pulling from the trough that add up. You try to cut one thing, and you're laughed at because it was only a tiny fraction of a percent of the total budget. You try to make a dent, and now imagine the aforementioned parable, only this time it's a hundred people receiving a penny, and they are all united to guilt trip others into giving up $1 a year.

So yeah. Have fun solving the paradox of government budgets.

 

[Gehenna]

Let me add a bit more to this. I'll skip over the econ since it's dull, but if you want to know that detail, I recommend:

Just imagine for a moment that you reading this post right now, you got 1 penny from every person in America every year. However you want to imagine it happens, everybody sends you a shiny new penny every year.

Congrats, you are now getting over 3 million dollars a year.

Some politician comes along and says "hey, we need to trim the budget. Why we paying this [insert your name here]?" Now unless you happen to be Bloomberg or Trump visiting this thread, I'm going to assume that $3,000,000+ a year is a big deal to you. So you're going to fight to keep that money coming to you as hard as you can. You're going to buy lobbyists, you're going to buy commercials and get news reporters to talk about how awful any politician is who considers cutting your funds.

Who's going to fight against you? The voters? To us you're only taking 1 penny a year. By some point, who cares if we have to give up that penny, it will be a small price to pay to get you to shut up.

That's the real problem - the incentive for those who get government funds is a lot higher than those who have to pay for it. And believe it or not, but that's where a lot of the budget goes. There's not just 1 magical thing that we can cut out and be balanced (though social security is getting close), but it's millions of tiny items all pulling from the trough that add up. You try to cut one thing, and you're laughed at because it was only a tiny fraction of a percent of the total budget. You try to make a dent, and now imagine the aforementioned parable, only this time it's a hundred people receiving a penny, and they are all united to guilt trip others into giving up $1 a year.

So yeah. Have fun solving the paradox of government budgets.

Solving it on a theoretical level is easy. A strong, careful look at where money can be shaved off and presenting this massive list all at once would do it. Its the political capital angle that is damn near impossible.

In order to do it, you'd NEED a veto proof majority. Not to stop a veto, but because that's the number of representatives and senators that would be needed to ensure a comfortable enough majority to withstand those who would turn yellow and cave. Good fucking luck there.

 

[It's HK-47]

And that's why your city is a Hellscape of needles, human shit, and violent crime.

 

[Chaptersevenbankruptcy]

Solving it on a theoretical level is easy. A strong, careful look at where money can be shaved off and presenting this massive list all at once would do it. Its the political capital angle that is damn near impossible.

In order to do it, you'd NEED a veto proof majority. Not to stop a veto, but because that's the number of representatives and senators that would be needed to ensure a comfortable enough majority to withstand those who would turn yellow and cave. Good fucking luck there.

Agreed. Milton Friedman made a similar point decades ago concerning the income tax system:

Again, I'm all for a more efficient and lean government, but currently actually achieving that would require Trump to seize absolute power and start piling the bodies of all who oppose him in mass graves. And don't get me wrong, if Trump said tomorrow that he was going to do that, I would come running and I would bring my own fucking shovel to help out. But, sadly, I do not foresee government fiscal responsibility being used as a pretext for the bigliest and best authoritarian government of all time any time soon.

Until that happy day, the US government will continue to be a bloated mess that more or less works in spite of itself.

 

[Iron Hamster]

2 problems: Hillary and Bloomberg are both listed as living in New York, and you can't have the president and vp from the same state; and no. 2, I don't think a guy that is smart enough to have made billions of dollars in his lifetime is crazy enough to risk an acute bout of rapid onset lead poisoning in the back of his head.

Rumor has it he is going to change his primary address to one of his other estates. So......loophole.

 

[SBG]

Bloomberg is paying smart enough people that they'd tell him Hillary being a running mate would be stupid, but putting the suggestion out there gets people thinking of Bloomberg in terms of being the prospective nominee already. Guy doesn't have a single delegate yet but now has people talking about whether or not he's making a smart choice about his running mate.

 

[PantsFreeZone]

The snowflakes are angry at the current Nascar thing because she wants Trump to sign her helmet.

The replies are why I wish that using Twitter caused cancer.

Hailie Deegan on Twitter

“Today’s goal. Get my helmet signed by Trump https://t.co/5v9y2vrjPg”

twitter.com

 

[thismanlies]

Buckle up Cuckaroos....shit might be about to get real fuckin interesting

BREAKING: Mike Bloomberg wants Hillary Clinton as his running mate

Mike Bloomberg is considering making Hillary Clinton his running mate, a source close to his campaign has told Drudge Report.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Is this manlet seriously thinking about gifting the presidency to the bitch? Because I know you don't get to Bloomberg's position by being naive and choosing her as your VP for any other reason is dangerously naive.

 

[Ilmseil]

Hillary would find the suggestion of her as VP fucking insulting, degrading ad far beneath her. Bloomberg has 5 shotgun shells to the back of the head waiting for him if he tries that shit and he knows it.

 

[heyitsmike]

the annoying thing with trump is really that he isnt really draining the swamp

The swamp fights back. Are you really surprised they're not going quietly?

for a man that campaigned on ending useless wars and getting out of never ending wars its been disappointing to say the least.

Getting out of quagmires is several orders of magnitude harder than getting in. That much should be pretty obvious by now but I guess not.

the simple fact that people around him recommended these people to advise him shows that the ''deep state'' and ''swamp'' swamps his cabinet tremendously.

No one in the swamp says they're in the swamp. They hide the fact that they're in the swamp. No one will check 'Yes' on their job application to the question 'Are you a swampy motherfucker?' No one will answer 'Yes' to the question in a job interview. The best you can do is vet them as well as possible and fire them if they do turn out to be swampy.

Your complaints can basically all be boiled down to 'Why hasn't he accomplished these really difficult things in a single weekend?'

You need to adjust your expectations because they are wholly unrealistic and out of whack. Things didn't get this way overnight and they won't be fixed overnight.

 

[Marissa Moira]

Maybe Bloomberg is trying to crash the DNC so he's the only source of money they will have left?

Nobody likes how Trump is harassing China because their foreign offshore investments are taking a nosedive.