SURVEY: Do you want Trump to finish his first term?

[watcharacters]

On 1/28/2018 at 12:52 PM, The Old Bull said:

The problem is if you get rid of Trump you get a religious nutter for president.

And that's a BIG problem except for those who are "religious nutters".

 

 

 

[malagateddy]

Sorry Sir..but my knowledge of American Politics is limited..but as an outsider..I think it's good that an anti-globalist won the day..as a side issue..I have also read "the mena cover up" etc etc..
The Clintons are a dirty word to me

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Jools]

Trump will never be impeached and even if he were, he would not be removed from office. He will definitely not be indicted. There is no precedent for a sitting President being indicted. My hope would be that voters will decide to make him a one-term President.

[heybruce]

Just heard a clip of Trump gloating about catching the Democrats at something.  I'm not sure what he thinks they were caught at.  There was also a Republican spin doctor claiming that the Russia investigation was opened based on the Steele dossier, which is obviously false.

 

I don't know if Trump and his people are really stupid and believe their nonsense, or if they just have zero respect for the intelligence of the Trump base.

[Slip]

40 minutes ago, heybruce said:

With respect to British expats here in Thailand, events have demonstrated that the people who voted for Brexit were inadequately informed on what they were voting for.  Well over a year later and they still aren't sure.  The comparatively simple issue of how to deal with the border between North Ireland and Ireland has people stumped, imagine how difficult the complex issues will be.

 

I was happy to leave the choice to the UK voters.  However you should know that Trump supported Brexit because Obama opposed it.  He had, and has, no idea of what it involves.

With regard to the UK- the same dark forces are at work both in the UK and the US.  It just so happens that Trump is providing a lightning rod for them so obviously in the U.S.  May is far too weak to attract the proper fascists.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies and posts making claims without any supporting links have been removed.   Also a post violating Fair Use policy.  

[heybruce]

49 minutes ago, Slip said:

With regard to the UK- the same dark forces are at work both in the UK and the US.  It just so happens that Trump is providing a lightning rod for them so obviously in the U.S.  May is far too weak to attract the proper fascists.

"Dark forces"?  Are we into conspiracy theories here?

[Slip]

9 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"Dark forces"?  Are we into conspiracy theories here?

Ha! fair point.  As I was typing it I thought it sounded a bit overly-dramatic but went on to make some minor edits and let that blow straight through, but the connections between brexit and trump (with all the Russian overlap) are well documented.  I used to blame Trump for the mess that the U.S. has become, but now I have realised it is the GOP who should pay for this, and no doubt they will.

[lannarebirth]

9 hours ago, mikebike said:

I agree it is very funny that thing called time. Hard to understand. I'll try to help you.

 

Govt. policy is like a ship in a storm - make a correction...wait to see how effective your adjustments are. The last administration's adjustments were quite effective and pulled the country out of a financial crisis cause by the administration previous to theirs. These adjustments continued working until the current administration's policy adjustments come on-line... NOW we are seeing the effects of this admin's adjustments and the markets are becoming volatile.

 

Does that help?

 

Have you ever heard of Congress?  Presidents have very little to do with the economy and sometimes crises take decades to build.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/12/hey-barney-frank-the-government-did-cause-the-housing-crisis/249903/

[ilostmypassword]

6 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Have you ever heard of Congress?  Presidents have very little to do with the economy and sometimes crises take decades to build.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/12/hey-barney-frank-the-government-did-cause-the-housing-crisis/249903/

It figures you would cite a right wing extremist who uses misleading number to falsely blame government for the housing crisis in 2008. And you complain about Slate?

 

[Scott]

A post using unapproved sources has been removed.   Here's a little about FAIR:

 

The founding chairman, John Tanton, became leader of several anti-immigration groups.^[13] John Tanton personally held white supremacist beliefs while he lead the organization,^[14] leading to the Southern Poverty Law Center to classify FAIR as a hate group.^[15]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_for_American_Immigration_Reform

 

The Center for Immigration studies is a spin off of FAIR.

[lannarebirth]

8 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

It figures you would cite a right wing extremist who uses misleading number to falsely blame government for the housing crisis in 2008. And you complain about Slate?

 

 

I think The Atlantic is a pretty mainstream periodical. I know partisans like to point fingers at the other party for all the ills in society but the truth is the past financial crisis had many mothers.  Personally, as bad as government policy was to encourage mortgages by substandard loan applicants, it was just as complicit in its setting of reserve requirements for those who would provide those loans. Ultimately IMO theblame rests on the borrowers themselves for not being cautious with their own finances. That you can not legisate or write policy for.

[Jingthing]

trump called democrats who didn't adoringly stand for the "great leader" "trump"'s total B.S. speech TREASONOUS.

I see this as a political opportunity like when Hillary Clinton called some "trump supporters" deplorables.

Americans have proven how stupid and gullible they are to a bullying CON MAN electing a wanna be dictator in "trump" but there may just be a limit. Emphasis on maybe. 

Having the FREEDOM to not supplicate to a wannabe dictator without being labeled a traitor is deeply in the American DNA.

I see a politically exploitable moment. 

Of course not about impeachment or resignation directly, but about kicking the republicans out of power in congress this year!

Edited February 6, 2018 by Jingthing

[Thakkar]

12 minutes ago, Scott said:

A post using unapproved sources has been removed.   Here's a little about FAIR:

 

The founding chairman, John Tanton, became leader of several anti-immigration groups.^[13] John Tanton personally held white supremacist beliefs while he lead the organization,^[14] leading to the Southern Poverty Law Center to classify FAIR as a hate group.^[15]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_for_American_Immigration_Reform

 

The Center for Immigration studies is a spin off of FAIR.

 

Wikipedia is fake pedia, everybody says so; they’re part of the Deep State and financed by Soros and The Clinton Foundation—just ask Alex Jones.

[Scott]

3 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

 

Wikipedia is fake pedia, everybody says so; they’re part of the Deep State and financed by Soros and The Clinton Foundation—just ask Alex Jones.

OK, I'll bite, we can use this site then:

 

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/organizations/federation-for-american-immigration-reform/

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I think The Atlantic is a pretty mainstream periodical. I know partisans like to point fingers at the other party for all the ills in society but the truth is the past financial crisis had many mothers.  Personally, as bad as government policy was to encourage mortgages by substandard loan applicants, it was just as complicit in its setting of reserve requirements for those who would provide those loans. Ultimately IMO theblame rests on the borrowers themselves for not being cautious with their own finances. That you can not legisate or write policy for.

Peter Wallison lied. He invented his own criteria for what was a substandard loan that vastly inflated the number of them. Also from the Atlantic:

"First, central to Wallison's argument that affordable housing policies (including those advocated by Rep. Frank in 1992) caused the mortgage crisis is his claim that the federal government is responsible for 19.2 million "subprime" mortgages (with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac being responsible for 12 million of those). But what Wallison fails to tell the Atlantic's readers is that he is using his own made-up definition of "subprime," a definition that no one outside of his think tank, the American Enterprise Institute, uses. By way of comparison, the non-partisan Government Accountability Office has estimated that there were only 4.58 million subprime and other high risk loans outstanding, with very few of these attributable to the federal government."

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/12/for-the-last-time-fannie-and-freddie-didnt-cause-the-housing-crisis/250121/

In fact, the vast majority of housing loans that went into default were made by private lenders who were in cahoots with the 3 private credit certifiers to certify subprime loans.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/11/22/5086/#f2ec788f92f1

[Opl]

 

 

 

d

Edited February 6, 2018 by Opl

[lannarebirth]

33 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Peter Wallison lied. He invented his own criteria for what was a substandard loan that vastly inflated the number of them. Also from the Atlantic:

"First, central to Wallison's argument that affordable housing policies (including those advocated by Rep. Frank in 1992) caused the mortgage crisis is his claim that the federal government is responsible for 19.2 million "subprime" mortgages (with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac being responsible for 12 million of those). But what Wallison fails to tell the Atlantic's readers is that he is using his own made-up definition of "subprime," a definition that no one outside of his think tank, the American Enterprise Institute, uses. By way of comparison, the non-partisan Government Accountability Office has estimated that there were only 4.58 million subprime and other high risk loans outstanding, with very few of these attributable to the federal government."

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/12/for-the-last-time-fannie-and-freddie-didnt-cause-the-housing-crisis/250121/

In fact, the vast majority of housing loans that went into default were made by private lenders who were in cahoots with the 3 private credit certifiers to certify subprime loans.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/11/22/5086/#f2ec788f92f1

 

I didn't read that butI know a standard loan is 20% down with PITI accounting for no more than about 35% -43% of income depending on cash flow. Credit scores matter too but I'm not sure what is considered "good enough". Are his lending requirements more stringent than that?

Edited February 6, 2018 by lannarebirth

[ilostmypassword]

19 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I didn't read that butI know a standard loan is 20% down with PITI accounting for no more than about 35% -43% of income depending on cash flow. Credit scores matter too but I'm not sure what is considered "good enough". Are his lending requirements more stringent than that?

All I know is that he came up with a standard that was not shared by anyone else in the industry. And he used that standard to indict Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Even though their default percentage was only 1/6 that of private lenders. Clearly it was just a way of attempt to cast the blame on government regulations when in fact it was deregulation that was in so many ways responsible for the disaster. And once again Trump and his cronies want to do away with that regulation.

[riclag]

1 hour ago, Scott said:

A post using unapproved sources has been removed.   Here's a little about FAIR:

 

The founding chairman, John Tanton, became leader of several anti-immigration groups.^[13] John Tanton personally held white supremacist beliefs while he lead the organization,^[14] leading to the Southern Poverty Law Center to classify FAIR as a hate group.^[15]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_for_American_Immigration_Reform

 

The Center for Immigration studies is a spin off of FAIR.

TV has a term and conditions page that everyone must adhere too.I haven't seen a source requirement . Perhaps I missed it.I have and I'm sure many others have quoted sources only to find the mods pulled them(unapproved).Can you please post a current or popular list of  what TV considers  unapproved.It would save a great deal of time and frustration for members posts not to mention  your time constraints, as I'm sure we keep you very busy with World News comments.

Edited February 6, 2018 by riclag

[Scott]

33 minutes ago, riclag said:

TV has a term and conditions page that everyone must adhere too.I haven't seen a source requirement . Perhaps I missed it.I have and I'm sure many others have quoted sources only to find the mods pulled them(unapproved).Can you please post a list of  what TV considers unapproved.It would save a great deal of time and frustration for members posts not to mention  your time constraints, as I'm sure we keep you very busy with World News comments.

Sources which do not fact check their information are not approved.  

 

*edited*

 

PM sent.

 

 

[lannarebirth]

19 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

 And once again Trump and his cronies want to do away with that regulation.

 

 

I agree, that would be bad. It seems to me the regulations are too lax as they stand now. That, together with the recognition that the sensibilities of borrowers has changed. People will walk away from an underwater loan in a heartbeat now. People used to feel a little bit more ethically obligated, if not legally, to follow through on their commitments.

[Jingthing]

Reality catching up with trump.

Of course his hard core white resentment motivated base won't care.

 

Quote

In ways large and small, reality is catching up with Trump.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reality-is-catching-up-with-trump--everywhere/2018/02/05/83644532-0ac0-11e8-8b0d-891602206fb7_story.html

 

[Jingthing]

Our very weird president. He never improves. He just gets more and more what he is.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2018/02/06/daily-202-why-trump-flippantly-accusing-democrats-of-treason-is-not-a-laughing-matter

 

Quote

 

The Daily 202: Why Trump flippantly accusing Democrats of ‘treason’ is not a laughing matter

...

-- “One of the things that has made the Donald Trump political experience so peculiar is that he combines the instincts of an authoritarian with the mannerisms of an insult comic,” writes New York Magazine’s Jonathan Chait. “Neither of these traits is a familiar element of electoral politics in the United States (certainly not at the presidential level). And as strange as they are individually, they are even more bizarre in combination. … It is totally beyond the pale for a president to describe the opposing party as having committed treason for failing to applaud his speech. It is the logic and rhetoric of authoritarianism in its purest form.
...

 

 

[mikebike]

5 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Have you ever heard of Congress?  Presidents have very little to do with the economy and sometimes crises take decades to build.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/12/hey-barney-frank-the-government-did-cause-the-housing-crisis/249903/

Did not say "president". You do understand the word "administration", right? Are you denying that the current president's administration has a super-majority and is in full control of fiscal policy, taxes, deregulation and appointing heads of departments?

 

Decades in the past... the boom-bust cycle has accelerated in the last 20 yrs.

[lannarebirth]

1 hour ago, mikebike said:

Did not say "president". You do understand the word "administration", right? Are you denying that the current president's administration has a super-majority and is in full control of fiscal policy, taxes, deregulation and appointing heads of departments?

 

Decades in the past... the boom-bust cycle has accelerated in the last 20 yrs.

 

President, Chief Executive, Executive Branch, that's just semantics as far as I'm concerned. There is no supermajority in either branch of Congress. Not that it is needed. Simple majorities do pass fiscal policy and tax bills, none good, for a long time now. Regulation is primarily done within executive department.

 

I agree with you that the boom bust cycle has accelerated and I attribute that primarily to poor Federal Reserve rate policy, also for a long time now. Also, IMO equities should not be allowed in government sanctioned tax deferred retirement plans.

[Thakkar]

4 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Our very weird president. He never improves. He just gets more and more what he is.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2018/02/06/daily-202-why-trump-flippantly-accusing-democrats-of-treason-is-not-a-laughing-matter

 

 

 

Book: “How Democracies Die” by Steven Levitsky and Danial Zeblat (both professors of government at Harvard).

The authors Argue that the slow erosion of vital norms of behavior is how the death spiral begins. We’ve seen it happen in Venezuela, then Turkey, and now, slowly, is happening in Hungary. The US isn’t any of those countries; it’s institutions are far stronger—but still, there are risks. Let’s hope the US is not next on that list. The big reveal of 2017 has been that what we assumed were legal constraints on Presidential behavior were merely norms. Trump has trampled on many of those norms and paid no price.

 

The authors identify certain key indicators in *potential* despots that are publicly identifiable *before* such people get into office. Trump, in 2016, the authors argue, ticked all the boxes. The indicators are: A weak commitment to democratic rules of the game or an unwillingness to play by democratic rules of the game, the denial of the legitimacy of your opponents, a toleration or encouragement of violence, and the willingness to curtail the civil liberties of your opponent, including the press.

[F4UCorsair]

9 hours ago, Scott said:

Sources which do not fact check their information are not approved.  

 

*edited*

 

PM sent.

 

 

 

 

So wikipedia is NOT approved?   I don't think it should be, incidentally, and anybody quoting from it, without substantial confirmation from other sources, is just lazy.

[Scott]

5 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

So wikipedia is NOT approved?   I don't think it should be, incidentally, and anybody quoting from it, without substantial confirmation from other sources, is just lazy.

The next comment about moderation will get you a long suspension.  

[KMartinHandyman]

Yes I look forward to 1077 more days and possibly 4 more years. At the same time I can continue to enjoy this thread on a daily basis.