Image of the United States has plunged under Trump, survey shows

[craigt3365]

2 minutes ago, Ace of Pop said:

I think its the same Image.Bill the Zip Clinton, Obama , the Song n Dance Man , now its Don the Wall ,all good fun because they are just told what to do on major issues.?
Kennedy was yer last good chap.!.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

And how is that different from any other country?  It's all about money.

[Ace of Pop]

No but your clowns are funnier than German ones.?[emoji562]


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Thakkar]

20 minutes ago, Ace of Pop said:

I think its the same Image.Bill the Zip Clinton, Obama , the Song n Dance Man , now its Don the Wall ,all good fun because they are just told what to do on major issues.?
Kennedy was yer last good chap.!.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

While you may be a legend in your own mind (you certainly are in mine), what you personally think is somewhat less impactful than the results of a scientific survey of thousands of representative people in 37 countries.

 

But thanks for sharing anyway.

 

T

[craigt3365]

13 minutes ago, Ace of Pop said:

No but your clowns are funnier than German ones.?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

We've got the best one in the world at the moment!

[F4UCorsair]

5 hours ago, Thakkar said:

"parallel comparison, would be Obama with Clinton when Obama first took office"

 

We all tend to black out bad memories, but I notice you skipped a whole eight years of the disastrous Bush presidency, you know, the one that directly preceded the Obama presidency.

 

T

T

 

 

Well dig out the graphical data on that, or any other new president.   I really don't care whom you compare with whom, but what is interesting is that often popularity/acceptance/etc falls for a new man in the chair and as he beds in, the level rises.  I'm sure there are exceptions, just as there are for every situation.

 

I didn't comment specifically on Obama, but the trend when the leadership changes, so rather than compare Trump in his first months with Obama in his final months, it's more valid to compare with other presidents at the same stages of their administrations.

 

 

[Thakkar]

23 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

 

Well dig out the graphical data on that, or any other new president.   I really don't care whom you compare with whom, but what is interesting is that often popularity/acceptance/etc falls for a new man in the chair and as he beds in, the level rises.  I'm sure there are exceptions, just as there are for every situation.

 

I didn't comment specifically on Obama, but the trend when the leadership changes, so rather than compare Trump in his first months with Obama in his final months, it's more valid to compare with other presidents at the same stages of their administrations.

 

 

I'm too busy making fun of you. Since you're the one making the assertion that this isn't a fair comparison, why don't you dig up the data? If you don't like what you find, you don't have to share it here.

 

T

[dutchisaan]

15 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

 

Well dig out the graphical data on that, or any other new president.   I really don't care whom you compare with whom, but what is interesting is that often popularity/acceptance/etc falls for a new man in the chair and as he beds in, the level rises.  I'm sure there are exceptions, just as there are for every situation.

 

I didn't comment specifically on Obama, but the trend when the leadership changes, so rather than compare Trump in his first months with Obama in his final months, it's more valid to compare with other presidents at the same stages of their administrations.

 

 

Well, we do compare the Trump administration, with, like you said the Obama adminstration. And guess what??? OnlyTrump and his family need a lot of lawyers to defend the lying from the WH! I can not remember that any other president has this much trouble in the 6 months he has the office of POTUS.

But, hey, keep defending this want to be, because he is the only one that knows all.

Defend what you want to, but I think to many people are sick of listening to a lying, want to be, except for the diehard trumpeteers. 

Why are you not standing up for your country??? 

[iReason]

25 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

I didn't comment specifically on Obama, but the trend when the leadership changes, so rather than compare Trump in his first months with Obama in his final months, it's more valid to compare with other presidents at the same stages of their administrations.

 

"I didn't comment specifically on Obama" 

Short memory?

 

Of course you did:

 

F4UCorsair said:

"I think a more valid comparison, or certainly a parallel comparison, would be Obama with Clinton when Obama first took office."

 

"I do know that Obama's approval/popularity soared in his final couple of years, and it's not unusual for approval to drop

when a new leader takes office because the voters don't know what to expect."

[craigt3365]

33 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

 

Well dig out the graphical data on that, or any other new president.   I really don't care whom you compare with whom, but what is interesting is that often popularity/acceptance/etc falls for a new man in the chair and as he beds in, the level rises.  I'm sure there are exceptions, just as there are for every situation.

 

I didn't comment specifically on Obama, but the trend when the leadership changes, so rather than compare Trump in his first months with Obama in his final months, it's more valid to compare with other presidents at the same stages of their administrations.

 

 

No matter how you cut it, the image of the US and it's president is way down compared to when Obama was president.  For sure Clinton.  Not sure about Bush as he wasn't a very well liked person! LOL

 

I was lucky to be in Kenya just after Obama was elected.  I felt like a rock star.

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

 

Well dig out the graphical data on that, or any other new president.   I really don't care whom you compare with whom, but what is interesting is that often popularity/acceptance/etc falls for a new man in the chair and as he beds in, the level rises.  I'm sure there are exceptions, just as there are for every situation.

 

I didn't comment specifically on Obama, but the trend when the leadership changes, so rather than compare Trump in his first months with Obama in his final months, it's more valid to compare with other presidents at the same stages of their administrations.

 

 

Right you are.

Poll finds Trump’s standing weakened since springtime

Approaching six months in office, Trump’s overall approval rating has dropped to 36 percent from 42 percent in April. His disapproval rating has risen five points to 58 percent. Overall, 48 percent say they “disapprove strongly” of Trump’s performance in office, a level never reached by former presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama and reached only in the second term of George W. Bush in Post-ABC polling.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-finds-trump-standing-weakened-since-springtime/2017/07/15/2decf03a-68d2-11e7-9928-22d00a47778f_story.html

[F4UCorsair]

1 hour ago, iReason said:

 

"I didn't comment specifically on Obama" 

Short memory?

 

Of course you did:

 

F4UCorsair said:

"I think a more valid comparison, or certainly a parallel comparison, would be Obama with Clinton when Obama first took office."

 

"I do know that Obama's approval/popularity soared in his final couple of years, and it's not unusual for approval to drop

when a new leader takes office because the voters don't know what to expect."

I note you didn't quote my entire post, because I said, "I really don't care whom you compare with whom", etc.

I then used Obama and Clinton as an example.  You do understand quoting 'an example'?  Perhaps not....never mind.

Not even a nice try.

[Smarter Than You]

28 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

I note you didn't quote my entire post, because I said, "I really don't care whom you compare with whom", etc.

I then used Obama and Clinton as an example.  You do understand quoting 'an example'?  Perhaps not....never mind.

Not even a nice try.

Trump cannot be compared with any of the 44 men that preceded him - he is completely off the reservation as indicated by the precipitous fall in the international image of the US under his stewardship.

[iReason]

22 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

I note you didn't quote my entire post, because I said, "I really don't care whom you compare with whom", etc.

I then used Obama and Clinton as an example.  You do understand quoting 'an example'?  Perhaps not....never mind.

Not even a nice try.

Don't you remember any of them?

The lines aren't even in your quote you reference.

"I note you didn't quote my entire post because I said, "I really don't care whom you compare with whom"

 

This is what I quoted:

Full quote of your first post starting with specifically commenting about Obama on the same subject:

 

8 hours ago -F4UCorsair said:

I think a more valid comparison, or certainly a parallel comparison, would be Obama with Clinton when Obama first took office.   I do know that Obama's approval/popularity soared in his final couple of years, and it's not unusual for approval to drop when a new leader takes office because the voters don't know what to expect.  Percentages will no doubt vary,  but broadly, those are traditional trends.

 

I don't have the time or level of interest to trawl through the net looking for similar graphical data, but I'm sure it's there somewhere, and you will be able to find something that expresses a contrary view.

You really need to compare apples with apples, not apples with durian.

 

You appear a bit confused...

[ilostmypassword]

5 hours ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

 

Well dig out the graphical data on that, or any other new president.   I really don't care whom you compare with whom, but what is interesting is that often popularity/acceptance/etc falls for a new man in the chair and as he beds in, the level rises.  I'm sure there are exceptions, just as there are for every situation.

 

I didn't comment specifically on Obama, but the trend when the leadership changes, so rather than compare Trump in his first months with Obama in his final months, it's more valid to compare with other presidents at the same stages of their administrations.

 

 

I just found this page for you. It will tell you where Trump stands in polls at any point in his presidency compared to all the Presidents from Harry Truman onwards. That's 12 other presidents. And guess where he stands? If you guessed 13th, you'd win.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?ex_cid=rrpromo

 

[samuijimmy]

opps insert image not work

 

It was an image of Angela  pushing  Donald in a baby pram!

 

 

 

[Andaman Al]

13 minutes ago, samuijimmy said:

opps insert image not work

 

It was an image of Angela  pushing  Donald in a baby pram!

 

 

 

This one?

 

[rijb]

16 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

I just found this page for you. It will tell you where Trump stands in polls at any point in his presidency compared to all the Presidents from Harry Truman onwards. That's 12 other presidents. And guess where he stands? If you guessed 13th, you'd win.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?ex_cid=rrpromo

 

When any data is presented in the business world, the first question is "so what"?  What are the implications of this data?  For shits and grins, let's apply it here.

 

Is Trump a lame duck?  Republican members of Congress continue to vote in line with Trump's position.  

 

Countries continue to do business with the U.S., including those with a low opinion of Trump and the U.S.  Enemies of the U.S. are confused and aren't making any progress against the U.S.

 

So, the question remains.  So what?  

 

BTW:  Hate speech is not a substitute for real answers.  

[ilostmypassword]

5 minutes ago, rijb said:

When any data is presented in the business world, the first question is "so what"?  What are the implications of this data?  For shits and grins, let's apply it here.

 

Is Trump a lame duck?  Republican members of Congress continue to vote in line with Trump's position.  

 

Countries continue to do business with the U.S., including those with a low opinion of Trump and the U.S.  Enemies of the U.S. are confused and aren't making any progress against the U.S.

 

So, the question remains.  So what?  

 

BTW:  Hate speech is not a substitute for real answers.  

First off, it was a reply to someone who pinpointed a problem with the data. I gave him a link to it.

 

If members of congress are so supportive of Trump, why is the health care bill in such trouble? (Trump has said at various times that the health care bill is mean..no wait it's great..if it doesn't pass that's ok...Congress better not adjourn without passing the health bill)  Congressional leader are worried that they won't be able to raise the deficit limit  Tax reform is in trouble. How have Trump's contradictory statements and evident ignorance done anything but hurt his agenda?

 

I have no idea on what basis you say enemies of the U.S. are confused and aren't making any progress against the U.S. What on earth are you talking about? Western Europe? Is that your idea of our enemies? Because they sure are confused about where he stands on Russian aggression.  Is Russia not an enemy of the U.S.? If it is, what has he done to confuse and stop them from making progress?  Is Iran not advancing in the mideast? Is the extremist Islamist nation Saudi Arabia a friend of the USA? Is Trump's over the top support of Saudi Arabia good for the USA?

 

What on earth do you mean by countries are doing business with the USA? Do you mean the government of other countries are trading with the USA? Weapons purchases?  Do you mean foreign private businesses are making purchases from  and selling to private business in the USA? Let's wait and see if Trump puts in place some of the protectionist measures he has spoken of in the past before we characterize the USA's business relations with the rest of the world as unchanged.

 

And as for your comment about hate speech, I guess you just threw that in irrelevantly since to a rational mind, none of what I stated here or in the earlier post qualifies as that. Unless you mean by hate speech, speech you hate to read or hear.

[boomerangutang]

                    America's position as one of the leaders on clean energy solutions has taken a sustained hit due to Trump's asinine position re; the Paris Accords.  Trump (and the idiots he surrounds himself with) don't even know it (yet), but it was like giving the middle finger to the whole rest of the world.  People don't like being given the finger.

 

                         On a practical and economic level, Trump succeeded in lowering the image of US expertise and products/service/installation of alt.energy.  The US has the largest passive solar array producing electricity in the world (in California).  It is also at the vanguard of battery storage, compressed-air storage tech for alt.energy, and many other related fields.   Yet, Trump flushed all that down the toilet.   Now, when overseas countries or corps want to transition to alt-energy, they're more likely to turn to Germany, Denmark, China, India or other countries who are now perceive as being at the vanguard.   Among other things, that will translate to tens of thousands of jobs transferring out of the US, to other countries.

 

 

[rijb]

RE: post ID 648

 

Lots of questions.  Don't see many answers about how these issues are affected by Trump's approval ratings.

 

Your last paragraph makes no sense.  Don't let your emotions get the best of you.

[ilostmypassword]

2 minutes ago, rijb said:

Lots of questions.  Don't see many answers about how these issues are affected by Trump's approval ratings.

 

Your last paragraph makes no sense.  Don't let your emotions get the best of you.

Did you write this or did hacker take control of your posts?

"Trump a lame duck?  Republican members of Congress continue to vote in line with Trump's position." 

 

And did that hacker also write this?

"BTW:  Hate speech is not a substitute for real answers." 

[bushdoctor]

27 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

                    America's position as one of the leaders on clean energy solutions has taken a sustained hit due to Trump's asinine position re; the Paris Accords.  Trump (and the idiots he surrounds himself with) don't even know it (yet), but it was like giving the middle finger to the whole rest of the world.  People don't like being given the finger.

 

                         On a practical and economic level, Trump succeeded in lowering the image of US expertise and products/service/installation of alt.energy.  The US has the largest passive solar array producing electricity in the world (in California).  It is also at the vanguard of battery storage, compressed-air storage tech for alt.energy, and many other related fields.   Yet, Trump flushed all that down the toilet.   Now, when overseas countries or corps want to transition to alt-energy, they're more likely to turn to Germany, Denmark, China, India or other countries who are now perceive as being at the vanguard.   Among other things, that will translate to tens of thousands of jobs transferring out of the US, to other countries.

 

 

He wants to build a wall on the southern US border and cover it with solar panels. Possibly 40-50 feet tall and 900 miles long. That's a pretty big solar array innit? 

[Jingthing]

Someone believes that will ever happen.

[bushdoctor]

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Someone believes that will ever happen.

Please share with us any solid inside information you have regarding a future congressional vote. 

[attrayant]

5 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

He wants to build a wall on the southern US border and cover it with solar panels. Possibly 40-50 feet tall and 900 miles long. That's a pretty big solar array innit? 

 

And a pretty ineffective one, too.  PV cells need to face UP, toward the sun, and ideally track its apparent movement throughout the day.  A border wall would run - on average - from east to west.  That means anything mounted on the wall will be facing either north or south.  A wall covered in solar cells would perform marginally at best, for either a few hours in the morning or a few hours in the late afternoon, and only if we can figure out how to get the sun to rise in the north and set in the south.

 

By the way, the previous specification for the wall was only 18 feet and a cost of $20B.  Has it gone up to 50 now?  

[Grubster]

35 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

                    America's position as one of the leaders on clean energy solutions has taken a sustained hit due to Trump's asinine position re; the Paris Accords.  Trump (and the idiots he surrounds himself with) don't even know it (yet), but it was like giving the middle finger to the whole rest of the world.  People don't like being given the finger.

 

                         On a practical and economic level, Trump succeeded in lowering the image of US expertise and products/service/installation of alt.energy.  The US has the largest passive solar array producing electricity in the world (in California).  It is also at the vanguard of battery storage, compressed-air storage tech for alt.energy, and many other related fields.   Yet, Trump flushed all that down the toilet.   Now, when overseas countries or corps want to transition to alt-energy, they're more likely to turn to Germany, Denmark, China, India or other countries who are now perceive as being at the vanguard.   Among other things, that will translate to tens of thousands of jobs transferring out of the US, to other countries.

 

 

I don't like Trump, but he is right on this issue, the US has already lost most of its production jobs to countries that don't give a crap at all about their own environment or human rights. Now the world wants the US to be on the leading edge of overpricing even more of its production,  Almost all of the nations in this accord are enjoying the cheap costs of doing business in China and other countries that pollute like crazy and have very poor human rights including child labor. Everybody needs to play on an even playing field or not at all.

[bushdoctor]

2 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 

And a pretty ineffective one, too.  PV cells need to face UP, toward the sun, and ideally track its apparent movement throughout the day.  A border wall would run - on average - from east to west.  That means anything mounted on the wall will be facing either north or south.  A wall covered in solar cells would perform marginally at best, for either a few hours in the morning or a few hours in the late afternoon, and only if we can figure out how to get the sun to rise in the north and set in the south.

 

By the way, the previous specification for the wall was only 18 feet and a cost of $20B.  Has it gone up to 50 now?  

Unless you're a solar engineer I'd leave that to the experts. You do realize panels can be placed at any angle, and multiple angles? 

[attrayant]

1 minute ago, Grubster said:

I don't like Trump, but he is right on this issue, the US has already lost most of its production jobs to countries that don't give a crap at all about their own environment or human rights. Now the world wants the US to be on the leading edge of overpricing even more of its production,  Almost all of the nations in this accord are enjoying the cheap costs of doing business in China and other countries that pollute like crazy and have very poor human rights including child labor. Everybody needs to play on an even playing field or not at all.

 

Ivanka dresses: made in China

Ivanka blouses: made in Indonesia

Ivanka suits: made in Viet nam

Ivanka handbags & shoes: made in Malaysia

 

Ivanka Inc.: Not made in the USA.

[ilostmypassword]

20 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

He wants to build a wall on the southern US border and cover it with solar panels. Possibly 40-50 feet tall and 900 miles long. That's a pretty big solar array innit? 

And so efficient stretching it out over 900 miles.  The thing is, though, Trump also said it has to be see through.. Otherwise border patrol agents could risk having 60 pound bags of drugs tossed onto their heads.  

[Grubster]

3 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 

Ivanka dresses: made in China

Ivanka blouses: made in Indonesia

Ivanka suits: made in Viet nam

Ivanka handbags & shoes: made in Malaysia

 

Ivanka Inc.: Not made in the USA.

Yeah no kidding I challenge you to find a clothing article made in the US. Get it now?