US President 2016 - the Great Horse Race

[laughing dog]

At this point, I'd say GW was worse than two Trumps.

Trump is an idiot, but he has done very little.

GW got hundreds of thousands of people killed over a hare brained idea.

Give Trump some time.

 

[Toni]

At this point, I'd say GW was worse than two Trumps.

Trump is an idiot, but he has done very little.

GW got hundreds of thousands of people killed over a hare brained idea.

In the long term, I think that Trump is worse, if for nothing else than his cabinet picks, especially with regards to the environment and education, and the environmental rollbacks which are already in progress now. Then there is the US vs Rest of the World mentality and the serious long term damage that is very likely to cause.

Should Trump not remain in office long term---there is widespread speculation that he will be impeached or will be removed via 25th Amendment provisions--we will still have to deal with the damage that Pence will do. He is a very limited, dogmatic thinker, who, when his feet are truly put to the fire and there is enough public scrutiny, will do the very least possible to put out one raging fire at a time, rather than actually address the root cause of fire outbreaks. My stomach churns at the ill that he would do as President. Moving down the line of succession, it is not better.

The only real hope is mid-term elections.

 

[Elixir]

At this point, I'd say GW was worse than two Trumps.

Trump is an idiot, but he has done very little.

GW got hundreds of thousands of people killed over a hare brained idea.

Give Trump some time.

He should get some time all right... a thirty year sentence should finish him off.

 

[Horatio Parker]

At this point, I'd say GW was worse than two Trumps.

Trump is an idiot, but he has done very little.

GW got hundreds of thousands of people killed over a hare brained idea.

Give Trump some time.

I prefer to avoid that, if possible.

But so far, Trump has a bark, but not much bite. I know, famous last words and all, but so far, that seems to be the case.

 

[bilby]

At this point, I'd say GW was worse than two Trumps.

Trump is an idiot, but he has done very little.

GW got hundreds of thousands of people killed over a hare brained idea.

At this point, Trump has been in power for 1% as long as W.

So if W was worse than fewer than 100 Trumps, then Trump is worse overall.

 

[Horatio Parker]

At this point, I'd say GW was worse than two Trumps.

Trump is an idiot, but he has done very little.

GW got hundreds of thousands of people killed over a hare brained idea.

At this point, Trump has been in power for 1% as long as W.

So if W was worse than fewer than 100 Trumps, then Trump is worse overall.

Clever, but, without a body count, irrelevant. GW stepped on his dick bigger than any POTUS.

If Trump turns out to be a foreign policy wus, that may not be a bad thing for many people.

 

[Harry Bosch]

At this point, I'd say GW was worse than two Trumps.

Trump is an idiot, but he has done very little.

GW got hundreds of thousands of people killed over a hare brained idea.

In the long term, I think that Trump is worse, if for nothing else than his cabinet picks, especially with regards to the environment and education, and the environmental rollbacks which are already in progress now. Then there is the US vs Rest of the World mentality and the serious long term damage that is very likely to cause.

Should Trump not remain in office long term---there is widespread speculation that he will be impeached or will be removed via 25th Amendment provisions--we will still have to deal with the damage that Pence will do. He is a very limited, dogmatic thinker, who, when his feet are truly put to the fire and there is enough public scrutiny, will do the very least possible to put out one raging fire at a time, rather than actually address the root cause of fire outbreaks. My stomach churns at the ill that he would do as President. Moving down the line of succession, it is not better.

The only real hope is mid-term elections.

I think that there is a lot to be optimistic about the mid-term elections. NY Times subscription is up 10-fold. SNL is booming. Trumps early ratings are at an all time low. Dems are showing signs of willingness to get off their ass and vote in two years. I'm hopeful.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

At this point, Trump has been in power for 1% as long as W.

So if W was worse than fewer than 100 Trumps, then Trump is worse overall.

Clever, but, without a body count, irrelevant. GW stepped on his dick bigger than any POTUS.

If Trump turns out to be a foreign policy wus, that may not be a bad thing for many people.

Trump certainly seems on a path to be worse than W, despite the W Admin being pretty bad. But Trump has a ways to go. What concerns me is that Trump is riding along a global wave of "We forget how bad shit got when all these right-wing assholes got power back in the 20s and 30s." That wave is bothersome and while Trump is an idiotic fuckwad, he isn't evil. However, he'll align with evil if it makes him look good to enough people.

 

[Elixir]

he isn't evil. However, he'll align with evil if it makes him look good to enough people.

WUT? Aligning oneself with evil for the purpose of self aggrandizement isn't evil?

 

[RavenSky]

At this point, Trump has been in power for 1% as long as W.

So if W was worse than fewer than 100 Trumps, then Trump is worse overall.

Clever, but, without a body count, irrelevant. GW stepped on his dick bigger than any POTUS.

If Trump turns out to be a foreign policy wus, that may not be a bad thing for many people.

What Trump is doing to education, the environment, the EPA and every other &^%$%^&( department meant to protect the US citizens could very well kill more people than W's wars.

Don't get me wrong. I haven't forgiven Bush/Cheney/Rumsey for invading Iraq. But I still think Trump is worse. And he's mentally ill. Bush isn't.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

At this point, Trump has been in power for 1% as long as W.

So if W was worse than fewer than 100 Trumps, then Trump is worse overall.

Clever, but, without a body count, irrelevant. GW stepped on his dick bigger than any POTUS.

If Trump turns out to be a foreign policy wus, that may not be a bad thing for many people.

Ya, one of Dubya's biggest problems was that he wanted to be a war president. That meant that not only did he fuck up the US, he also fucked up a lot of the rest of the world as well. If the bulk of Trump's damage can be limited to America, that would be a plus.

It's unlikely, though. I can't see Trump going four years without declaring war on someone. I hope I'm wrong, though.

 

[bilby]

Clever, but, without a body count, irrelevant. GW stepped on his dick bigger than any POTUS.

If Trump turns out to be a foreign policy wus, that may not be a bad thing for many people.

Ya, one of Dubya's biggest problems was that he wanted to be a war president. That meant that not only did he fuck up the US, he also fucked up a lot of the rest of the world as well. If the bulk of Trump's damage can be limited to America, that would be a plus.

It's unlikely, though. I can't see Trump going four years without declaring war on someone. I hope I'm wrong, though.

At least with W you had some clue who he would go to war against. It was bound to be someone in the Islamic world, and Iraq was obviously on the shortlist from day one.

With Trump, it's quite possible to envisage him going to war with almost any nation on Earth, if he feels like they have insulted or slighted him. And he is incredibly quick to insult.

War against Sweden, for not backing him against the perpetrators of his fictional terror attack? Against China? India? France? North Korea? Nuclear armed states have generally not been considered safe targets in the past; But with a mad egotist in charge, who knows? Invade Mexico to stop the 'illegals' at source? Invade Canada for providing refuge to Tom Sawyer, who wouldn't stop mocking Trump on an Internet Discussion Board? Attack South America for stealing their name from the Greatest Nation on Earth^TM? All of these seem less unlikely with Trump than I would like to think they should be.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Ya, the war would be pretty fucking random. The Americans gave a crazy person an army, though, so we're going to have to accept the very real possibility of a completely random war.

 

[angelo]

As long as a war is Limited on radical Islamists and the left some good would come out of it!

 

[KeepTalking]

As long as a war is Limited on radical Islamists and the left some good would come out of it!

Carpet bombing certain parts of Western Australia would also have some benefits. At least for this forum.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

As long as a war is Limited on radical Islamists and the left some good would come out of it!

Carpet bombing certain parts of Western Australia would also have some benefits. At least for this forum.

And to be fair, no one would really be able to tell the difference.

 

[angelo]

As long as a war is Limited on radical Islamists and the left some good would come out of it!

Carpet bombing certain parts of Western Australia would also have some benefits. At least for this forum.

Are you insinuating that it's wrong to declare war on radical Islam?

 

[DrZoidberg]

Carpet bombing certain parts of Western Australia would also have some benefits. At least for this forum.

Are you insinuating that it's wrong to declare war on radical Islam?

Lol. Yes, it's wrong to declare war on radical Islam. For the same reason it's wrong to declare war on drugs. You can't fight social problems with conventional arms. If you do you create more Islamic fighters. You're going to need a new plan, Sir.

 

[KeepTalking]

Carpet bombing certain parts of Western Australia would also have some benefits. At least for this forum.

Are you insinuating that it's wrong to declare war on radical Islam?

No, I wasn't insinuating that in the post you are quoting. If you didn't get what I was insinuating, well, more's the pity for you.

Now that you have me on the hook, however, I would like to do more than insinuate that it's wrong to declare war on radical Islam. I will flat out state that it's wrong to declare war on radical Islam. My reasoning is the same as that presented by DrZ. That is not to say that we shouldn't be fighting groups like ISIS when they rear their ugly heads, but declaring war on Islam would be extremely counterproductive.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Carpet bombing certain parts of Western Australia would also have some benefits. At least for this forum.

Are you insinuating that it's wrong to declare war on radical Islam?

I thought the post was clear, we should bomb western Australia. Though it'd be a good idea to double check Trump's orders and make certain it doesn't say Austria.