How much damage will Trump do?

[Gori the Grey]

Over in the "Trump accuses Obama of wiretapping" thread, we've drifted over to a different topic.

I want to give it its own thread.

How much damage will Trump and his administration do to the nation/world?

I created the poll options as a worst to best range, but I've allowed you to pick up to two.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Aside from repealing every piece of environmental legislation ever passed?

 

[Narz]

Yeah I think the main damage he will do will be environmental, which will sicken and kill perhaps even millions but most of the consequences won't be able to be directly linked back to him.

The glee with which republicans in general & Trump in particular rape the environment is the most sickening thing about them (and it's not like there aren't a plethora of other choices).

 

[Lexicus]

I chose "Major pointless international military conflict costing tens of thousands of lives" and "other", where "other" is irreversible catastrophic climate change is made certain by his Presidency combined with Republican control of Congress.

 

[Perfection]

My hope is Trump is the syrup of ipacac to all the crap that's been shoved down our throats. Hopefully it will all be purged with him and we can get back to more functional and sane governance.

My fear is he'll hasten the erosion of the American system and too many voters will buy into his bs framing of conflicts.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Another globel financial crisis, but this time the Fed dosnt have ammunition to do anything about it
Probably another terrorist attack will lead to a crack down and expansion of executive powers.
Maybe an expansion of an existing war, Like a surge in Afghanistan, US public appiethite for another military adventure is at a all time low

 

[Lexicus]

Another globel financial crisis, but this time the Fed dosnt have ammunition to do anything about it

You think the Fed solved the last crisis?

 

[Synobun]

This is a difficult question to both answer and quantify.

I don't find Trump, as an individual, to be particularly damaging or dangerous. This changes based on how others respond to him. International response to some of his decisions has been good (other countries stepping up with funding, for example), but it's bound to happen that someone with a particularly opportunistic personality will take advantage of a pause or fumbled response. Lack of response, as well, has consequences that we're starting to see in the US.

If the hesitance and inaction continues, Trump's administration will likely cause an immense amount of damage not only to the US but the stability of the world community as well.

 

[warpus]

Depends on what die he is throwing down and what kind of weapon he wields

 

[metalhead]

Checks and balances unfortunately weren't designed to prevent kleptocracy, which is already well underway. That will continue unabated, unless the Democrats take back the House in 2018. Otherwise, Trump and Co. are far too incompetent and unintelligent to pull off anything meaningful.

He also might start a war, but you can say that about any president.

 

[onejayhawk]

I find the Kleptocracy option amusing. Hillary and Bill Clinton are all about the money and not even they fall on that line. The Donald is not driven by money. It's just how he keeps score.

The changes wrought by an administration are often lingering and subtle. The Obama administration was very forceful in extending regulatory reach. To most of the posters in this forum, that is a good thing. The Trump administration will dial that back, particularly by EPA. We are already seeing the impact in oil, gas and coal. Stricter enforcement of border laws is a given, with more resources directed that way. Significant changes in school funding and school choice are coming. HUD may undergo a really major change, but few will ever see it. Money and efforts directed to climate change will almost vanish.

On a more obvious level, the Supreme Court will be a vastly different one than Hillary Clinton would have produced. Foreign ties to Israel will be strengthened, but weakened with Muslim countries. Tension with Russia will cool, but tensions with China and the Pacific rim may heat up. Trade may improve or deteriorate. It's hard to tell.

All this is if he never passes a signature piece of legislation. Indeed, there has been a significant lack of new legislation proposed. With healthcare reform tabled, nothing is stepping forward. Perhaps, we will get a new Trump Oval Office and Casino.

J

 

[Perfection]

I like regulations. Like we should have one telling ISPs to not sell my browsing data.

@onejayhawk can we at least agree that the antiprivacy bill just passed isn't in America's best interest.

 

[metalhead]

The Donald is not driven by money. It's just how he keeps score.

J

I . . .I don't even. Do you honestly not realize the contradiction here?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I . . .I don't even. Do you honestly not realize the contradiction here?

I don't recall J posting anything honestly, and doubt this was an exception.

 

[FriendlyFire]

You think the Fed solved the last crisis?

Government Bail outs ? along with QE, Stimulus and expanding the safety net ?
Once the Debt hits a certain % like Japan you have economic stagnation, though for Japan it a combination of low birth rates and currency deflating due to people not spending.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Aside from repealing every piece of environmental legislation ever passed?

Yeah I think the main damage he will do will be environmental, which will sicken and kill perhaps even millions but most of the consequences won't be able to be directly linked back to him.

The glee with which republicans in general & Trump in particular rape the environment is the most sickening thing about them (and it's not like there aren't a plethora of other choices).

I chose "other", where "other" is irreversible catastrophic climate change is made certain by his Presidency combined with Republican control of Congress.

Yeah, drat. I wish I'd included irreversible climate catastrophe between Armageddon and major war.

The Donald is not driven by money. It's just how he keeps score.

Ok, but even if this is so, mightn't he want to rack up his score? People who care about scores usually care about getting high scores.

 

[metalhead]

Trump cares about winning, right? If money is how he keeps score, and he wants to "win," where winning is typically understood to mean having the highest score, um, er, yeah.

As a general issue, never try to claim a rich person doesn't care about money, because that might trump even some recent, extraordinarily dumb claims you made, in terms of its stupidity. Rich people are rich because money is ALL they care about. Trump certainly fits the bill.

 

[Lexicus]

Government Bail outs ? along with QE, Stimulus and expanding the safety net ?
Once the Debt hits a certain % like Japan you have economic stagnation, though for Japan it a combination of low birth rates and currency deflating due to people not spending.

The Bail Outs were the Treasury. Ditto with QE, which didn't do anything anyway. Stimulus spending came from the Treasury too.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Trump cares about winning, right? If money is how he keeps score, and he wants to "win," where winning is typically understood to mean having the highest score, um, er, yeah.

As a general issue, never try to claim a rich person doesn't care about money, because that might trump even some recent, extraordinarily dumb claims you made, in terms of its stupidity. Rich people are rich because money is ALL they care about. Trump certainly fits the bill.

Don't want to derail my own thread (which was designed to prevent a derail elsewhere), but I actually think Trump cares more about popularity than money.

I think he's incapable of regarding himself as worthwhile. So he needs external markers of worth: money, beautiful wives, etc.

But the most direct external marker of worth is popularity. So first he found notoriety in the New York tabloids and as a minor national celebrity. Then, with the Apprentice, TV ratings became sign of worthiness as a human being (look how his tweets about Schwarznegger show how hung-up he still is about this). The presidential run just gave him amped-up versions of those kinds of validations: weekly poll numbers, daily press coverage. The rallies were full-on crack cocaine--pure, unadulterated, direct, real-time adulation. The presidential run was primarily, for him, about the rallies. That's why he's counteracting his historically bad poll numbers (and getting worse with each poll) by absurdly already starting rallies for the 2020 campaign.

 

[Commodore]

Aside from repealing every piece of environmental legislation ever passed?

This is not a power the president has. The president cannot repeal legislation.

I foresee more of the same government deadlock we've seen for the past 15 or so years. Especially once the Democrats make gains after the 2018 mid-term elections.