[RD] Trump: The First 100 Days

[aelf]

That's an argument with an extremely limited shelf life.

Even J must realize that if the only thing the Republicans can come up with in 2018 as to why they should retain total power is, "We're not Hillary Clinton," they are going to have an extremely difficult time of it. That also stands as an extraordinarily poor accomplishment to be touting for the first 100 days. Literally everyone on the planet besides Hillary Clinton could have achieved that. I think maybe we should set the bar a little higher.

Maybe bottom-of-the-barrel voters need bottom-of-the-barrel politicians. Who else can represent them?

 

[rah]

All the candidates last time were bottom-of-the-barrel. That's the only reason Trump was able to win.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Kinda makes me wonder what the next republican primaries will look like.....

 

[onejayhawk]

All the candidates last time were bottom-of-the-barrel. That's the only reason Trump was able to win.

Bottom of the barrel is a job requirement. It will be the same next time.

Maybe bottom-of-the-barrel voters need bottom-of-the-barrel politicians. Who else can represent them?

We never get the government we want. We get the government we will tolerate.

Kinda makes me wonder what the next republican primaries will look like.....

Assuming you mean when Trump is not running, a Ted Cruz coronation.

J

 

[onejayhawk]

Even J must realize that if the only thing the Republicans can come up with in 2018 as to why they should retain total power is, "We're not Hillary Clinton," they are going to have an extremely difficult time of it. That also stands as an extraordinarily poor accomplishment to be touting for the first 100 days. Literally everyone on the planet besides Hillary Clinton could have achieved that. I think maybe we should set the bar a little higher.

Since you are part of the 30%, I do not expect you to get it. Suffice to say, I don't think you can get more wrong.

They are not saying, "We are not Hillary Clinton." She's not worth mention. They are saying, "We are doing something." That means enforcing immigration laws, building oil pipelines, clearing the way for more drilling, providing school choice, etc. All of those are good things to their target audience. That leaves aside foreign policy, which looks good after eight years of equivocation.

J

 

[metalhead]

She's not worth mentioning, but you mentioned her

Most people are not conservative ideologues. Most people are not ideologues at all. The moment you start pointing to policy is the moment you totally lose the thread. Trump will not have a single major thing in his first 100 days, which is what this thread is about. YOU tried to claim it's a success because he's not Hillary Clinton, which is about the lamest definition of success I've ever heard.

 

[metalhead]

I mean honestly J - if people just loooove action and "doing something" - why is his approval rating historically low? Why is he 17 points lower now on the question of "keeps his promises" than he was 2 months ago, and why has he lost ground on every other personal trait question that Quinnipiac asks about?

All signs point to a disastrous first 100 days. That a minority of sycophants and ideologues likes it is fine as far as it goes, but the majority of the country just isn't buying it.

 

[JollyRoger]

Trump is even more unpopular than United Airlines:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/united-airlines-less-unpopular-donald-165523806.html

 

[Takhisis]

Hillary Clinton is the obvious much-worse scenario.

Once again you are not explaining. Why would she have been worse? How? What would have been the consequences of her actions?

Democrats lost last year with "we're not Trump."

Except that more people chose not-Trump than not-Hillary.

 

[Lexicus]

Except that more people chose not-Trump than not-Hillary.

So what? They still lost.

 

[Takhisis]

They won a majority of the vote. Given that the US has massive disenfranchisement and an electoral college, well, we cannot claim it's a democratic election system anyway.

 

[Lexicus]

Yes, I agree, that's the problem.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Give it time and the republicans will pass a "Elections reform" bill that will ensure that only registered republicans can vote.

 

[Takhisis]

Given that in some places it is potentially easier for somebody to become a party member than a registered voter, that could be problematic.

 

[onejayhawk]

She's not worth mentioning, but you mentioned her

Most people are not conservative ideologues. Most people are not ideologues at all. The moment you start pointing to policy is the moment you totally lose the thread. Trump will not have a single major thing in his first 100 days, which is what this thread is about. YOU tried to claim it's a success because he's not Hillary Clinton, which is about the lamest definition of success I've ever heard.

I was asked.

I am not a conservative ideologue. I am never-Clinton, which is relevant here. I don't claim Trump's a success because he's not Clinton. I was willing to hold my nose and vote for him. He has not given me reason to regret it. The opposite was true in 2009.

How you get from that to claiming he's a success because he's not Hillary Clinton is . Keep working on it. I know you labor under a severe handicap, but you might be able to overcome your assumptions.

I mean honestly J - if people just loooove action and "doing something" - why is his approval rating historically low? Why is he 17 points lower now on the question of "keeps his promises" than he was 2 months ago, and why has he lost ground on every other personal trait question that Quinnipiac asks about?

All signs point to a disastrous first 100 days. That a minority of sycophants and ideologues likes it is fine as far as it goes, but the majority of the country just isn't buying it.

Maybe not. We will see in 2018.

J

 

[Takhisis]

He has not given me reason to regret it.

Threatening a narcissistic-militaristic despot with a fleet that is not actually there and also while having no ambassador to China, Korea or Japan is clearly a minor blunder. I mean, mishap.

 

[aelf]

All the candidates last time were bottom-of-the-barrel. That's the only reason Trump was able to win.

Oh, so you're one of those who think Hillary is the same as if not worse than Trump. Okay.

 

[RomanKing]

Oh, so you're one of those who think Hillary is the same as if not worse than Trump. Okay.

Edit*

Just realized this is an RD thread. I've removed my Hillary joke.

In all seriousness, Hillary must be the most cringeworthy woman in America, closely followed by Liz Warren.

 

[Grisu]

I just can't see how anybody can regard his first 100 days anything but a failure. In the span of only 3 months he has broken many of his campaign promises and failed on most of the others. But I'm sure he'll spin it as a tremendous success. Already most republicans are tired of winning.

In all seriousness, Hillary must be the most cringeworthy woman in America, closely followed by Liz Warren.

Yes, successful women tend to have that effect on some people.

 

[RomanKing]

You consider faking Indian Status for preferential treatment a success?

I call that an embarrassment.