Discussion of Concerns for Trump Presidency

[Horseman 1,987]

19 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Tony Tony Tony…so funny you think I’m a life loser. Pretty sure my life is better than yours in every way imaginable.

Hey Mike, we know your life sucks. Look in the bed next to you after she's passed out. 

You only have your imagination about me. 

HTH

 

[Horseman 1,987]

14 hours ago, The Phantom's Phantom said:

Anyone who is constantly telling you how good their life is on an anonymous fantasy football message board probably doesn't have a good life.

Constantly?  

How many times have I posted here in the past week GutterBoy (RIP)?

Signed, Horseman, OG, never banned. 

[Fnord 1,664]

This Paul Krugman piece is excellent at explaining what many of us fear (expect) from Trump part deux. I'll quote it for everyone to read and await rebuttals, if anyone can offer something better than "derp derp it hasn't happened yet!" Curious to hear from those that will claim Trump won't engage in what Krugman lays out here. The bolded pieces are especially telling.

 

It’s late 2025, and Donald Trump has done what he said he would do: impose high tariffs — taxes on imports — on goods coming from abroad, with extremely high tariffs on imports from China. These tariffs have had exactly the effect many economists predicted, although Trump insisted otherwise: higher prices for American buyers. 

Let’s say you have a business that relies on imported parts — maybe from China, maybe from Mexico, maybe from somewhere else. What do you do?

Well, U.S. trade law gives the executive branch broad discretion in tariff-setting, including the ability to grant exemptions in special cases. So you apply for one of those exemptions. Will your request be granted? 

In principle, the answer should depend on whether having to pay those tariffs imposes real hardship and threatens American jobs. In practice, you can safely guess that other criteria will play a role. How much money have you contributed to Republicans? When you hold business retreats, are they at Trump golf courses and resorts? 

I’m not engaging in idle speculation here. Trump imposed significant tariffs during his first term, and many businesses applied for exemptions. Who got them? A recently published statistical analysis found that companies with Republican ties, as measured by their 2016 campaign contributions, were significantly more likely (and those with Democratic ties less likely) to have their applications approved. 

But that was only a small-scale rehearsal for what could be coming. While we don’t have specifics yet, the tariff proposals Trump floated during the campaign were far wider in scope and, in the case of China, far higher than anything we saw the first time around; the potential for political favoritism will be an order of magnitude greater. 

As I understand it, the term “crony capitalism” was invented to describe how things worked in the Philippines under the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos, who ruled from 1965 to 1986. It describes an economy in which business success depends less on good management than on having the right connections — often purchased by doing political or financial favors for those in power. In Viktor Orban’s Hungary, for example, Transparency International estimates that more than a quarter of the economy is controlled by businesses with close ties to the ruling party. 

Now it’s very likely that crony capitalism is coming to America. 

There have been many analyses of the probable macroeconomic impact of Trump’s tariffs, which will, if they are anywhere near as big as he has suggested, be seriously inflationary. Arguably, however, their corrupting influence will, in the long run, be an even bigger story. 

Why do tariffs create more potential for cronyism than other taxes? Because the way they operate under our laws offers so much room for discretionary enforcement. The Treasury secretary can’t simply exempt his friends from income taxes (although Andrew Mellon handed out highly questionable rebates in the 1920s). The president can, however, exempt allies from tariffs. And does anyone really believe that the Trump administration will be too ethical to do so? Trump himself has bragged about his ability to game the system; he has bragged that not paying his fair share of taxes makes him “smart.” 

Will tariffs be the only major potential engine of crony capitalism under the incoming administration? It’s doubtful. If you think about it, Trump’s deportation plans will also offer many opportunities for favoritism. 

Some of Trump’s advisers, notably Stephen Miller, seem to imagine that they can quickly purge America of undocumented immigrants, rounding up millions of people and putting them in “vast holding facilities.” Even if you set aside legal issues, however, this is probably logistically impossible. What we’re much more likely to see are years of scattershot enforcement attempts, with raids on various businesses suspected of employing undocumented immigrants. 

But what criteria will decide which businesses become priority targets for such raids and which will be left alone, effectively exempted, for years? What do you think? 

And there’s more, of course. For example, Trump has suggested a willingness to take away the licenses of TV networks that provide, in his view, unfavorable coverage. 

If crony capitalism is coming, what will it do to America? Obviously it will be bad for democracy, both by helping to lock in a large Republican financial advantage and by guaranteeing vocal business support for Trump, no matter how much damage his policies do. It will also enrich Trump and those around him. 

Beyond that, a system that rewards businesses based on their political connections will surely exert a drag on economic growth. Many attempts to explain Italy’s dismal economic record over the past generation attribute poor performance in part to pervasive cronyism. One recent study found that populist regimes, whether of the left or the right — regimes that are generally crony capitalist as well — tend to suffer a long-run growth penalty of about one percentage point each year. 

Time will tell. The evidence suggests that the rules for how to succeed in American business are about to change, and not in a good way.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,164]

Paul Krugman has a track record that rivals Jim Cramer. And Gutterboy.  

[Reality 3,043]

3 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Paul Krugman has a track record that rivals Jim Cramer. And Gutterboy.  

I am blown away that Krugman is still employed, he's spent a lifetime being epically wrong. Only the most brainwashed people on the planet care at all what he has to say. 

How focking embarrassing... 

The bubble that some of these idiots refuse to get out of, unreal.

[Fnord 1,664]

Well now that Statler and Waldorf have weighed in from the balcony, denouncing both the author and me, would they happen to have any thoughts on the content of the article, or associated concerns? Or TL;DR?

[Hardcore troubadour 14,164]

They still trotted out jimmy the Greek for years to make picks even after it was shown he didn’t know what he was talking about.  

[jerryskids 6,170]

14 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Well now that Statler and Waldorf have weighed in from the balcony, denouncing both the author and me, would they happen to have any thoughts on the content of the article, or associated concerns? Or TL;DR?

It's a bit tl;dr.  Not the Krugman article, but the linked study which allegedly shows preference by Trump to companies that supported him.  I quit trying to find the actual results.

But even if I had, this seems like the most normal thing that happens in politics.  Also, I would need to see how such exceptions changed during the Biden administration.

Presidents find ways to get money to their supporters, is this new? 

 

[Fnord 1,664]

20 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

They still trotted out jimmy the Greek for years to make picks even after it was shown he didn’t know what he was talking about.  

Thank you for finally explaining your continued presence here.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,164]

24 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Thank you for finally explaining your continued presence here.

That’s not bad.  I give it a 7. Kudos 

[Fnord 1,664]

29 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

That’s not bad.  I give it a 7. Kudos 

I'll take it. Happy Thanksgiving!

[Hardcore troubadour 14,164]

4 hours ago, Fnord said:

I'll take it. Happy Thanksgiving!

Likewise. 

[The Phantom's Phantom 196]

Kash Patel FBI director

[Hardcore troubadour 14,164]

Kash Patel to head the FBI! Yes! 

[Frozenbeernuts 1,883]

52 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Kash Patel to head the FBI! Yes! 

He looks crazy. As long as he is pro Americans crazy, I'm OK with it.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,164]

28 minutes ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

He looks crazy. As long as he is pro Americans crazy, I'm OK with it.

He’s crazy pissed and gonna take some scalps! 

[Maximum Overkill 1,394]

Amazing hire by Trump!!! The Biden Crime Family is finally going down!

 

“We’ve got to put in all-American patriots top to bottom,” Patel said of the DOJ, adding that the department under Trump “will go out and find the conspirators, not just in government but in the media.”

“Yes, we’re going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections – we’re going to come after you,” he said.

[IGotWorms 4,028]

Kinda sounds like a nut to me.

Also FBI Directors typically serve for ten years.

Trump actually appointed the current one but he’s gonna fire him years before his ten year term is up

[Hardcore troubadour 14,164]

5 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Kinda sounds like a nut to me.

Also FBI Directors typically serve for ten years.

Trump actually appointed the current one but he’s gonna fire him years before his ten year term is up

There’s no way Wray can stay on with the amount of legal issues he’s about to have. He needs to concentrate on his defense. 

[Frozenbeernuts 1,883]

"You believe Q! Lol"

2018

https://x.com/KAGdrogo/status/1863016850076135849?s=19

[Maximum Overkill 1,394]

11 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

Kinda sounds like a nut to me.

Also FBI Directors typically serve for ten years.

Trump actually appointed the current one but he’s gonna fire him years before his ten year term is up

Calm down Sally. He probably won't be confirmed anyhow 

[MDC 6,755]

11 hours ago, Maximum Overkill said:

Amazing hire by Trump!!! The Biden Crime Family is finally going down!

 

“We’ve got to put in all-American patriots top to bottom,” Patel said of the DOJ, adding that the department under Trump “will go out and find the conspirators, not just in government but in the media.”

“Yes, we’re going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections – we’re going to come after you,” he said.

Great, another “muh fraud” sore loser titty baby.

[Maximum Overkill 1,394]

1 minute ago, MDC said:

Great, another “muh fraud” sore loser titty baby.

Again, calm down Sweetheart, he's probably not getting confirmed anyhow. 

[The Real timschochet 5,232]

7 minutes ago, Maximum Overkill said:

Again, calm down Sweetheart, he's probably not getting confirmed anyhow. 

I think you overestimate the willingness of Republican senators to continue to defy Trump. 

[Maximum Overkill 1,394]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

I think you overestimate the willingness of Republican senators to continue to defy Trump. 

Naaa, there's still a lot of old school senators that won't go for it. You'll see 

[Reality 3,043]

When the FBI is labeling parents that attend school board meetings a threat to national security, it's obvious that a massive change is in order.

If you were ok with the current direction of the FBI, your opinion on who takes over moving forward is meaningless.

[IGotWorms 4,028]

2 hours ago, Maximum Overkill said:

Calm down Sally. He probably won't be confirmed anyhow 

So a dog and pony show, you say? Could be. Trump likes to make it look like he has foils 

[Maximum Overkill 1,394]

16 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

So a dog and pony show, you say? Could be. Trump likes to make it look like he has foils 

Sit down Son, this is what America voted for. 

Biden weaponized the judicial system and Trump is doing the same, he's just open and honest about it. Remember when Biden said "WE MUST LOCK TRUMP UP"? I bet you didn't have a problem with that, did ya? 

7,000 employees in the FBI? Why? 

[The Phantom's Phantom 196]

32 minutes ago, Reality said:

When the FBI is labeling parents that attend school board meetings a threat to national security, it's obvious that a massive change is in order.

If you were ok with the current direction of the FBI, your opinion on who takes over moving forward is meaningless.

That didn't happen.

I guess when you believe obvious lies about the FBI going after innocent civilians then you think the FBI should be dismantled.

[Strike 4,814]

Former FBI agents love this pick:

https://djt.nucleusemail.com/amplify/v/2zNzCccqN7?hids=65GmuK7Yw1&_nlid=thS9xgUb5M&_nhids=65GmuK7Yw1

[jonmx 2,201]

17 minutes ago, The Phantom's Phantom said:

That didn't happen.

 

Are you effing stupid?  BTW, it rhetorical because obviously you are.  Merrick Garland absolutely did write a memo which directed the FBI to investigate parents who voiced concerns over CRT or Vaccine policies as domestic terrorists. They even had a special hotline setup to report such parents which would trigger a visit from the FBI.  

[The Phantom's Phantom 196]

29 minutes ago, jonmx said:

Are you effing stupid?  BTW, it rhetorical because obviously you are.  Merrick Garland absolutely did write a memo which directed the FBI to investigate parents who voiced concerns over CRT or Vaccine policies as domestic terrorists. They even had a special hotline setup to report such parents which would trigger a visit from the FBI.  

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/24/politics/doj-memo-school-board-threats-dismiss-lawsuit/index.html

A federal judge threw out a lawsuit on Friday from parents that accused Attorney General Merrick Garland of stifling their free speech, saying the group misunderstood a memo addressing increased harassment against schools.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/26/politics/fact-check-mccarthy-garland-parents-terrorists-school-board/index.html

Facts First: McCarthy’s claim about the attorney general is just wrong. Garland never called parents terrorists for attending or wanting to attend school board meetings.

Look, you're not a smart person, you fall for conspiracy theories all the time.  Do us all a favor and fact check yourself every once in a while.

[Reality 3,043]

1 hour ago, The Phantom's Phantom said:

That didn't happen.

I guess when you believe obvious lies about the FBI going after innocent civilians then you think the FBI should be dismantled.

Meh, CNN can run cover all they want. I read the memo and for the most part, only parents go to those meetings. WTF do you think he was talking about.

Keep playing stupid, it's what you are good at.

[IGotWorms 4,028]

1 hour ago, Maximum Overkill said:

Sit down Son, this is what America voted for. 

Are you stupid or something? I’ve said this about a hundred times myself since the election.

I swear you guys can’t focking read

[jonmx 2,201]

39 minutes ago, The Phantom's Phantom said:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/24/politics/doj-memo-school-board-threats-dismiss-lawsuit/index.html

A federal judge threw out a lawsuit on Friday from parents that accused Attorney General Merrick Garland of stifling their free speech, saying the group misunderstood a memo addressing increased harassment against schools.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/26/politics/fact-check-mccarthy-garland-parents-terrorists-school-board/index.html

Facts First: McCarthy’s claim about the attorney general is just wrong. Garland never called parents terrorists for attending or wanting to attend school board meetings.

Look, you're not a smart person, you fall for conspiracy theories all the time.  Do us all a favor and fact check yourself every once in a while.

 

As usual with these dumfuk deep state 'fact-check' they create a strawman arguement.  Here is the DOJ website which created the policy (not some conspiracy, but actual policy)..  The policy was not in response to any actual violence, but was in reaponse to parents showing up at school and getting angry at schools trying to sneak CRT agenda into curriculum.  What i stated was 100 percent accurate.   What CNN posted above is a misleading smokescreen to cover up for the disgusting policies of Garland who was trying to using the lable of 'domestic terrorists' to intimidate parents from speaking. 

[Frozenbeernuts 1,883]

Kash Patel calls for release of Diddy and Epstein lists. Liberals are you against this? Weird how liberals were fine that Biden has ignored this. Also weird that they weren't more supportive of Trump when he mentioned it.

And I don't want to hear any "I will believe it when I see it." You know for a fact that Biden or Kamala weren't going to. A big part of Trumps campaign was bringing the truth to light. Yes he could have done more in his first term, but I genuinely believe he realized he should have gone all the way his first term. Who was the president when ISIS was dismantled? Who flew out to Afghanistan unannounced in the middle of the night to find out the military was lead by incompetent generals who claimed it woult take years to wipe out ISIS, but then the generals he tasked with it got it done in weeks? Who was the president when Epstein was arrested?

https://x.com/Rothmus/status/1863043653670781200?s=19

[Frozenbeernuts 1,883]

5 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Are you stupid or something? I’ve said this about a hundred times myself since the election.

I swear you guys can’t focking read

Why do liberals get so emotional?

[The Phantom's Phantom 196]

48 minutes ago, Reality said:

Meh, CNN can run cover all they want. I read the memo and for the most part, only parents go to those meetings. WTF do you think he was talking about.

Keep playing stupid, it's what you are good at.

Did you really read the memo?  Because he's pretty clear what he's talking about.

 “a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers and staff,” 

Any parent that threatens school board members should be held accountable.

It's ok to admit you were wrong.

[The Phantom's Phantom 196]

43 minutes ago, jonmx said:

 

As usual with these dumfuk deep state 'fact-check' they create a strawman arguement.  Here is the DOJ website which created the policy (not some conspiracy, but actual policy)..  The policy was not in response to any actual violence, but was in reaponse to parents showing up at school and getting angry at schools trying to sneak CRT agenda into curriculum.  What i stated was 100 percent accurate.   What CNN posted above is a misleading smokescreen to cover up for the disgusting policies of Garland who was trying to using the lable of 'domestic terrorists' to intimidate parents from speaking. 

Did you even read your website?  It clearly says parents who use threats of violence.  You're ok with that?

Also you made up the label of domestic terrorists.  Please stop lying.

[Reality 3,043]

25 minutes ago, The Phantom's Phantom said:

Did you really read the memo?  Because he's pretty clear what he's talking about.

 “a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers and staff,” 

Any parent that threatens school board members should be held accountable.

It's ok to admit you were wrong.

Keep playing dumb, a much needed change is coming.

Cry more.