Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 34 of 36     «   Prev   31   32   33   34   35   36   Next
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,519
Reply with quote  #496 
Obama's economic record seems reasonably strong to me. Upward trends under Trump have generally been continuations of trends that began on Obama's watch. See this also, or just keep scrolling on the first link. There is anyway a good deal more to governance than the economy alone, crucial though that is, and I would say Trump has performed the reverse of well in virtually every aspect that can't be measured by the stock market. And his quite dreadful character is a lot of the reason why.

PS Your first point is well taken, but I think Warren was in any case an unlikely pick. Sanders himself would possibly be a thought, but is disqualified due to having selected the wrong allosomes all those decades ago. As well as about three million other factors.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,852
Reply with quote  #497 
Obama presided over an extremely slow recovery from the GFC, whereas under Trump the economy seems to have taken off and ended up with the best economy in nearly half a century. I think you'd have a big stretch to claim that just continued the trajectory under Obama. An acceleration from 30mph to 60 doesn't seem a mere continuation to me, especially as Trump came to power when the recovery was already seven years or more old, when we might have expected it to begin to slacken - it did the opposite. We can argue over how much presidents are really responsible for economic conditions, but if we admit they are, it would be hard not to give Trump his due here. Trump's personal management has been chaotic, but his policies have been relatively good, as far as I can see. The chaos in the White House, mostly, but not only, Trump's fault, has largely not had too much of an impact outside it.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,519
Reply with quote  #498 
People are now suggesting that Trump's daily virus briefings are so irresponsible and misleading that for public safety media should stop broadcasting them. Incidentally, a report I read a couple of days ago said, with pictorial evidence, that Trump's mentor/puppetmaster Putin is following the same policy mentioned in the linked article, continuing to be with crowds of people publicly and, until very recently, shake hands to show the public there's little to worry about and life goes on. What isn't mentioned in the Russian media is that everyone seen with Putin has been virus tested in advance, and no one is allowed near him without a negative result. I wonder whether Trump is following the same policy? Seems unlikely, the US is not Russia and the media would be all over it. Considering Trump's age and obesity, he's either courageous or crazy. I found it not all that hard to decide which.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,852
Reply with quote  #499 
Biden has been accused of sexual assault twenty-five years ago:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/walsh-joe-biden-said-he-wants-accused-men-to-be-assumed-guilty-now-hes-been-accused-we-should-respect-his-wishes

Now, the media is largely ignoring this, though it seems more credible on its face than what Kavanaugh was accused of. It should be a problem for Biden for two reasons.

One, it would seem to close off a route of attack against Trump. Yes, Trump has his own allegations, but these are largely priced in with him, and Biden will have trouble pressing them if his pitch ends up looking like "yes, I'm a creep, but Trump is even worse!" I thought that was a great handicap with nominating someone like Warren. Yes, Trump is more dishonest, but nominating a serial liar like Warren rather would have made it hard to press the point.

Secondly, Biden explicitly backs the MeToo standard of believe all women. It's a stupid standard, but he can't advocate it for all other cases, but his own.
AaronTraas

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 537
Reply with quote  #500 
Still kind of astounding that Biden is going to win the Primary. He's not as terrible of a candidate as Hillary was, but talk about a weak candidate that doesn't inspire confidence.

Honestly, if it weren't for the impending economic collapse, I'd still think Trump was a shoe in for the general election.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,852
Reply with quote  #501 
One of the major #MeToo legal organisations has refused to support Reade:

https://theintercept.com/2020/03/24/joe-biden-metoo-times-up/
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,519
Reply with quote  #502 
Guardian article indicting Trump for the scale of the public health disaster the US is experiencing. I know the reaction will be, oh, the Guardian, they would wouldn't they? But there are extensive citations and detailed arguments showing that the President's entirely irresponsible and incompetent leadership is indeed largely to blame for how bad things are getting. No one is suggesting they wouldn't have been bad in any case, but there is a case that leadership failures traceable directly to the President's flawed character have made them a lot worse.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,852
Reply with quote  #503 
While I certainly think there have been flaws in Trump's leadership over this issue, I wonder where in the world there haven't been? This is uncharted territory. That link is mostly on the first weeks of this when, especially, many governments were slow to react. Let's not forget that some of the early measures taken by Trump, like stopping travel from China, were decried by Biden, Bernie, and other Democrats. I might take The Guardian more seriously if the left-liberal media hadn't been constantly trying to deflect blame from the Chinese government.

I also wonder if it is a public health disaster. At the moment America seems to be managing, even if New York in particular is facing huge strain. Also, I don't blame Trump for considering the economy. That's how public policy works: cost-benefit. Obviously, no one is saying open things up straight away or that hundreds of thousands of deaths are worth staving off recession. But we have to weigh off risks against risks, and economic recession has its real human cost. America reported three million new jobless claims last week. That's five times the previous record. We may be staring at a depression more than a recession. Again, that doesn't mean that avoiding that should be out first and only consideration, but it should be a consideration to be balanced alongside public health. That's how public policy works, and Cuomo's claims about this all being worth it to save one life was quite frankly insane.

In a way this is broader than Trump. Some of the approach from governments, as well as media and even public, seems to be all sail and no anchor, to borrow a phrase from Macaulay. There seems to be a rush to ever greater restrictions, without properly explaining the specific necessity or them or what outcomes and time frames are looked for. Some of this is due to that the fact the full economic effects will be delayed, and some is due to the fact that how many would have died without measures enacted, or less severe ones, is a counterfactual that can't really be known: a politician can always claims thousands or even millions more would have died if they hadn't acted in such and such a way. In Australia, for example, we have seen the amount new cases fall, yet the government is still continuing to increase restrictions, whilst some call for a full lockdown, as in Britain or New Zealand. Such common sense qualms are automatically strawmanned as claims that we should open everything back up or that the one putting them forward thinks the whole thing is a hoax, which obviously need not be the case. The worst part is, to repeat, just how little has been communicated about just what such measures hope to achieve and what concrete progress is being made. I don't mean slogans like flattening the curve, because it isn't clear that there won't be another wave after things begin to open up that won't have much the same effect as if we'd never been through all this. We should be told more about just how this down time is being used. How many more ventilators, ICU beds, etc., have been built? How far are we towards a vaccine or treatments? What has actually been achieved beyond postponement of the inevitable?
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,852
Reply with quote  #504 
Interestingly, both Trump and the Tories seem to be doing well in the opinion polls right now. Although, for Trump, actually I mean the approval ratings - he still is trailing to Biden in the national opinion polls. However, Trump is having his best approval ratings and the Tories have risen to as high as 54% of the potential vote share.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,852
Reply with quote  #505 
The left-liberal media continues its perverse crush on the Chinese communist government:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/nyt-writer-americans-should-stop-blaming-communist-chinese-government-learn-from-them-instead

The writer seems to think we can take the Chinese government at its word about the China Virus situation there, as do much of the media. This is an old song, of course. I recall Malcolm Muggeridge pointing out how Western correspondents in the Soviet Union would often just take official reports and statistics as true. We have seen the same with journalists in Gaza taking Hamas' claims and numbers at face value. Some of this is just laziness and the desire to report something, anything of course, as it's hard to get to the truth in such countries, but sympathy for their cause (even if here it is as much the desire to blame Trump or the view that we can't fuel racism blaming the Chinese government) and fellow-travelling plays a role.

That article also touches on the WHO's subservience to the Chinese, both in accepting its numbers and claims at face value and over Taiwan. 

After this is over, we should take a much harder line on China and perhaps recognise Taiwan as independent, if that is what it wishes. The tyrants in Peking should not be able to get away with their actions here (not to mention the sub-holocaust conditions they have created in East Turkestan and their other numerous crimes).  

Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,519
Reply with quote  #506 
It is as expected Sir Keir Starmer who has been handed responsibility for healing the Labour Party from the poison years of Corbyn 'leadership'. From what I have seen of Sir Keir, he won't be up to the task. But then, not many would. And he will be an improvement on the former Great Leader. It would have been pretty remarkable to have found someone that wouldn't be.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,852
Reply with quote  #507 
Ah, poor Rebecca Long-Bailey. I had heard she was neither pretty enough not dark-skinned enough.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,519
Reply with quote  #508 
She always seemed perfectly nice-looking to me. Which isn't to say that she is nice. More like the XX version of Corbyn. Anyway, Labour and the country have been spared that.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,519
Reply with quote  #509 
Three interesting pieces from the Mail, all combined in one link, discuss Labour's new leader and the challenge facing him. 'Dull, wooden and lawyerly'? Sounds about right. The thoughtful second piece from former Home Secretary David Blunkett is particularly worth reading. Note also Starmer's anti-monarchist past and the view of an innocent victim of his policies as Director of Public Prosecutions that he is unfit to hold any position of responsibility whatsoever. A thought of mine is that while Corbyn lied a lot it was always pretty clear where he stood: Marxist, anti-Semite, anti-Britain. While Starmer's few clear policy pronouncements have been unimpressive to say the least, for the most part he goes in for weighty-seeming obscurity, leaving one as uncertain of his real intent and views as if consulting the Oracle at Delphi.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,519
Reply with quote  #510 
Well, this is an unexpected development, or was for me anyway. But while there is a place for the person who led Labour to its last election defeat but two, there is happily none for the one who led it to the two more recent, including the last and most calamitous of the post-war era. This despite his having indicated his wish for a Shadow Cabinet position. None either for Diane Abbott, who will not be in the least missed.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.