[Zelandakh]

 ldrews, on 2017-December-08, 11:56, said:

<some pointless drivel relating to an irrelevant and faulty analogy>

 ldrews, on 2017-December-08, 12:01, said:

<displaying a complete inability to apply one's own argument to the point of "promises" made that turn out not to be in the national interest and almost every senior advisor says this to be the case>

Still evading? Difficult to believe you were here and somehow managed to miss it again.

[johnu]

 Winstonm, on 2017-December-08, 09:29, said:

Quote

As Axios noted, Trump’s approval rating had either remained the same or dropped among every demographic group Pew polled.

Clearly a biased poll. Pew did not filter for white supremacists, KKK, and Neo-Nazis where Trump approval should be peaking.

[Winstonm]

 johnu, on 2017-December-08, 12:59, said:

Clearly a biased poll. Pew did not filter for white supremacists, KKK, and Neo-Nazis where Trump approval should be peaking.

You forgot child molesters and their supporters.

[hrothgar]

 ldrews, on 2017-December-08, 12:01, said:

Agreed. The point I was trying to make is that even for one of our most sacred agreements we recognize that those agreements don't always work out, and we provide a mechanism for breaking the agreement so that the parties can get on with their lives.

I don't think that anyone here would disagree that - on very rare occasions - breaking treaties might make sense.

I don't think that these conditions are met here...

Do you honestly believe that Trump has any idea what-so-ever about the specifics of the treaty that the US signed with Iran or has a clue how to "improve" upon it?

Recall, Trump's own direct reports all condemn his efforts to withdraw from this treaty.
They also refer to him as a "***** moron" and an idiot.
His staff says that he is unable to pay attention to briefings for longer than 5 minutes unless they sprinkle references to his campaign victories.
Republican Senators describe the White House as a kindergarten with aides treaty Trump with tactics one normally uses on five year olds.

Is this the man that should be deciding whether or not to break our treaty with Iran?

Here's what I think happened

1. Trump's brand is based on his being some kind of great negotiator
2. This, combined with his hatred of Obama caused him to critique the Iran deal during the campaign
3. Now he is rolling this back, along with every else that Obama did

There is no thought, no consideration, no plan.

In all honesty, even if the Iran deal is "bad", how does the United States violating said deal improve on matters?

1. Even if the US re-imposes trade sanctions, non of our European allies will do so. (Recall, they are all opposed to the US pulling out of this deal and intend to honor it so long as Iran is)
2. WE have no financial leverage because we already unfroze all of the Iranian $$$

How is Trump going to bring the Iranians back to the table, especially after demonstrating that he will ignore formal agreements on a whim?

And who in their right mind would ever trust Trump to begin with?

[cherdano]

 rmnka447, on 2017-November-28, 13:15, said:

This is so patently ridiculous it's laughable. Pure progressive BS. A two word refutation - Kevin Spacey - who's been accused of gay pedophilia. If we want talk about those who sexually abuse or harass others maybe we ought to talk about all the other progressives as well - Harvey Weinstein, Ex-Amazon studio exec Roy Price, Louis C.K., Anthony Weiner, Sen. Al Franken, Rep. John Conyers, perpetrator in chief Bill Clinton and probably many more on the way to being exposed from the cesspool of Hollywood. I have no doubts that they'll be a few conservatives identified as well.

The behavior you want to get on your high horse about isn't just a phenomenon of the right, it's across all of society. But progressives try to claim moral supremacy and pin it all on conservatives. Sorry, that just doesn't wash.

How about the comical dance Sen. Franken is trying to perpetrate saying " I'm really a champion of women and am sorry this harassment behavior occurred." Let's be honest, if Franken was a conservative, progressives would be all over him to resign because his behavior was unacceptable. But progressives are saying exactly what conservatives say when any accusations occur - let him have his due process. That speaks to the double standard the progressives feel entitled to. No matter what your political views, unacceptable behavior is always unacceptable.

Would you like to add an update to your post? Any recent developments that may have changed your views?

[ldrews]

 hrothgar, on 2017-December-08, 15:24, said:

I don't think that anyone here would disagree that - on very rare occasions - breaking treaties might make sense.

I don't think that these conditions are met here...

Do you honestly believe that Trump has any idea what-so-ever about the specifics of the treaty that the US signed with Iran or has a clue how to "improve" upon it?

Recall, Trump's own direct reports all condemn his efforts to withdraw from this treaty.
They also refer to him as a "***** moron" and an idiot.
His staff says that he is unable to pay attention to briefings for longer than 5 minutes unless they sprinkle references to his campaign victories.
Republican Senators describe the White House as a kindergarten with aides treaty Trump with tactics one normally uses on five year olds.

Is this the man that should be deciding whether or not to break our treaty with Iran?

Here's what I think happened

1. Trump's brand is based on his being some kind of great negotiator
2. This, combined with his hatred of Obama caused him to critique the Iran deal during the campaign
3. Now he is rolling this back, along with every else that Obama did

There is no thought, no consideration, no plan.

In all honesty, even if the Iran deal is "bad", how does the United States violating said deal improve on matters?

1. Even if the US re-imposes trade sanctions, non of our European allies will do so. (Recall, they are all opposed to the US pulling out of this deal and intend to honor it so long as Iran is)
2. WE have no financial leverage because we already unfroze all of the Iranian $$$

How is Trump going to bring the Iranians back to the table, especially after demonstrating that he will ignore formal agreements on a whim?

And who in their right mind would ever trust Trump to begin with?

For all of his "ineptness" the country and the economy seems to be doing OK. It certainly feels better than it did a couple of years ago.

[hrothgar]

 ldrews, on 2017-December-08, 20:48, said:

For all of his "ineptness" the country and the economy seems to be doing OK. It certainly feels better than it did a couple of years ago.

There really hasn't been any change other than the way that you are choosing to interpret facts.

The stock market, unemployment, etc are all following the same long term trends that they were on before.



With this said and done, I think that we're headed for a major correction (I pulled my $$$ from the market back in August)

Not sure what will trigger it. Maybe impeachment. Maybe some stupid military action. Maybe just animal spirits. But it feels as if its time for the bears to come out and play...

[cloa513]

 hrothgar, on 2017-December-08, 22:12, said:

Note that is a rating of the stock market- a very artificial system.

[johnu]

 hrothgar, on 2017-December-08, 15:24, said:

And who in their right mind would ever trust Trump to begin with?

For countries, one would be puppet master Russia, and for companies, Deutsche Bank and their Russian partners. To be fair, they apparently have leverage on Trump that others don't have.

[hrothgar]

 cloa513, on 2017-December-08, 22:14, said:

Note that is a rating of the stock market- a very artificial system.

True. However, this is the one that Trump is citing to try to prove what a good job he is doing.
So even with Trump's choice of metrics, he has not changed the long term trend.

Also, as I already noted you'll see the same pattern with other variables
"The stock market, unemployment, etc are all following the same long term trends that they were on before."

[ldrews]

 hrothgar, on 2017-December-09, 03:59, said:

True. However, this is the one that Trump is citing to try to prove what a good job he is doing.
So even with Trump's choice of metrics, he has not changed the long term trend.

Also, as I already noted you'll see the same pattern with other variables
"The stock market, unemployment, etc are all following the same long term trends that they were on before."

So you would agree that Trump is being a decent steward of the long term trends?

[hrothgar]

 ldrews, on 2017-December-09, 09:31, said:

So you would agree that Trump is being a decent steward of the long term trends?

Comment 1: Trump claims on multiple occasions that Obama was terrible and Trump is great. What does this have to do with whether Trump is a decent long term steward?

Comment 2: Did you see the part where I said that I had pulled all of my money out of the market back in August?
Thats a pretty strong indication that I have severe concerns about Trump...

I don't know what is going to cause things to blow up, but I suspect that either impeachment or a war with North Korea or Iran will trigger a major correction.

But enough about me...

Lets return to some of the outstanding questions that you continue to dodge starting with the Iran deal.

You stated that you believed that Iran was violating the terms of the deal.

Multiple people provided information suggesting otherwise
Have your beliefs changed in any way, shape or form?

[ldrews]

 hrothgar, on 2017-December-09, 09:39, said:

Comment 1: Trump claims on multiple occasions that Obama was terrible and Trump is great. What does this have to do with whether Trump is a decent long term steward?

Comment 2: Did you see the part where I said that I had pulled all of my money out of the market back in August?
Thats a pretty strong indication that I have severe concerns about Trump...

I don't know what is going to cause things to blow up, but I suspect that either impeachment or a war with North Korea or Iran will trigger a major correction.

But enough about me...

Lets return to some of the outstanding questions that you continue to dodge starting with the Iran deal.

You stated that you believed that Iran was violating the terms of the deal.

Multiple people provided information suggesting otherwise
Have your beliefs changed in any way, shape or form?

So you do think Trump has an effect on the economy and/or the stock market. Then the current robustness in the economy must be at least partially attributable to Trump, right?

Re: Iran - I could be wrong, I will go do some more research and get back to you.

Do you still think that if you have made an agreement that you are stuck with it for life regardless of changing circumstances?

[ldrews]

 hrothgar, on 2017-December-09, 09:39, said:

ets return to some of the outstanding questions that you continue to dodge starting with the Iran deal.

You stated that you believed that Iran was violating the terms of the deal.

Multiple people provided information suggesting otherwise
Have your beliefs changed in any way, shape or form?

You are right and I am wrong. Iran is apparently living up to the agreement as they interpret it. Apparently there was some differences in interpretation even when the agreement was reached.

Apparently Trump thinks the agreement is a bad agreement and wants to renegotiate it. He is also conflating the nuclear issues with ballistic missile issues and with Iran's supplying others with such weapons. In a classic negotiating move, Trump is pushing back hard and creating uncertainty with regard to the US continuing to keep the original agreement. We will see where that leads.

Trump thinks the Iran nuclear agreement is a bad deal for the US. Do you agree or disagree?

[hrothgar]

 ldrews, on 2017-December-09, 10:26, said:

So you do think Trump has an effect on the economy and/or the stock market. Then the current robustness in the economy must be at least partially attributable to Trump, right?

Personally, I think that Trump has been able to goose certain sectors of the economy while harming others because of perceived risk
In aggregate his impact appears neutral, however, there are plenty of hours left in the day.

FWIW, when I was a kid, I recall that conservatives claimed

1. The federal government was unable to have a lasting effect on the eocnomy
2. It was wrong for the government to pick winners and losers.

It is interesting to see just how thin that veneer was...

Quote

Do you still think that if you have made an agreement that you are stuck with it for life regardless of changing circumstances?

I was raised to believe that one should strive to keep one's word.

There are many types of arrangements - contracts for example - that you are stuck with regardless of changing circumstance.
<Unless, of course, you're able to declare bankruptcy multiple times and then shift your business from real estate to laundering money for the Russians>

[hrothgar]

 ldrews, on 2017-December-09, 10:40, said:

Trump thinks the Iran nuclear agreement is a bad deal for the US. Do you agree or disagree?

1. I disagree

2. Even if I agreed with this statement, the US doesn't have the allies or the leverage necessary to negotiate a better deal at this point in time

[ldrews]

 hrothgar, on 2017-December-09, 10:54, said:

1. I disagree

2. Even if I agreed with this statement, the US doesn't have the allies or the leverage necessary to negotiate a better deal at this point in time

Do you think that the US must have the approval/support of its allies before attempting to negotiate a better deal for the US?

You disagree with Trump about the current agreement. Do you have some information that causes you to hold that position?

[Winstonm]

The difficulty now is that the USA has the unstable appearance of a third-world country making it virtually impossible to negotiate on a long term basis. By playing strictly to the base, a minority of Americans, both Trump and the Republican party have abandoned US continuity.

[Winstonm]

NYT has a good article today about how Trump faces each day:

Quote

His vision of executive leadership was shaped close to home, by experiences with Democratic clubhouse politicians as a young developer in New York. One figure stands out to Mr. Trump: an unnamed party boss — his friends assume he is referring to the legendary Brooklyn fixer Meade Esposito — whom he remembered keeping a baseball bat under his desk to enforce his power. To the adviser who recounted it, the story revealed what Mr. Trump expected being president would be like — ruling by fiat, exacting tribute and cutting back room deals.

He thought being president made his Don Trump instead of Donald Trump. His past led to this thinking and his past will lead to his downfall, most likely.

[ldrews]

 Winstonm, on 2017-December-09, 11:21, said:

The difficulty now is that the USA has the unstable appearance of a third-world country making it virtually impossible to negotiate on a long term basis. By playing strictly to the base, a minority of Americans, both Trump and the Republican party have abandoned US continuity.

Do you mean that the US has abandoned a number of asserted bad agreements, and the beneficiaries are unhappy about that?