Sure. I'm thinking what you and I define as competent would differ but bad candidates on either side ultimately hurt the country. I mean if you mean me then no it doesn't. I couldn't care less what a politician says about me in the current environment because it's all meaningless rhetoric. That's just the state of politics in America in the year 2022.
Most likely yes because although I think Trump is leader with lots of shortcomings, his election would also forestall bad policy I believe the opposition party (Democrats) are interested in putting forth. I've already seen what Trump was as a leader. I wasn't thrilled by it but the country did just fine while he was President (IMHO). I'm sure you think differently. Agree to disagree and all that.
My man you need to step away from the ledge and listen to yourself. What does that say about you that your actively wishing for someone to die and rot in Hell. Trump is an ego maniac and has his shortcomings but you left wing nut jobs take it to far. Continue your circle jerk liberal lunatics.
He broke federal spending during an economic boom, even had the yield curve flip on him months before the covid crash. The response afterward was doubling down on the fed put and signalling a guarantee to high yielding (near junk) corporate bonds. For all the **** biden gets for inflation, trump is not the candidate to uhhh..."fix what he started." I'm at a point where if a candidate promises to cap and reduce spending by 10%, I'll blindly support that person through the riots. The situation is as bad as the climate crisis....a 500+ billion (interest only) drag on our gdp where in 10 years, interest only payments will balloon to a trillion. Infinite borrowing has never worked in history. Despite MMTpy promises.
Please tell me how a candidate that can work with the other party, isn't a narcissistic buffoon, doesn't attack American companies, has a solid mental grasp on subjects a President needs to know, is a president to all Americans not just the states that voted for him, hires competent people and staff, is diplomatic, works hard at his job, doesn't make promises that he can't come close to keeping, is compassionate in the times of need and trauma, is strong and fair during negotiations, has a good grasp of the Constitution, espouses and encourages civility within the goverment and overall a decent human being is different than what you would consider a competent candidate because those are among the traits I expect.
Honestly not seeing much of this. And no, I don't consider a couple of representatives who voted for 1 infrastructure bill "working with the other party". As I said earlier, not my favorite thing about Trump but also way down the list of importance in a President. Having said that, Biden ain't exactly shameless ffs. I could list dozens of things he's done/said about himself in his career that were bold faced lies. No, Joe just attacks other Americans and groups instead. Wut. Yeah like on Day 1 last year when he destroyed hundreds of jobs and tens of millions of future tax dollar revenues in eastern Montana taking down the Keystone Pipeline forever. His FIRST hire was Kamala Harris. I rest my case. Yes comparing people who disagree with his policies with racists like Bull Conner is so diplomatic. LOL. How many trips to Delaware has Joe taken? Can't rate Joe completely on this only 1 year in, but it's not looking good so far. Afghanistan withdrawal being done competently, safely and with honor sure as hell didn't happen. Eye of the beholder. One man's "compassion" is another man's tragedy. Say what you want about Trump, I think he did a pretty decent job with items like trade agreements with Canada, Mexico, and holding NATO accountable. I'd like to think Joe is strong and fair, but his inability to even get his own party to agree on even key parts of his agenda say otherwise. Yeah like using OSHA to enforce a mandate to force people to choose between their job and an unwanted vaccine. Joe really had a grasp there. Civility (i.e. business as usual) has gotten us to the place where our government is a gigantic monolith with no accountability, 30 trillion in debt, and a public that by and large has given up on it ever being a body that truly represents them. The entire reason Trump became President was a cry by the voters to pay attention to them. Being a decent human being has never been what this is about. Bill Clinton was hardly a decent human being and yet was fairly effective. Jimmy Carter was probably the nicest human being to occupy the White House in my lifetime and was horrible as a President. And certainly Trump and Biden do not fit the profile of "decent human being". They both have done/said reprehensible things.
You have me confused with someone who voted for Biden. My post was not talking about him at all. My post was what I would like to see in a candidate. As I've said a number of times, the next time I vote for a Democrat for federal office, will be the first time.
Fair enough. It sounds like we aren't as far apart on what we want in a president as it might seem. For me it boils down to this....Which guy will drive policies that make the most sense to me and will be effective at doing so. Everything else is secondary to that.
Both times Trump ran, I wrote in someone who I thought was a more reasonable candidate. (Wasn't hard to find one )
Absolutely. 100% on board with this analysis. But lets not pretend Trump alone did that. It's been happening for decades and every single president (and congress) in the last 40 years added to this problem. Because of the nature of politics, and keeping power neither party ever wants to address this and neither ever will. When the collapse comes it will be catastrophic.
The Message in the Polls: Trump’s Done https://anncoulter.com/2022/01/19/the-message-in-the-polls-trumps-donex/
I agree with that article... Repubs are in a really bad position right now... Dems are no better.. Should be interesting too see what happens this year with the mid-terms and then in 2 more years... T_Man
Important to note that the whole "rule" about not indicting a sitting comes from the Nixon DOJ (which later had multiple officials indicted) which was making a case in order to protect Nixon, and make Spiro Agnew the fall guy. The argument is you really cannot indict the President BECAUSE YOU CAN indict the VP. Therefore its a chain of command argument. ..... The DOJ office of legal counsel can write a public memo this afternoon explaining that this Nixon memo that led to policy is no longer standing policy for the DOJ and while the Constitution does provide a mechanism for a sitting president who breaks the law (impeachment) the Constitution does not limit the executive branch and judiciary in who they can indict. The new policy should clarify that the DOJ will moving forward allow for investigation upon evidence being disclosed, and evidence of criminal activity to be formally lodged with both Houses of Congress, and if the DOJ would normally indict, they should disclose that with Congress. That way Congress has the opportunity to act fast on a rogue president, and the DOJ process of prosecution follows as that's a much more lengthy process that can be started at that point. This way Congress is not in a position to make a case to the American people that the President should or shouldn't be impeached because he or she might or might not have committed a crime. It's there and black and white, and unless highly unusual circumstances are going on, that President is almost certainly removed from office because a sitting president is about to be under indictment, and they cannot govern in those conditions.
