Will History Judge Trump to be a Good President? [W:101]

The problem is, by now, it's impossible to make such a statement, as I have no idea what to expect from Trump.

I don't even know if he's interested in seriously making politics, rather than leaving most of the work to Pence and his advisors, and just show up for speeches here and there -- or if he actually means the things he said in the campaign. And I don't know which would be worse.

Could be anything -- he might end 70 years of the US as global power, by enforcing a new isolationism. He might do the contrary.

He might end the era of 300 years of liberal republicanism, by turning America into an authoritarian state, a "directed democracy" à la Russia. Or he might just divert with wild rhetorics from the fact that he leaves everything about as it is, as the elites sourrounding him want it to be.

He might end 50 years of civil rights movement, by once again making it fashionable to look down on non-white minorities, in allience with his neo-Nazi allies from Bannon's "Breitbart" -- or he might tame his rhetorics and not give these far-right forces real power.

He might sell out NATO and Europe to Russia in a new version of a Hitler-Stalin pact, or not.


I have just no idea whatsoever what to really expect from this man.

German guy said:

The problem is, by now, it's impossible to make such a statement, as I have no idea what to expect from Trump.

I don't even know if he's interested in seriously making politics, rather than leaving most of the work to Pence and his advisors, and just show up for speeches here and there -- or if he actually means the things he said in the campaign. And I don't know which would be worse.

Could be anything -- he might end 70 years of the US as global power, by enforcing a new isolationism. He might do the contrary.

He might end the era of 300 years of liberal republicanism, by turning America into an authoritarian state, a "directed democracy" à la Russia. Or he might just divert with wild rhetorics from the fact that he leaves everything about as it is, as the elites sourrounding him want it to be.

He might end 50 years of civil rights movement, by once again making it fashionable to look down on non-white minorities, in allience with his neo-Nazi allies from Bannon's "Breitbart" -- or he might tame his rhetorics and not give these far-right forces real power.

He might sell out NATO and Europe to Russia in a new version of a Hitler-Stalin pact, or not.


I have just no idea whatsoever what to really expect from this man.

Click to expand...

It is impossible to tell and all one can do is sit and watch for the moment and evaluate each deed on its own consequences.

It is far too early to have any idea how history will judge Trump.

molten_dragon said:

It is far too early to have any idea how history will judge Trump.

Click to expand...

Or to know who's going to write these history books...

German guy said:

The problem is, by now, it's impossible to make such a statement, as I have no idea what to expect from Trump.

I don't even know if he's interested in seriously making politics, rather than leaving most of the work to Pence and his advisors, and just show up for speeches here and there -- or if he actually means the things he said in the campaign. And I don't know which would be worse.

Could be anything -- he might end 70 years of the US as global power, by enforcing a new isolationism. He might do the contrary.

He might end the era of 300 years of liberal republicanism, by turning America into an authoritarian state, a "directed democracy" à la Russia. Or he might just divert with wild rhetorics from the fact that he leaves everything about as it is, as the elites sourrounding him want it to be.

He might end 50 years of civil rights movement, by once again making it fashionable to look down on non-white minorities, in allience with his neo-Nazi allies from Bannon's "Breitbart" -- or he might tame his rhetorics and not give these far-right forces real power.

He might sell out NATO and Europe to Russia in a new version of a Hitler-Stalin pact, or not.


I have just no idea whatsoever what to really expect from this man.

Click to expand...

I agree that Trump is less predictable than his predecessors (that has both advantages and disadvantages, and it may be on purpose to some extent). But he's a 70-yo man who we do know some things about from his life history - he's been on stage for decades, he didn't just pop out of nowhere. Given his age, this presidency will likely be the last substantial thing he does in his life. From what we know about him, his being viewed as a great president will be very important to him, he'll want to make substantial changes in both how government operates and in policy, and he's a pragmatist shaped by a vast amount of business experience. His 'crazy' ideas are only starting points for negotiation which are usually underlain by sensible intentions, and I no longer react reflexively to them. So I'm cautiously optimistic that he'll do well overall and won't cause any of the disasters which some people fear. Of course I could be wrong (we don't "know" what will happen with any President, the world is just too nonlinear and complex), but this is my best guess regarding how things will go with Trump as President, and I'll be making my own life decisions in various spheres accordingly.

MaggieD said:

Could we get him sworn in first?

Click to expand...

Exactly!
This is a question for to be asked at soonest towards the end of his presidency, or better yet after he is no longer president.

LessBiased? said:

This is my first post in this forum, so please forgive me if I'm going down a path which is already well trodden. I hope to learn a lot in this forum, and perhaps also contribute in a small way to the discussions.

I think of myself as an independent (neither party resonates with me enough that I want to be a member), I voted for Clinton, and was as surprised as anyone that Trump won the election. Clearly, my understanding of things was well off the mark! Seeing that we're in uncharted waters, I thought I better start paying attention and trying to learn who Trump is, so that I can better predict, at least in a broad sense, how the coming months and years might unfold under Trump's presidency. I'm finding that the more I study Trump, the more I like him and the more optimistic I am about our future with him. If I had to vote today, I think I'd vote for him. Reading 'The Art of the Deal' has shaped my understanding of Trump (he seems to be essentially the same person as he was three decades ago), and I recommend reading that book.

With all of that as preface, I've set up a poll to see what others think about how Trump will do as President.

Click to expand...

I think you will get mostly very partisan answers, horrible from Clinton supporters, fantastic from Trump supporters. I don't think we can tell how Trump will do as president until we see him in action. A lot depends on what events take place and how Trump will react to them. Most presidencies are decided by the events, situations that arise during their presidencies whether they are looked back on as good or bad or even indifferent. All it take is one major event to go the wrong way and that president is tarred. Of course the opposite is true. I will wait and see and watch the events and how Trump governs unfold.

I am leery about him, but at this point he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Perotista said:

I think you will get mostly very partisan answers, horrible from Clinton supporters, fantastic from Trump supporters.

Click to expand...

Although 19 is a small sample (and the poll isn't anonymous), the poll results so far aren't quite that polarized. Almost half think Trump will do quite poorly, but the others are distributed somewhat evenly among the other poll options. Overall, that may reflect uncertainty more than polarization.

Quite poor. I am afraid he is going to be a complete and total disaster, but let's hope I am wrong here. But someone who says what he wants to do but does not say how he thinks he is going to do that should have been forced out of the race. Someone who tells plain lies during the race should also be banned from the race. (Sadly enough, all candidates in all elections in all countries do exactly this...) And not much Trump of the sales pitch from the campaign time era is still standing. Most of it has been softened or simply cancelled. He is a business man. And a successful one for that. I do not believe that these are the skills we need for someone running the country. People that run a country should have vision, people skills and diplomacy skills. Trumps visions are too short sighted, he has got the social skills of a pregnant monkey and he has not shown any diplomatic skills as of yet. The only thing that gives me hope is an old saying we have in Holland. The soup is never eaten as hot as it is served. I'm afraid this is not too much to hold on to, but it's all I've got...


Joey

JoeyJoystick said:

Quite poor. I am afraid he is going to be a complete and total disaster, but let's hope I am wrong here. But someone who says what he wants to do but does not say how he thinks he is going to do that should have been forced out of the race. Someone who tells plain lies during the race should also be banned from the race. (Sadly enough, all candidates in all elections in all countries do exactly this...) And not much Trump of the sales pitch from the campaign time era is still standing. Most of it has been softened or simply cancelled. He is a business man. And a successful one for that. I do not believe that these are the skills we need for someone running the country. People that run a country should have vision, people skills and diplomacy skills. Trumps visions are too short sighted, he has got the social skills of a pregnant monkey and he has not shown any diplomatic skills as of yet. The only thing that gives me hope is an old saying we have in Holland. The soup is never eaten as hot as it is served. I'm afraid this is not too much to hold on to, but it's all I've got...


Joey

Click to expand...

.. and yet he has repeatedly defied expectations by winning the nomination and then the election. Perhaps he knows some things and has some skills that his supposedly wiser critics lack? I too dismissed Trump for a long time, but I'm trying to be objective about this and I'm coming to understand the methods behind his apparent madness. Also, regarding his business experience and success, I believe it's highly relevant and applicable to being President, and if you have any business leadership experience yourself in a competitive and complex area, you'll know that it absolutely requires vision, people skills, and diplomacy skills. By comparison, let's face it, Obama had a rather thin resume when he took on this job (and I did vote for Obama both times, but with less enthusiasm the second time).

LessBiased? said:

.. and yet he has repeatedly defied expectations by winning the nomination and then the election. Perhaps he knows some things and has some skills that his supposedly wiser critics lack? I too dismissed Trump for a long time, but I'm trying to be objective about this and I'm coming to understand the methods behind his apparent madness. Also, regarding his business experience and success, I believe it's highly relevant and applicable to being President, and if you have any business leadership experience yourself in a competitive and complex area, you'll know that it absolutely requires vision, people skills, and diplomacy skills. By comparison, let's face it, Obama had a rather thin resume when he took on this job (and I did vote for Obama both times, but with less enthusiasm the second time).

Click to expand...

I hear you there and I agree to some level. Especially the skills required to become a successful businessman. But they are still not the skills that are required for a politician. Yes he needs vision, but a vision to make a company successful is not the same vision you need to make a country successful. Same with diplomacy and people skills. The government is not a company. You have to make decisions in the best interest of all the people in your country. And he does not give me the feeling that he is capable of doing that. Now I am not convinced that Hilary as an alternative would have been able to do that either, but that is not the discussion here at all.


Joey

JoeyJoystick said:

I hear you there and I agree to some level. Especially the skills required to become a successful businessman. But they are still not the skills that are required for a politician. Yes he needs vision, but a vision to make a company successful is not the same vision you need to make a country successful. Same with diplomacy and people skills. The government is not a company. You have to make decisions in the best interest of all the people in your country. And he does not give me the feeling that he is capable of doing that. Now I am not convinced that Hilary as an alternative would have been able to do that either, but that is not the discussion here at all.


Joey

Click to expand...

I understand that argument, and have made that argument myself in the past. It seems almost obvious. But I'm coming around to the view that serious business experience may be one of the best means of preparation for this type of political job. While a country isn't a business, the skills involved in leading a country do overlap extensively with leading a large multifaceted group of businesses. My sense is that Trump is aiming to serve the interests of America - all Americans - with a realistic understanding that the relationships with other countries involve both collaboration and competition, so there's a lot of negotiation and deal-making involved, with all of the tactical aspects which come with that. Trump has a lot of relevant experience here.

Clearly, some of Trump's rhetoric has made some Americans feel alienated from their own country, but IMO if one pays close attention to his words and tries to infer his intentions without bias against him, I don't think he's espousing racism, xenophobia, etc. He wants to keep criminal illegal immigrants out, not stop all immigration, and he's not saying that all Mexicans are rapists, etc. He wants to keep Muslim extremist terrorists out, he's not saying that all Muslims are terrorists or potential terrorists, or that there should be a permanent ban on all Muslim immigration. He's saying that police officers do a difficult job which involves judgment calls in ambiguous time-pressured situations which routinely put their lives at risk, not that the police can do no wrong and that there aren't problems with black Americans being wrongly accused and sometimes tragically killed. At least that's how I'm re-interpreting some of Trump's rhetoric these days ...

Getting back to the business experience aspect, I would also note that the vast majority of US politicians have been trained as lawyers. While I've worked well with lawyers and respect them, there's much evidence to indicate that when lawyers venture beyond their narrow specialty of practicing law, such as by going into business, they tend not to do too well. Legal thinking seems to not generalize too well outside of legal practice. So I'm receptive to the idea of serious business people becoming more actively involved in politics.

To be clear though, I don't yet consider myself to be a Trump "supporter". He will need to show results before I can do that. But for now, I'm cautiously optimistic, and hopeful that we'll see mostly the upside potential rather than downside risks that his "change" represents.

LessBiased? said:

I understand that argument, and have made that argument myself in the past. It seems almost obvious. But I'm coming around to the view that serious business experience may be one of the best means of preparation for this type of political job. While a country isn't a business, the skills involved in leading a country do overlap extensively with leading a large multifaceted group of businesses. My sense is that Trump is aiming to serve the interests of America - all Americans - with a realistic understanding that the relationships with other countries involve both collaboration and competition.

Click to expand...

I agree that he has experience and that there is overlap. But saying he is qualified to run a country based on this is not enough. He will need much more expertise. He needs to have an understanding of other cultures in order to be able to negotiate a good deal. He has not shown much of that. And while a businessman may be a good 'Manager', I do not think that every successful businessman qualifies for the job either. In many Asian countries he will not get anywhere with his rhetoric because people will quickly get offended. And that is not just limited to personal conversations, but also some bold statement that he dumps on twitter. He will try to serve the US as best he can. But I am not sure that what he thinks is good fro the US is actually good for the US.

LessBiased? said:

Clearly, some of Trump's rhetoric has made some Americans feel alienated from their own country, but IMO if one pays close attention to his words and tries to infer his intentions without bias against him, I don't think he's espousing racism, xenophobia, etc.

Click to expand...

I fully agree with you here as well. Where he failed is to not be clear about that. And he aims to gain votes from people that do not have the ability to look through that like you and I apparently do. This means that there is a whole bunch of people out there that will be wondering why he is not keeping his campaign promises. And of course he will not because it is not possible, or at least not possible at an acceptable cost... At the same time this also implies (if my statement is true of course) that he has won the election by saying what he is going to do knowing very well that this will gain him votes and he is not actually going to do what he has promised. And if I would take this one step further, he has basically not deserved to win the election because if all these people had really understood that it was mostly rhetoric than there would have been a whole bunch of people that would not vote for him. Likewise there would be people that would have voted for him but I think the balance would not have been in his favour. Regardless, it is not fair, and is that not what democracy is all about?

LessBiased? said:

He wants to keep criminal illegal immigrants out, not stop all immigration, and he's not saying that all Mexicans are rapists, etc. He wants to keep Muslim extremist terrorists out, he's not saying that all Muslims are terrorists or potential terrorists, or that there should be a permanent ban on all Muslim immigration. He's saying that police officers do a difficult job which involves judgment calls in ambiguous time-pressured situations and puts their lives at risk, not that the police can do no wrong and that there aren't problems with black Americans being wrongly accused and sometimes tragically killed.

Click to expand...

He actually has said many of things you mention, but later on reversed it to a slightly more acceptable stance. And basically he is not going to have to do anything at all with the mentioned items because that is happening already. Problem at hand of course is that many of the people he is targeting will also look for a way around to still get where they want to be. Let it be a terrorist or a criminal. But let us not think for a second that the various secret services are not trying very hard to stop these people from entering the country, because they do try. And they will make mistakes here again and again. But they are trying.

LessBiased? said:

Getting back to the business experience aspect, I would also note that the vast majority of US politicians have been trained as lawyers. While I've worked well with lawyers and respect them, there's much evidence to indicate that when lawyers venture beyond their narrow specialty of practicing law, such as by going into business, they tend not to do too well.

Click to expand...

Yes. And this too is not good enough. You need a blend of people with different kinds of expertise. Hence it is probably better to let go of a democratic system with people being elected and move to a government where not the people but the policies are democratically chosen by the people. But as always, that is an entirely different story.

I would like to add to all this that a good economy of the US is not the only criteria for having a good president.


Joey

LessBiased? said:

My sense is that Trump is aiming to serve the interests of America - all Americans - with a realistic understanding that the relationships with other countries involve both collaboration and competition, so there's a lot of negotiation and deal-making involved, with all of the tactical aspects which come with that.

Click to expand...

What bugs me about him mostly, in this context, is that it seems to be a lot of shortside thinking. A lot of agreements cost a lot of money. And he is picking on the trade agreements and the environmental agreements a lot in this respect. So yes he could potentially undo/delay some of this and temporarily gain from this, but in the long run the US will loose out because of this. The only way forward is together as a team. And if he thinks that the US is better of alone than the US is going to pay the price for that. Probably after his term though. Sure China costs the US a lot of money. But he can approach that in a completely different way where China would follow the US. How about saying to China that you can only export to the US if your products are manufactured following the same strict regulations that apply to American manufacturers? China would have to change a few things there quickly or they will loose money in unthinkable amount. The US at the same time keeps up the higher standard.

Europe is facing the same problem right now with some populist movements that are rapidly gaining strength. A very scary scenario in my opinion.

The US needs to remember a few things. They are at the top. It is lonely at the top. it is easy to fall down from the top and you can fall a long long way. They are many people who want to help you fall down. China is trying very hard to take that position and simply because of its sheer size they actually make a chance and trust me that is not a scenario anyone wants to see happening. Well there probably are people who like that, but not many on this side of the globe. lol.


Joey

Joey,

- It's an interesting question of what qualifications we should seek in a prospective President. Some political experience, particularly at the Federal level, would seem to be helpful, but if we want to bring in an outsider to shake things up, drain the swamp, etc., someone like Trump may be needed. In general, I'd like to see experience accomplishing things in the real world which involve scale, complexity, and organizational leadership, and I'm increasingly not liking the idea of "career politicians". Regarding expertise, despite his center-stage alpha-male image, I think his history shows that he does seek input from diverse sources before making decisions.

- I agree that Trump can and should do more to correct, and condemn as needed, those who draw messages of exclusion and hate from Trump's rhetoric. Maybe it was more understandable during the campaign in order to get and motivate voters, but IMO it's now time to change the tone considerably. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the protesters, the fact that they were out there and quite upset is a message that Trump needs to heed.

- While Trump may not keep all of his campaign "promises" (does any President?), my guess is that his policies and actions will be in line with the spirit of his campaign rhetoric. Will he build an insurmountable wall along the entire border? I doubt it. But I anticipate that he'll tighten up border security considerably by various means. For those who feel betrayed that he didn't keep promises, IMO they need to be less naïve and understand that politics involves compromises.

- Regarding the terrorism aspect, I suspect that his perspective is changing now that he's getting top secret briefings. Us regular people don't know their content, but I suspect that it's eye opening.

- Agreed that economic strength isn't the only measure or aspect of success for a country. There are too many "issues" for me to be an issue-driven voter, and I instead try to take a more holistic view.

- Agreed that the global situation is complex. A lot can go right, but much can go wrong, and the overall uncertainty level is substantial. One unexpected event can cause a lot of assumptions to quickly go out the window. In this context, Trump may appear more risky, but we can never know what would have happened if the other candidate (in this case Hilary) had won because that alternative history won't happen. Hilary might appear safer, but who knows? This goes back to the criticism by several people that we can't predict, so the poll has no value. Again, I agree that we can't predict with confidence, but I'm still interested in seeing the distribution of people's guesses to at least see where the sentiment is.

Wouldn't it be nice to wait and see what Trump does before making proclamations about his presidency?

That is what the democrats demanded of people prior to the Obama presidency but apparently will not extend the same to Trump.

He is not even sworn in yet.

LessBiased? said:

Although 19 is a small sample (and the poll isn't anonymous), the poll results so far aren't quite that polarized. Almost half think Trump will do quite poorly, but the others are distributed somewhat evenly among the other poll options. Overall, that may reflect uncertainty more than polarization.

Click to expand...

I can buy the uncertainty, I am very leery. I am surprised that the Clinton supporters haven't chimed in with horrible. But how we today or during a president's term or terms in office view them, historians may have another view 20 or 30 years later once they have seen how a certain president's policies and action affected the country in the long term.

Truman is the classic example, he left office with a 32% approval rating, most Americans thought him to be one of the worst president's ever. Now we look back on good old Harry S. "The buck stop here," Truman as one of the near greats. Historians rank him 6th overall. Behind Washington, FDR, Lincoln, Jefferson and Teddy Roosevelt, ahead of all others.

If he does what he says he does with appointing sound SCOTUS judges, lowering taxes, bringing business back, fixing Obama's mistakes (as numerous as they are), and fight inner city crime I'd rank him as very good.

lurchadams said:

I'd like to give him the chance the GOP never gave Obama. The GOP opposed everything Obama tried to do. With one party rule in WA stuff is going to get done. As you do, I sincerely hope it's good stuff!

Click to expand...

Schumer and Pelosi has said they plan to oppose everything proposed by both the republican congress and Trump...so what exactly is the difference. The only difference is the party of 'no' switched from red to blue.

interisting said:

he will be impeached very quickly. he will cause wwiii.

Click to expand...

Impeached for what offense? Winning the election?

antiquity said:

Impeached for what offense? Winning the election?

Click to expand...

For some people that is enough of a reason.

LessBiased? said:

This is my first post in this forum, so please forgive me if I'm going down a path which is already well trodden. I hope to learn a lot in this forum, and perhaps also contribute in a small way to the discussions.

I think of myself as an independent (neither party resonates with me enough that I want to be a member), I voted for Clinton, and was as surprised as anyone that Trump won the election. Clearly, my understanding of things was well off the mark! Seeing that we're in uncharted waters, I thought I better start paying attention and trying to learn who Trump is, so that I can better predict, at least in a broad sense, how the coming months and years might unfold under Trump's presidency. I'm finding that the more I study Trump, the more I like him and the more optimistic I am about our future with him. If I had to vote today, I think I'd vote for him. Reading 'The Art of the Deal' has shaped my understanding of Trump (he seems to be essentially the same person as he was three decades ago), and I recommend reading that book.

With all of that as preface, I've set up a poll to see what others think about how Trump will do as President.

Click to expand...

I mean, who knows? We'd have to fast forward like 20 years to know what History starts to say about Trump's presidency. He hasn't even started it yet, so we don't know.

I don't think that he'll do a good job, I don't think he'll be remembered fondly, but ultimately we're going to have to run the experiment and see how it comes out.

antiquity said:

Schumer and Pelosi has said they plan to oppose everything proposed by both the republican congress and Trump...so what exactly is the difference. The only difference is the party of 'no' switched from red to blue.

Click to expand...

I have not heard that. I'm sure you're right but would you mind quoting your source of that info? If that is true then I don't agree with opposing just for the sake of opposing. People need to grow up and accept the fact that they lost.

OTHER: and option not provided.

FOR THE ZILLIONTH TIME.....

How about we wait with our score cards and then make our reports four years AFTER January 21st, 2016.

You politicos are ready to pass judgment before he is even sworn in, and not even officially the president !!!

This exercise is foolish on its face.