• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How Long Before Trump Goes Back To Being a Liberal

NIMBY said:
With trump putting out campaign ads tonight, DEMs must counter every swing his Breitbart billionaires take at trying to raise his 35% approval rate .
Click to expand...

I am not worried. Time and time again, Trump has proven that he is his own approval ratings worst enemy
 
ModerateGOP said:
Background:
1. Trump has already tried to push through a highly polarizing Health Care Bill
2. Trump has stated he is open to working with democrats
3. Trump is working with Labor Unions to "build the wall"; Foreign contracts to build pipelines etc...

4. He is signing E.O.s Left and Right.
5. He is wasting taxpayer money on NYC, Florida, and DC Trips.

The first three are three big ticket items that if any other Republican did or stated that they would do on their campaign, would automatically get them ridiculed for being a RINO. The Difference? Trump said he would do the opposite. The difference? Trump lied. Trump doesn't know how to be an actual Republican.

Do people just love what they hear and don't care about the reality anymore?
Click to expand...



Dunno. Still better than Hillary.
 
sangha said:
They will have the same problem whenever they try to repeal and replace. Repubs in purple districts and states will want to keep most of Obamacare (like the Medicaid expansion and tax credits for the middle class) while those from solid red states and districts will want to tear it all down.

There is no way to pass a health care bill without the dems and in order to do that, they will have to work to fix Obamacare; not weaken it. But after 8 years of talking about how horrible Obamacare is and 60 votes to repeal it, they cant do that either. So instead, many of the holdout repub states WILL buy into the Medicaid expansion making it even *harder* to repeal it. All they will be left with is attacking the marketplaces - the one part of Obamacare that is based on private for-profit health insurance.

IOW, they will be expanding govt health care while undermining the for-profit sector. They will be helping to bring a single payer govt operated system into existence
Click to expand...

I can see that. I read an article last week that stated 5 states beginning on 1 January will have but one insurance company offering health insurance and nine more that will have only two.

Single Provider: 5 States Will Have Only 1 Obamacare Insurance Provider

With premiums and deductibles scheduled to rise significantly, one has to wonder if this defeat was for the best. Another article mentioned several counties that will have no insurance companies. Aetna, Humana, United, some of the Blue Cross companies or programs have either pulled out partially or is going to wholly. This is for 2018, it makes one wonder come 2019 how many states will have no insurance companies whatsoever to choose from.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Background:
1. Trump has already tried to push through a highly polarizing Health Care Bill
2. Trump has stated he is open to working with democrats
3. Trump is working with Labor Unions to "build the wall"; Foreign contracts to build pipelines etc...

4. He is signing E.O.s Left and Right.
5. He is wasting taxpayer money on NYC, Florida, and DC Trips.

The first three are three big ticket items that if any other Republican did or stated that they would do on their campaign, would automatically get them ridiculed for being a RINO. The Difference? Trump said he would do the opposite. The difference? Trump lied. Trump doesn't know how to be an actual Republican.

Do people just love what they hear and don't care about the reality anymore?
Click to expand...

You're citing his EOs as evidence of his liberalism? You have obviously NOT been paying attention. :roll:
 
NIMBY said:
America won't look kindly on GOPs putting off issues until after another election.

Especially when they are finally in power, based on 8 years of obstruction, just because they are afraid of losing power, especially on the federal house and state legislative and executive levels.

Btw, I now have conclusive data and evidence that gerrymandered AND uncontested house races decrease/suppress the vote. In fact, Georgia should not have been as close as it was for trump. You had 4 uncontested GOP CDs and only one DEM. Turnout was depressed in all five. I could be off a bit since I haven't broken down the gerrymandered DEM CDs in GA.

I started looking at the close states after you mentioned that 49-48 stat, which is completely useless. In Michigan, with all numbers in thousands, trump won by 11, the average POTUS vote between Clinton and trump was 325, gerrymandered DEM CD-13 of Conyers only had 257 votes, 68 less than the average.

Clinton got 4.35 votes for every trump vote in Conyer's CD, or 55,000 of the 68,000, easily enough to win. And as you would expect, there were the same gerrymandering voter depression problems in 3 other DEM CDs. The 2011 remaps continue to drive this Nation and absolutely elected trump, as I found in PA and WI .
Click to expand...

Georgia makes the most of majority minority districts, federal court mandated and approved. Georgia is approximately 35% black and the Republican legislature when they drew the districts made sure that as many of those 35% of blacks were placed in the majority minority districts. So we only have four Democrats, all black and blacks make up between 50-60% of those districts with the rest being white Republicans. What this means on average is the Democrat wins their district 75-25 on average while Republicans are winning 55-45 which gives the GOP a 10-4 advantage, 9-4 pending the upcoming election for Price's seat..

I had started once to compile the numbers for majority minority districts, to see if having 30 seats guaranteed by majority black districts actually hurts the Democrats in the long run providing more than 30 seats to the GOP in closer races. But I let that slide. Gerrymandering is a two party affair, Democrats do it in Illinois and New York where Republicans holler and the GOP do it in Texas and North Carolina where Democrats holler. Neither party will ever stop it. To do away with gerrymandering means one would also have to stop federal government gerrymandering with majority minority districts.
 
I honestly think it's the best strategy for him at this point, but what you mean is back to being centrist. He may even switch parties if the house again mucks up his tax reform, which he cares far more about since he stands to profit directly. That would be an interesting sight to behold.
 
countryboy said:
You're citing his EOs as evidence of his liberalism? You have obviously NOT been paying attention. :roll:
Click to expand...

i cite it as his total lack of principles whatsoever
 
Perotista said:
Georgia makes the most of majority minority districts, federal court mandated and approved. Georgia is approximately 35% black and the Republican legislature when they drew the districts made sure that as many of those 35% of blacks were placed in the majority minority districts. So we only have four Democrats, all black and blacks make up between 50-60% of those districts with the rest being white Republicans. What this means on average is the Democrat wins their district 75-25 on average while Republicans are winning 55-45 which gives the GOP a 10-4 advantage, 9-4 pending the upcoming election for Price's seat..

I had started once to compile the numbers for majority minority districts, to see if having 30 seats guaranteed by majority black districts actually hurts the Democrats in the long run providing more than 30 seats to the GOP in closer races. But I let that slide. Gerrymandering is a two party affair, Democrats do it in Illinois and New York where Republicans holler and the GOP do it in Texas and North Carolina where Democrats holler. Neither party will ever stop it. To do away with gerrymandering means one would also have to stop federal government gerrymandering with majority minority districts.
Click to expand...

There are 23 GOP gerrymandered states compared to 7 DEM. From the data, it's obvious that your CDs 4, 5 and 13 are dem GM. I'm assuming CD 2 is also dem GM, but Clinton barely won it.

trump only won your state by 211. There's no question that the 4 uncontested CDs held down GOP voter turnout and hurt trump in GA. In fact, I can see the other party doing this on purpose against strong house members.

OTOH, the lone uncontested dem in cd-13 hurt DEMs but the POTUS turnout there was still above the average per cd if all GA CDs are the same. Clinton was hurt by lower turnout in CDs 2,4 and 5--especially cd-2.

You may want to go back to the The Green Papers: United States Off Year Election 2017 to see all of the 2016 results as well as elections from 2017 all the way out to 2020. This is not a blog site.

Presidential vote by cd is already known together with house cd vote. Another link is still working on presidential vote by statehouses and shows the level of GM facing DEMs at the state level in the next two cycles .
 
countryboy said:
You're citing his EOs as evidence of his liberalism? You have obviously NOT been paying attention. :roll:
Click to expand...

Just more things I heard through the conservative grapevine that was bad because the other side did it, but now it's A-OK.
 
chromium said:
I honestly think it's the best strategy for him at this point, but what you mean is back to being centrist. He may even switch parties if the house again mucks up his tax reform, which he cares far more about since he stands to profit directly. That would be an interesting sight to behold.
Click to expand...

Yeah but I wouldn't consider him centrist. he is already pissed at Congress and the Republicans. Acting very much like how he used to act before 2012. After these E.O.s he signs and we'll see how well the tax reform goes. I bet not well.
 
Perotista said:
I can see that. I read an article last week that stated 5 states beginning on 1 January will have but one insurance company offering health insurance and nine more that will have only two.

Single Provider: 5 States Will Have Only 1 Obamacare Insurance Provider

With premiums and deductibles scheduled to rise significantly, one has to wonder if this defeat was for the best. Another article mentioned several counties that will have no insurance companies. Aetna, Humana, United, some of the Blue Cross companies or programs have either pulled out partially or is going to wholly. This is for 2018, it makes one wonder come 2019 how many states will have no insurance companies whatsoever to choose from.
Click to expand...

I bet the public option is going to start looking like a really good idea to thepeople in those states
 
WCH said:
People who voted for Trump knew most of that going in. We knew he wanted to change DC, the tax code, rebuild the infrastructure, help the middle class, etc...
Click to expand...

So self proclaimed "conservatives" knowingly voted for a big government liberal from New York? Sweet!
 
disneydude said:
Sorry.....Trump is ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL yours.
Click to expand...

Yep.

I'll be the first to say that Donald Trump is an opportunistic piece of crap who despite holding liberal views for most of his life, pretended to be a conservative starting around 2011 simply to gain popularity with GOP voters, likely because he saw an easier opportunity to win the presidency on the GOP side. It all started with Trump becoming a birther in 2011...and the rest is history.

Any way, GOP voters are the ones who voted for Trump in the primaries, and they voted for him as president. His liberal past is now completely irrelevant. Trump's legacy will be as a Republican president elected by so called "conservative" voters.
 
NIMBY said:
There are 23 GOP gerrymandered states compared to 7 DEM. From the data, it's obvious that your CDs 4, 5 and 13 are dem GM. I'm assuming CD 2 is also dem GM, but Clinton barely won it.

trump only won your state by 211. There's no question that the 4 uncontested CDs held down GOP voter turnout and hurt trump in GA. In fact, I can see the other party doing this on purpose against strong house members.

OTOH, the lone uncontested dem in cd-13 hurt DEMs but the POTUS turnout there was still above the average per cd if all GA CDs are the same. Clinton was hurt by lower turnout in CDs 2,4 and 5--especially cd-2.

You may want to go back to the The Green Papers: United States Off Year Election 2017 to see all of the 2016 results as well as elections from 2017 all the way out to 2020. This is not a blog site.

Presidential vote by cd is already known together with house cd vote. Another link is still working on presidential vote by statehouses and shows the level of GM facing DEMs at the state level in the next two cycles .
Click to expand...

This is where my idea of keeping as many counties whole as possible comes in. It's not a perfect solution to gerrymandering, but I think it would help. With Georgia, 14 representatives, 159 counties, only 7 counties could be divided between congressional districts in my plan. Gerrymandering is nothing more than Representatives choosing their voters than the voters choosing their Representatives. I have no sympathy for Democrats in the gerrymandering race, they do it if they can, the same as Republicans. Democrats until 2002 did it to Georgia since the civil war. They even came up with multi member districts to ensure no Republicans would be sent to Washington.

But as long as you have these majority minority districts, you have federally mandated gerrymandering.
 
sangha said:
I bet the public option is going to start looking like a really good idea to thepeople in those states
Click to expand...

You're probably right. This leads me back to when all of this began, 2009. Polls back then showed 80% of all Americans were at least satisfied with their health insurance. What was needed was something to get those without insurance, insurance. The Democrats decided destroy the old system in order to accomplish that. They paid the price in 2010 for that. Now we see that Obamacare is in deep doo doo or the people are. Yet even knowing that before long there will be states, possibly as soon as 2019 with no insurance companies, Democrats are willing to fight tooth and nail to preserve it..

I always thought congress should have concentrated on the uninsured and left the rest alone. I think that was possible, how I don't know. I not an expert in these things. Perhaps a VA style healthcare system for the uninsured. But I suppose that system would have the same problems as the VA.

Single Payer, Americans are willing to have taxes taken out of their paycheck for social security and medicare, both bipartisan affairs. At least voting wise. Obamacare wasn't. Would a majority of Americans agree to that? The federal government being the insurance company for everyone with a tax like FICA taken out of everyone's paycheck?
 
ModerateGOP said:
Just more things I heard through the conservative grapevine that was bad because the other side did it, but now it's A-OK.
Click to expand...

Like I said, not paying attention. You should try it, it makes you look smarter. ;)
 
ModerateGOP said:
Background:
1. Trump has already tried to push through a highly polarizing Health Care Bill
2. Trump has stated he is open to working with democrats
3. Trump is working with Labor Unions to "build the wall"; Foreign contracts to build pipelines etc...

4. He is signing E.O.s Left and Right.
5. He is wasting taxpayer money on NYC, Florida, and DC Trips.

The first three are three big ticket items that if any other Republican did or stated that they would do on their campaign, would automatically get them ridiculed for being a RINO. The Difference? Trump said he would do the opposite. The difference? Trump lied. Trump doesn't know how to be an actual Republican.

Do people just love what they hear and don't care about the reality anymore?
Click to expand...

In many respects he is more liberal than Obama was.
 
WCH said:
He's reversing some of the damage Obama did...I'm good.

Eventually you too will be praising his work.
Click to expand...

That's some good stuff you're drinking, can I put some in Coffee? :lamo
 
If Trump moves from his present position on the political continuum, it will be even further to the far right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom