But, for the time being, the fact that Trump is actually trying to solve problems instead of setting his party up for the next election puts him head and shoulders above any recent POTUS.
And this is why I would hope that the media would actually focus on Trump's deeds, not on his words. The problem with Trump is that he can not string two sentences together without either contradicting himself, or flat-out lie. On top of that, his ability to do a 180, followed by a 360 or even a 720 is completely unprecedented. For this reason, anyone can make the argument that Trump is pro-this or anti-that by selectively quoting him. This where the media get into unproductive ****-fights and trump is happy with it because they could be talking about something much worse (as far as he is concerned).
It also depends on what you consider a "problem that needs to be solved".
- If you consider it a problem that there are not enough multi-billionaires, then Trump's your man.
- If you think that anywhere between 13 and 35 million of "the forgotten people" (as per Trump's inauguration speech) need to lose their health insurance so that the richer ones don't have to subsidise them, then Trump's your man.
- Since this morning, there has been another Trillion added to the deficit, in addition to the 1.5 Trillion with the tax-cut. Ryan and the GOP are already talking about "making tough decisions" and "entitlement reforms" in order to pay for the tax cuts that just to handed 84% of its benefits to the top 1% of the population. This is not a problem that has existed before Trump came along.
- If you think that pursuing a two-state solution in the middle-east is a problem, then Trump's your man because Trump is clearly pursuing a one-state solution.
Other stuff that he has "created":
-making it easier for veterans to apply for commercial licenses or access apprenticeship programs (Good, but why only for such a small group?)
- out of the 100-something laws he signed into law, there is very little substantial apart from the tax-cut (and that alone could warrant its own thread):https://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/29/p...ion/index.html
What has he repealed? There is a lot in there that does not help "the forgotten man" but his billionaire cabinet and to further secure the status and power of the already rich and powerful. Some examples:
- Blocked implementation of a rule that would have made it easier for farmers to sue big agricultural companies.
- Repeal of a bill that mandated that employers maintain records of workplace injuries.
- Removed information about worker injuries from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration website.
- Killed a rule mandating that government contractors disclose past violations of labour law.
-Revoked an executive order that mandated compliance by contractors with laws protecting women in the workplace.
- Ended a rule that barred employers from taking some or all of the tips given to service employees.
- Cancelled a rule mandating that financial advisers act in the best interests of their clients.
- Ended a rule that allowed consumers to file class-action suits against financial companies. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.810466c3ab37
So the problems that he is trying to resolve is the perceived problem that the rich and powerful establishment has with the pesky "little people".
At one point, I was thinking about adding Trump's statement that "the forgotten people will no longer be forgotten" to the Greatest Hoax of all time Thread but I decided that this was not a hoax, just a misunderstanding. Trump's "forgotten men" are his billionaire buddies and white draft dodgers that long for a time when minorities and women still knew their place in society. Everything else is "just for show" as his actions speak louder than words.
The media meanwhile are failing to hold Trump accountable on his policies, that's my gripe with them.
Then again, I'm still confident that he will go down for obstruction of justice, money laundering (both definite) and collusion with a foreign power (possibly). My hope is just that he will take Foxnews down with him.
Oh, and let's talk about he glaringly obvious problem that trump has no intention of solving:
Jeanette Manfra, the current head of Cybersecurity at the DHS, that Russia have targetted the voter data of 21 data and concedes that "a small number have been penetrated" (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/fir...chief-n845886). What is a small number? 2 or 3? What if Russia double their success rate and target ALL 50 states this autumn and they manage to get into 10 or 15 databases? They can create complete chaos.
However, despite all of this, Trump or Nunes, who is supposed to investigate this, are doing nothing at all about this?
And why should they? the Russians are helping Trump. Why should be stop them? THIS is another real scandal IMO and here is another exhibit of Trump colluding with Russia in plain sight of the American people.
Trump has downed the Syrian airforce with a tweet, stopping the use of chemical weapons.
Headed a strategic bombing campaign with no casualties.
Got Russia running to the UN wanting "talks".
And now he is going to disarm the Korean peninsula by sitting down with the little Rocketman for a burger.
So it remains to be seen how effective the airstrikes were and I didn't have the impression that this was done with a tweet. Certainly, last year's airstrikes had no lasting effect.
The Russians didn't run to the UN "for talks", the run to the UN for a round of typical UN posturing, asking the security council to condemn the actions of US, UK and France (this was rejected by the council). So I fail to see how Trump can book this as "a win".
As for Kim Jong Un, he is coming to the table now because he is doing it from a position of relative strength. He has demonstrated nuclear and missile capabilities and his efforts to achieve these over the last 18 months would not suggest that he did it just to give it up in an instant. Instead, he can now make demands like the US withdraw from South Korea or a peace treaty in exchange for giving up SOME capability. He made a no-meaning concession to close one of his nuclear test-sites. Probably the one that got damaged during the last test....
The other possibility is of course that Kim knows that the dumpster-fire of Trump's presidency will soon be put out by the real stable genius that is Robert Swan Mueller III. and he wants to get in on the action before Trump's gone. I for one believe that Kim is a hell lot smarter than Trump and his henchmen in the White House.
Does anyone truly believe that protecting the Syrian people from poison gas formed any part of the rationale behind that strike? I don't. That, I think, was pretty plainly an effort to get the Russians to engage our cruise missiles with their improved S-400 air defense system, in order to get information about its capabilities*. We seem to have failed in that. According to most reports, the Syrian army were the only ones shooting back, and their response was piecemeal, and came for the most part after the raid was over, which strongly suggests that the Russians stood their entire system down and didn't even provide the Syrians with realtime information about what was happening.
We need Assad in power at this point, because his is the last secular faction left in central Syria. You'll note that we didn't target anything that would actually degrade his conventional war-fighting capabilities, nor, for that matter, did we conclusively destroy his ability to use poison gas. This leaves open the possibility that we might, at some point, find that our concern for the Syrian people requires us to launch more air raids. We bomb because we care, after all.
* The version that the Russians keep for themselves, not the export-grade one they sell to Turkey and India.