Post Election Stress Disorder

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Yes, it did. But Obama had absolutely nothing to do with it, and Trump/Pence did. But if you are willing to give Trump some credit for that, then I think you are more honest than the vast majority of folks who are deranged with hatred for the man. Trump brings a lot of that on himself, no doubt. My point was we can't judge him by ignoring the good things and only considering the bad things, and that's what a lot of people are doing. Not you at all, but many people.

(I'm not trying to call anyone out with this statement)

What other "good" ideas has he come up with? Mind you the comment reromises was that until some real plan is put forward, promising is as good as farting... it sticks around for 30-45 seconds and then dissipates. At least #^&#^&#^&#^& sticks to your fingers
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Ian

(I'm not trying to call anyone out with this statement)

What other "good" ideas has he come up with? Mind you the comment reromises was that until some real plan is put forward, promising is as good as farting... it sticks around for 30-45 seconds and then dissipates. At least #^&#^&#^&#^& sticks to your fingers
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Presidents coming up with ideas usually leads to bad consequences for our liberties and our wallets. They're not really supposed to come up with ideas so much as they are supposed to execute the ideas of Congress (unless those ideas are harmful to the people and the Constitution). They're at their best (for us as a nation) when they see to it that we are defended against enemies foreign or domestic. When they preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. And when they nominate judges who will do the same rather than "interpreting" it to reflect their personal notion of justice.

Sure, they can make suggestions. Anyone can. Most politicians get ideas from the populace at large. Which is how it should be. The proper places for the creation of and demand for implementation of ideas on how to make our country "healthy, wealthy, and wise," are in the public forums, marketplaces, and minds of the people.

It is the duty of government to make it safe enough and free enough for the people to make the country work, and to create the ideas to make it so.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Presidents coming up with ideas usually leads to bad consequences for our liberties and our wallets. They're not really supposed to come up with ideas so much as they are supposed to execute the ideas of Congress (unless those ideas are harmful to the people and the Constitution). They're at their best (for us as a nation) when they see to it that we are defended against enemies foreign or domestic. When they preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. And when they nominate judges who will do the same rather than "interpreting" it to reflect their personal notion of justice.

Sure, they can make suggestions. Anyone can. Most politicians get ideas from the populace at large. Which is how it should be. The proper places for the creation of and demand for implementation of ideas on how to make our country "healthy, wealthy, and wise," are in the public forums, marketplaces, and minds of the people.

It is the duty of government to make it safe enough and free enough for the people to make the country work, and to create the ideas to make it so.

I think I'm comfortable accepting that, but that's not the platform he ran on.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Ian

I think I'm comfortable accepting that, but that's not the platform he ran on.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think his platform, if it is possible to translate Trumpist rhetoric, can be summed up in one of his sentences: "We will make America great again." I think it was clear, as clear as a Trump locution can be, and if you actually heard or saw him speak at his rallies, by "We" he actually did mean the people not the bureaucrats in Washington.

His nomination for the Supreme Court is Constitution centered not judge whim centered so reflects what a good President would do.

His directly speaking to the people through social media reflects that it is the people who he depends on not the bureaucracy.

His direct appeal to business leaders and corporations is acknowledging their role in the economy not reliance on the central bureaucrats and politicians.

His repealing as many of the repressive, bureaucratic executive orders as possible is a transfer of power back from the bureaucracy to the people.

His appointments and decisions generally indicate a direction of having the states more involved in regulation and in matters that really should be governed at state and local levels rather than the federal.

His plans for security from the current Islamic threat, the destruction of ISIS and a slowing of immigration from those areas along with strict vetting certainly is proper "doing" of Constitutional Executive power and duty to defend us.

In general, to me, he sees the role of making the country "healthy wealthy and wise" lies in the hands of the people, not the political ruling class.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

In general, to me, he sees the role of making the country "healthy wealthy and wise" lies in the hands of the people, not the political ruling class.

seems like the left(as is usually the case)....and some others, can't decide whether they want balance of powers and co-equal branches... or at times(when their guy wins) an all powerful President, activist Judiciary, conniving Congress(Obamacare)....as the left tends to do, they want things their way when they want something "achieved" or when they maintain control of a branch of government but when they lose an election or the numbers tip the scales out of their favor power they want a completely different set of rules followed but those that assume control......you couldn't play a game with a sports team that plays like that( "holding, spitballs, hitting below the belt and traveling are fine as long as we're doing it") and I don't think you can co-exist in a society for very long with this kind of collective psychosis

[wdmso]

The biggest winners were shares in energy, financial and healthcare

This says it all ^^^^^^

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

The biggest winners were shares in energy, financial and healthcare

This says it all ^^^^^^

why do you hate healthcare?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

The biggest winners were shares in energy, financial and healthcare

This says it all ^^^^^^

Please tell us why this is bad? We can't all work in the public sector, some of us have to produce wealth, to generate tax revenue, to pay your salary.

The fact that some sectors won, doesn't mean that other sectors had to lose. Some just outperformed others.

The stock market went way up during Obama's 8 years. I heard lots of liberals giving him credit for that.

Not everything to do with "business" is bad, WDMSO. Lots of good, middle class Americans depend upon business for a livelihood.

Your comment is what says it all. You'd be happier if businesses all failed?