Trump vs. Republicans

[Rastapopoulos]

Inaugural Speech Dims G.O.P. Hopes for a More Conservative Trump Agenda

• Republicans have resisted Democratic efforts to spend big on the nation’s roads, bridges, tunnels and rail lines; use the federal government’s power to bargain for lower prescription drug prices; block trade agreements; and limit foreign interventions. Republican leaders have sought a business-friendly approach on immigration laws, offering a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, and tried to restrain popular programs like Social Security and Medicare.
  
  If the president is able to blur party lines on such issues and harness an ascendant blue-collar coalition to win that clash, he will have untethered conservatism from the Republican Party and shifted the party away from the small-government approach that has been its hallmark since Ronald Reagan stood 36 years ago in the same position on the Capitol steps as Mr. Trump.
  
  But Mr. Trump is about to discover that his hopes for a realignment may not come easily.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Inaugural Speech Dims G.O.P. Hopes for a More Conservative Trump Agenda

• Republicans have resisted Democratic efforts to spend big on the nation’s roads, bridges, tunnels and rail lines; use the federal government’s power to bargain for lower prescription drug prices; block trade agreements; and limit foreign interventions. Republican leaders have sought a business-friendly approach on immigration laws, offering a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, and tried to restrain popular programs like Social Security and Medicare.
  
  If the president is able to blur party lines on such issues and harness an ascendant blue-collar coalition to win that clash, he will have untethered conservatism from the Republican Party and shifted the party away from the small-government approach that has been its hallmark since Ronald Reagan stood 36 years ago in the same position on the Capitol steps as Mr. Trump.
  
  But Mr. Trump is about to discover that his hopes for a realignment may not come easily.

Republicans will fall in line, one tweet can ruin a politician's career.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Republicans will fall in line, one tweet can ruin a politician's career.

Oh sure, some will. But then, look at the marches today - there are plenty of Repubs in more swingy districts who know they will do BETTER by opposing Trump. And then there are the Ayn Rand acolytes like Paul Ryan who want to get rid of government altogether and know they've got a much better chance with President Pence... Either way, circular firing squad.

 

[Denny Crane]

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/314991-trump-team-prepares-dramatic-cuts

Trump team prepares dramatic cuts

Donald Trump is ready to take an ax to government spending.

Staffers for the Trump transition team have been meeting with career staff at the White House ahead of Friday’s presidential inauguration to outline their plans for shrinking the federal bureaucracy, The Hill has learned.

The changes they propose are dramatic.

The departments of Commerce and Energy would see major reductions in funding, with programs under their jurisdiction either being eliminated or transferred to other agencies. The departments of Transportation, Justice and State would see significant cuts and program eliminations.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting would be privatized, while the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities would be eliminated entirely.

Overall, the blueprint being used by Trump’s team would reduce federal spending by $10.5 trillion over 10 years.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/314991-trump-team-prepares-dramatic-cuts

Trump team prepares dramatic cuts

Donald Trump is ready to take an ax to government spending.

Staffers for the Trump transition team have been meeting with career staff at the White House ahead of Friday’s presidential inauguration to outline their plans for shrinking the federal bureaucracy, The Hill has learned.

The changes they propose are dramatic.

The departments of Commerce and Energy would see major reductions in funding, with programs under their jurisdiction either being eliminated or transferred to other agencies. The departments of Transportation, Justice and State would see significant cuts and program eliminations.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting would be privatized, while the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities would be eliminated entirely.

Overall, the blueprint being used by Trump’s team would reduce federal spending by $10.5 trillion over 10 years.

is this in the wrong thread? what does this have to do with trump vs republicans?

 

[Denny Crane]

is this in the wrong thread? what does this have to do with trump vs republicans?

Trump not vs republicans, eh?

 

[Denny Crane]

$10.5 trillion. It's a good start.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

Trump not vs republicans, eh?

ahh. well, DUH. he is with their platform pretty much across the board. i mean, he is a republican after all.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

$10.5 trillion. It's a good start.

That'll buy a lot of walls!

 

[3RA1N1AC]

donald j trump-r

dude is all about that GOP, hes gonna pay farmers not to grow corn, believe me.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

hes gonna name something after ronald reagan within the month. Nobody is gonna name more things after ronald reagan, seriously.

 

[barfo]

hes gonna name something after ronald reagan within the month. Nobody is gonna name more things after ronald reagan, seriously.

Did Reagan change his name to Trump? Because I don't think Trump approves of naming things anything other than Trump.

barfo

 

[JfizzleBlazer]

huh? Democrats care about roads? Have you seen the east county roads lately? Its a shit show.

 

[MarAzul]

hes gonna name something after ronald reagan within the month. Nobody is gonna name more things after ronald reagan, seriously.

Reagan has an AirCraft Carrier, USS Ronald Reagan (CVN76). Trump doesn't need to fret about him.

Day two and all is well!

 

[riverman]

hes gonna name something after ronald reagan within the month. Nobody is gonna name more things after ronald reagan, seriously.

He can't call hotels and casinos Trump anymore...Reagan makes sense to him

 

[Denny Crane]

That'll buy a lot of walls!

It will pay off the debt Obama saddled us all with.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Take this FWIW:

According to Reich, he recently had breakfast with a Republican friend who claimed he held his fire over his misgivings about Trump during the election, saying, “You kidding? I was surrounded by Trump voters. I’d have been shot.”

That was when the conversation took an interesting turn when Reich asked his friend what the GOP will do now that Trump is president.

“They’ll play along for a while,” the unidentified friend said. “They’ll get as much as they want – tax cuts galore, deregulation, military buildup, slash all those poverty programs, and then get to work on Social Security and Medicare – and blame him. And he’s such a fool he’ll want to take credit for everything.”

Asked what happens then, the Reich’s friend laughed and said, ‘They like [Vice President] Pence.”

“Pence is their guy. They all think Trump is out of his mind,” he explained. “So the moment Trump does something really dumb – steps over the line – violates the law in a big stupid clumsy way … and you know he will …”

“They impeach him?” Reich asked.

“You bet. They pull the trigger,” was the reply.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

It will pay off the debt Obama saddled us all with.

Oh Denny. Caring about debt is only something you pretend to do when the other guy's in office.

 

[Denny Crane]

Oh Denny. Caring about debt is only something you pretend to do when the other guy's in office.

Just how do you come to that idiocy?

I was against the deficits all along. Obama added $10T to the debt. I have no interest in seeing Trump add $.01 more.

Trump was left a shitty hand. At least he's going to take an AXE to the recklessness that he inherited.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

Just how do you come to that idiocy?

I was against the deficits all along. Obama added $10T to the debt. I have no interest in seeing Trump add $.01 more.

Trump was left a shitty hand. At least he's going to take an AXE to the recklessness that he inherited.

Ahhhh.....got it. Obama inherits a a shitty hand, too bad. Trump inherits a shitty hand, he got screwed. This just in from SC2's Trump Apologist in Chief, Denny Crane......

 

[Denny Crane]

Ahhhh.....got it. Obama inherits a a shitty hand, too bad. Trump inherits a shitty hand, he got screwed. This just in from SC2's Trump Apologist in Chief, Denny Crane......

Obama inherited a massive banking crisis, no doubt.

He made it worse. On purpose.

In the words of his chief of staff, "never let a good crisis go to waste." Meaning, they should milk it for all the money they could get out of congress for unrelated causes.

Do you deny someone has to do something about those deficits and debts?

 

[riverman]

Obama inherited a massive banking crisis, no doubt.

and a massive war against terrorism....war sucks the treasury dry ..let's not gloss that over...Obama inherited a shit storm of terror cells and conflicts...your precious Reagan started this trend spending 55 percent of the national budget on war machines....that's what ended up draining our treasury over a long period of time....

 

[Denny Crane]

and a massive war against terrorism....war sucks the treasury dry ..let's not gloss that over...Obama inherited a shit storm of terror cells and conflicts...your precious Reagan started this trend spending 55 percent of the national budget on war machines....that's what ended up draining our treasury over a long period of time....

The cost of the "wars" was 1/2 the surplus at the time. Obama didn't inherit ISIS, he made it.

Reagan's biggest defense budget was $465B out of ~$1.7T budgets. I'm pretty sure the math doesn't support the 55% claim.

All of Reagan's budgets were declared DOA by the democrats in congress. It was democrats that wrote the budgets, and it's their responsibility to control the purse strings. Reagan wanted budget cuts and the line item veto. While revenues doubled over his 8 years, congressional spending tripled.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...51b-8cd3-246b6728b17b/?utm_term=.6035bac7b5fe

For each of the past several years, President Reagan has sent a new budget to Capitol Hill, and Congress has promptly pronounced it DOA -- dead on arrival.

This year, with the drama over the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings balanced-budget act beginning, the early reaction is different: Most Republicans as well as Democrats have declared the administration's budget DBA -- dead before arrival.

"If it's last year's budget with another $15 [billion] to $20 billion in cuts added to it, with no major policy changes, then it clearly won't work," said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.), reflecting indications of what the budget will contain. "It can't fly, and it won't fly."

The fiscal 1987 budget that Reagan is scheduled to submit to Congress Feb. 3 is expected to include spending cutbacks of at least $50 billion to meet the $144 billion deficit target of the recently enacted Gramm-Rudman-Hollings legislation to force a balanced budget by fiscal 1991.

 

[riverman]

 

[Denny Crane]

That's a silly analysis.

He increased spending by 25% the first year and near 0 the rest. But the rest, the spending was 25% bigger, too.

Growth... don't be fooled.

 

[riverman]

Let's also keep in mind Reagan couldn't remember his wife's first name the last two years of his presidency and he filled the prisons and welfare lines with his war on pot.....really bad era for americans who didn't tow the conservative line

 

[riverman]

That's a silly analysis.

He increased spending by 25% the first year and near 0 the rest. But the rest, the spending was 25% bigger, too.

Growth... don't be fooled.

your analysis is silly.....you throw out a poll and I'll throw one out.....there are a lot of conflicting polls but I was a California land owner when Reagan was governing and he was horrible for the state at that time. He blew the biggest chance at nuclear disarmament we've ever had and bloated the military...he really started this policing the world trend and made us look like Romans trying to dominate the globe...but hey....you say he cut your mortgage payments...

 

[Denny Crane]

your analysis is silly.....you throw out a poll and I'll throw one out.....there are a lot of conflicting polls but I was a California land owner when Reagan was governing and he was horrible for the state at that time. He blew the biggest chance at nuclear disarmament we've ever had and bloated the military...he really started this policing the world trend and made us look like Romans trying to dominate the globe...but hey....you say he cut your mortgage payments...

Do the math.

$800B increase in budget x 8 years = $6.4T. If he started with a $0 increase and ended up increasing spending $6.4T, the spending increases would have been massive year over year.

It's fine to post data and charts that support your argument, but you might look at what you're posting, beyond the spin.



Obama junked W's $3.0T budget in 2009 and submitted his own at $3.8T.

+$800B for each year: 2009, 2010, 2011, ... etc.

If spending went back to $3.0T, you'd have a point.

The spin is just that. The math proves it.

 

[riverman]

but you might look at what you're posting, beyond the spin.

back atcha! you're the poll worshiper around here....I've read about and studied the Reagan era quite a bit...he escalated our military beyond any president ever in history......he changed the way we conduct diplomacy around the globe from peace to military intimidation. Trump now wants to make the military even bigger.....BIG mistake from my view. I'm not a hawk....

 

[riverman]

Obama junked W's $3.0T budget in 2009 and submitted his own at $3.8T.

and Obama clearly stated the necessity of this as a process that would take at least 3 decades to overcome....it was snowballing when he took office...his damage control was commendable and spending unavoidable....if not...our economy would be in the dumpster and it's not...a success given the circumstances