jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (91 posts)

Is this what you had in mind when you voted for change?

  1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
    Kathleen Cochranposted 9 days ago

    "One of the many underappreciated legacies of the Obama administration has been its widespread implementation of pro-consumer policies. Under the outgoing president’s leadership, multiple executive branch departments and independent agencies have enacted laws, rules and regulations designed to protect regular Americans from, well, the Donald Trumps of the world."  Politico  One of these major laws goes into effect April 2017.  What are the chances now that will happen?  Is this the change Republicans had in mind when they voted for Trump?

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 9 days ago in reply to this

      In a way, yes.  That is to say that the doomsayers will immediately begin saying the world is ending - that Trump will do great damage to everyone in the country.

      That it will actually happen ("What are the chances now that will happen?") is yet to be seen.  Or are you referring to Obama's illegal orders to protect illegal aliens from the law?  Because that is almost sure to come to a halt.

    2. ahorseback profile image46
      ahorsebackposted 9 days ago in reply to this

      The stranglehold of centrist government regulations are what have stifled our economic engine for eight years - Thank you Pres. Obama.     Want to end poverty Kathleen ?   Put America back near the opportunity of free  enterprise ,back to work - that's Trumps promise , freeing up  enterprise ! Of course we won't end free welfare free ,unlimited unemployment benefits ,  free cell phones ,  free college , free immigration ,free whatever  of the Obama or the Clinton legacy will we ?
      Surely you understand Reaganomics ?  It worked very well until the" swamp people" right and left  in congress and the house ,stole it !   Check out federal revenues during Reagans terms - if you aren't allergic to truth .

      1. rhamson profile image75
        rhamsonposted 9 days ago in reply to this

        Too many regulations and taxes have been the rights cry of foul against freedom and capitalism. History just does not support this as the proof of the last 30+ years has shown that the wealth is well and alive in it's trek up to the top 1%. Business is in the business of acquiring more business'. Acquisitions is what business is all about and is it regulations and taxes that is holding that back? I will not lay all the blame at the feet of Obama as his inheritance was an economy on the brink of the biggest world depression ever. Yes he bailed out the thieves but what choice did he have? Do what Hoover did and let it take its' course? Unbridled capitalism is both detrimental to the economy and the poor as it prays on them like a long sickness.

        Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone   John Maynard Keynes (1883 - 1946)

        1. colorfulone profile image87
          colorfuloneposted 9 days ago in reply to this

          John Maynard Keynes was a committed Marxist and a crony capitalist that loved to laugh at his enemies.    So, I had to laugh at that quote.

        2. ahorseback profile image46
          ahorsebackposted 9 days ago in reply to this

          And what's the alternative , Marxism , Socialism ,  ..........name the one surviving superpower that still feeds its hungry ?   Was it Hitler , Stalin ,  Mussolini  , which free nation  accomplished as much and when as a free America has ?

          1. rhamson profile image75
            rhamsonposted 8 days ago in reply to this

            Typical answer. You would be better identifying as an extremist rather than a conservative. Is the choice always the polar opposite? Is there nothing in between? Allowing what is going on to continue by either side has helped what?

            Your little quip about the hunger is a good example as 1 in 6 in America face hunger. Is that something to brag about? What you promote has no answers or end. It just continues the lies and bull that comes from both sides. Do you have a new constructive option to discuss or is it just more biased one sided conjecture?

            1. ahorseback profile image46
              ahorsebackposted 8 days ago in reply to this

              The election of Trump over Hilary  will take care of hunger ,  jobs , jobs and more jobs , of course , we'll have to make some people actually TAKE a job instead of not !

              Middle ground - The US. constitution protects us from the overreaching of federal "programs " taking money from one taxpaying pocket and putting it into another's .

              1. rhamson profile image75
                rhamsonposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                Trump is playing the same trickle down BS that has been proven a failure time and again. It is what brought us here. If you cannot see that as with many we will repeat the same failure. Low paying jobs and more decimation of the middle class. As far as taking from others it has already been found that Trump's policies will once again raise the taxes of the middle class to make up for the tax shortages. Reagan raised taxes on the middle and poor eleven times. This is the same path.

                1. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                  I fear you're right about the taxes - while the liberal dream is to get all the money they want from the rich it simply isn't there.  Confiscation of all the wealth (not income, but wealth) of the 1% won't run the country for but a couple of years.  Only the mass middle class has the money, and they are fast running out.

                  1. ahorseback profile image46
                    ahorsebackposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                    That is exactly correct !

                  2. rhamson profile image75
                    rhamsonposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                    I believe you are absolutely on target. We cannot require one side to change the other. How many small business' will invest the meager relief they get when they have so much debt to make up? The economy does not magically increase because of a preemptive tax law. You have to put money in the hands of those who will spend it. Jobs are what makes that happen and not taking from one segment to offset the other. Regardless of who or how they made their fortune you cannot take any more from them for doing so. We as a whole have to come up with a solution and going back and forth administration to administration with failed policies has gotten us here. And the Pink Elephant in the room we all ignore is what about the National Debt? Cutting taxes with no plan to repay it is typical of both parties.

                2. ahorseback profile image46
                  ahorsebackposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                  Rhamson , Reaganomics worked , that is it worked until the congress and house decided to spend it all near the end of the two term Reagan . -look it up ! -Job creation was a  high too.  But then the Clintons began an economic system breakdown of saving and increased spending ..

                  1. rhamson profile image75
                    rhamsonposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                    The only thing Reaganomics did was increase the deficit through government spending with the military and switching tax raises to the lower income brackets. look it up! The national debt tripled from 1 to 3 trillion during his presidency. You only have to look to more recent history to see that the shift of the nations wealth to the top 1% is glaring proof. Trump may make short term progress but unless money is put in the consumers hands again little real growth will occur. We keep going back and forth with each administration from high taxes to low taxes and the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

                3. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
                  Kathleen Cochranposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                  We have such short memories.  Don't know how we expect to run a country without a revenue stream.

                  1. ahorseback profile image46
                    ahorsebackposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                    And you really believe that revenue comes from  business and corporate ?   The middle class IS  the greater source of that revenue , not the rich and  not the poor .

              2. GA Anderson profile image86
                GA Andersonposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                "The election of Trump over Hilary  will take care of hunger ,  jobs , jobs and more jobs , of course..."

                Sounds a little like Pres. Obama's first election. Remember... "...get some Obama cash from his Obama stash."

                or maybe more like this;"... we ain't got pay no mo bills, we got a brother in the White House"

                Two sides of the same coin?

                GA

                1. ahorseback profile image46
                  ahorsebackposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                  The difference is a rebuilding of a self sufficient and tax revenue paying middle class by Trump --Rather than a socialized  wealth redistribution by Obama that sucks up all our resources .

                  Not hard to understand ........for most.

                  1. GA Anderson profile image86
                    GA Andersonposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                    It may be easy for a believer to understand your explanation, but as a skeptic, your comment sure sounded similar to those I linked.

                    GA

                  2. rhamson profile image75
                    rhamsonposted 6 days ago in reply to this

                    So..... cutting the corporate taxes helps the middle class how? By creating more mediocre paying service jobs? The savings are passed onto the consumer who does not have a job to keep up with the inflation? How does cutting taxes pay down the $19 trillion and increasing national debt? Please give me the details.

          2. Marisa Wright profile image92
            Marisa Wrightposted 3 days ago in reply to this

            Have you ever travelled to Europe, to Australia, to New Zealand?

            Every developed country in the world has its homeless and its hungry.  But there are DEGREES.  Take some time to look outside the borders of the US and you'll find plenty of countries that care for their poor, hungry and especially their sick, much much better than the US does.  And they are not socialist or communist.  And by the way, in spite of caring for the less fortunate in their society, in many cases their economies are in better shape than the US too.

            1. GA Anderson profile image86
              GA Andersonposted 3 days ago in reply to this

              Hello Marisa Wright,

              I have heard your points before, and I believe they have some validity, but, as you stated about degrees, I think their validity has degrees also.

              Would you consider that geography and population distribution factors might affect the validity of such comparisons? Or that it could be a problem of scale; what works for  three million might not work for three hundred million?

              If I had a `bucket list', a trip to New Zealand would be at the top. I have heard a lot of good things. My skimming of information about the place left a good impression, but, when considering issues such as you mentioned, I don't think New Zealand is an equitable comparison. I feel the same reservations about other frequently mentioned examples; Denmark, Sweden, etc.

              Or, do you see it as basic as; `if it can be done one place it can be done in any place?'

              GA

              1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
                Kathleen Cochranposted 3 days ago in reply to this

                Marisa:  Good points.  We could also follow other (virtually every other) countries on their gun control policies.  I have Austrailian friends who sincerely asked me what our problem was with government controlled health care.  They love theirs and are financially successful retired business owners.

                1. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 3 days ago in reply to this

                  "We could also follow other (virtually every other) countries on their gun control policies."

                  We could.  With the same proven results: that just as many people are murdered if we take the guns away as if we don't.  So we lose another freedom...for no results.  A fine goal, that!

                  1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
                    Kathleen Cochranposted 3 days ago in reply to this

                    Where did you get that information because every source I've found is in direct conflict with your statement.

                  2. Marisa Wright profile image92
                    Marisa Wrightposted 44 hours ago in reply to this

                    Wilderness, murder is only one crime.   

                    One incontrovertible fact is that both the UK and Australia do not have mass murders any more, except for terrorist attacks (which are unfortunately a global phenomenon).  No children have been killed in mass attacks since gun control was introduced.  How many children have died in massacres in the US since 1996, I wonder?

                    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-28/f … ur/7254880

                    https://www.truthorfiction.com/australi … ime-rates/

                    http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

              2. Marisa Wright profile image92
                Marisa Wrightposted 44 hours ago in reply to this

                I could see the argument if you said, what works for ten people won't work for three million.

                But when you are talking about a system that works for three million people, there should be no problem upscaling it for thirty million.  Apart from anything else, America has states, and each state is no bigger than many countries.  So there is no excuse, really.

                Geography is totally irrelevant IMO - climate and geographic conditions vary hugely across all the countries which have universal health care, effective gun control, etc and yet they all achieve similar results.  And those same climate and geographic conditions apply in the US because it covers such a wide area.

                Perhaps you could say that the people themselves are a factor, but I'm reluctant to make that statement.  Because if I did, it would mean that people in these enlightened countries, are intelligent, compassionate towards the less fortunate and have a strong sense of civic responsibility - whereas Americans are stupid and selfish.  I really hope it's not that simple.

                1. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 43 hours ago in reply to this

                  Do you think that a state with a population density of 1200/sq mi (New Jersey) or 740 (Connecticut) will have the same culture or attitudes as the people in a state with 4 people per sq mi (North Dakota) or 2 (Wyoming)?  When neither of the latter has a single large city while the first two are pretty much wall to wall urban dwelling?

                  I would disagree strongly with that.  The US election made a major point of that - nearly every urban area went Democrat while every rural precinct went Republican.  There is a MAJOR difference in the wants and attitudes between the two.

                  1. Marisa Wright profile image92
                    Marisa Wrightposted 43 hours ago in reply to this

                    True, but what does that have to do with the universal principle of compassion?  What does that have to do with the universal principle that no one should be refused health care just because they have no money?

                    Australia is a vast empty country.   If we city-dwellers said, we want our taxes to pay for our services and no one else's, there would be no schools in the outback, no hospitals, no train services, no internet.  The farmers and ranchers and people in small country towns would be left uneducated, isolated, and sick. 

                    We don't do that, because we are one country.  We are well aware that the taxes raised in city areas subsidise the country areas.  That's how a country works.

                2. GA Anderson profile image86
                  GA Andersonposted 38 hours ago in reply to this

                  Marisa Wright, I only offered those points because I think they do affect comparisons with smaller nations. My perspective isn't the result of serious study, and since I think this topic is extremely subjective, it was only offered for consideration.

                  I think the scale of the comparison does matter. With the exception of your Australia, the typical comparisons mentioned involve nations that are 30 to 50 times smaller than the U.S. I think it is reasonable to be skeptical that those systems would ramp-up without constrictions.

                  I am not worried about pointing to people as another factor in the comparisons. But the point would be cultural, not degrees of enlightenment or intelligence. Or stupidity or selfishness. Any example of national cultural differences offered could easily lead to the detour of "yeah but" and counter-example rebuttals - and that is the subjective part that neither of us can know more about than our own perspective. But the historical culture and tradition of a nation - the bedrock supporting a nation's growth, can be viewed a little more objectively, and it is that bedrock which  guides, (or should), a nation's acceptance or refusal of an effort.  Just because it is the choice of one nation of folks doesn't make it the right choice for all others. To even bring the concept of rude or selfish into  consideration is well outside the realm of enlightenment.

                  I don't see the point about states as you do. As a part of a republic, I see the states as distinct personalities, and I think the red/blue designations commonly applied point to that same conclusion. The issue is a national one more than a state one. It would be awkward to tip-toe around the thought that Vermont or Massachusetts are more intelligent, enlightened, and civic minded - because they agree with your perspective. As you said, I hope that is not the case.

                  GA

    3. Live to Learn profile image82
      Live to Learnposted 9 days ago in reply to this

      The man has not taken office. If there were voting irregularities he may not.

      Can we at least wait until we see what anyone will do before we complain about it?

      1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
        Kathleen Cochranposted 6 days ago in reply to this

        We know what he'll do.  He's already told us.  Those of you who voted for him, weren't you listening?

        1. ahorseback profile image46
          ahorsebackposted 6 days ago in reply to this

          I was listening but I never expected Trump to create more jobs that Obama's entire eight years BEFORE he even takes office .  It's just so wrong to show up an incumbent president  like that , How evil!

          1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
            Kathleen Cochranposted 6 days ago in reply to this

            Read Politico today before you start bragging about what Trump has already done.

        2. Live to Learn profile image82
          Live to Learnposted 5 days ago in reply to this

          We, or I to be exact, will wait and see. I know what Hillary would have done and I can't imagine anything worse than her in power. So, whatever the outcome I can always fall back on 'it could have been worse'.

          1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
            Kathleen Cochranposted 5 days ago in reply to this

            "I can't imagine anything worse than her in power."  You don't have to imagine it.  You are about to experience it in real life.

            1. Live to Learn profile image82
              Live to Learnposted 5 days ago in reply to this

              The sky is not falling. No matter how much the far left screams. This is politics Kathleen. One side has control, than the other. And on, and on, and on. I have no idea what you think 'anything worse' is but I get the impression that you and I would disagree on the definition.

              1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
                Kathleen Cochranposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                I have disagreed with every Republican president since Nixon - and for good reason to my way of thinking.  But not one of them has been a man without some admirable qualities.  Trump has demonstrated none.  "Anything worse" is this man who is unqualified, but that doesn't bother me as much as the vivid evidence that he is . . .  What's the word?  Deplorable.  My biggest problem is understanding how my fellow Americans could put a person like this in office - any office - much less the presidency.  Yes, the pendulum swings.  But not this far.

                1. ahorseback profile image46
                  ahorsebackposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                  So either half of America is deplorable or there is something wrong with your judgment ?    It might just be the same symptoms that led you to entirely ....overlook Hilary's  faults........:-}

                  1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
                    Kathleen Cochranposted 2 days ago in reply to this

                    Ahorse:  Are you capable of a comment that is not personally insulting?  I could take your comments much more seriously if you could.

                2. Live to Learn profile image82
                  Live to Learnposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                  I find him no more or less deplorable than I find Hillary to be. For different reasons. But Hillary is much more dangerous because she has had a lifetime of experience manipulating the system, stonewalling the system and getting rich while using that system. I cannot imagine how much more damage she might have done had she attained the highest office in the land.

                3. Credence2 profile image87
                  Credence2posted 4 days ago in reply to this

                  The danger is that the rightwinger will fix the pendulum so that it cannot work itself back from the extreme in the direction of the  moderate or progressive.

                  1. Live to Learn profile image82
                    Live to Learnposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                    Funny you should say that. I've thought the same of Obama.

                  2. Will Apse profile image89
                    Will Apseposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                    That is a concern.  On the foreign policy front alone, there is room for massive damage. Trump's foreign policy is so erratic (on the face of it), that he could easily destroy the US's reputation for honoring its commitments, treaties etc. You don't get a good rep back easily.

    4. Misfit Chick profile image94
      Misfit Chickposted 23 hours ago in reply to this

      Somehow, these questions always end up going off into tit-for-tat arguments that go off topic, so here's a reminder (above) of the original question, cuz its a good one.

      If it was only Republicans who voted for Trump, things would be far more understandable - cuz yeah, they have a completely different view on how the economy should work. But, ever heard of the GOP #NeverTrump movement? Many MANY Republican did not vote for Trump simply because they held to a higher moral standard.

      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309426.png

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309425.png

      Trump only won 20% of the country; and Hillary won by 2.5m more of the popular vote than he did. THAT means that the majority of us did NOT vote for Trump's policies (and a LOT of you who voted for him didn't vote for his policies, either). This is what the protests are about. The GOP are all gung-ho about undoing all that this country as accomplished - on 20% of the countrywide vote.

      Uncool beyond the telling of it, especially since GOP made it clear for 8 years that they do not respect the votes of the people; by trying to convince everyone that government is bad because of us EVIL ‘elitists’ (your NORMAL American neighbors) - while painting themselves as ‘abused’. They refused to work across partisan divides on budgets, immigration laws, jobs programs, climate change, tax reform, energy, etc - AND had a majority, yet Obamacare exists. Citizens became angry with a stalled country; while GOP continued to blame Obama & those who voted for him.

      And again, many white, male Bernie voters couldn't vote for Hillary long before Trump's misogynistic dribble gave them permission to hate her, more. The people who voted for Trump are a mix of genuine GOP supporters who would have voted for whatever candidate was in that place without conscious (as many did); and spiteful Bernie voters crying cuz 'their extreme-liberal' MAN who wanted 100% FREE Universal Healthcare & College implemented was rejected.

      Conservative white men & women don't have enough numbers to elect anyone into that office on their own, anymore - especially when they are as divided as they are. Its really quite a shame.

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309405.png

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309407.jpg

      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309420.png

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309421.png


      Misogyny: other 'groups' beyond white men had every reason to be JUST as ANGRY as anyone else about anything; and yet we all found it in our hearts to vote fair between both Trump & Hillary. Search YouTube for “70 Awful Displays Of Sexism On Fox News” Its not just GOP men. Women expect this misogynistic attitude from the disoriented right-wing.

      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309408.png

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309409.png


      So no, I really don't think this is what probably close to half of Trump's voters had in mind. All most people wanted to do was p*ss on Hillary, Dems, 'Elitists' and/or Obama, in general.

      Since the election, Trump has ignored trying to unify our country - while doing everything he can to fracture America right down the middle of every possible dividing line. He’s inspired good people to turn ugly; and ugly people to become uglier. Its easier to heal than we realize - Christians & ex-Christians Prove God Exists by Debunking Salvation: Science & Spirituality Reveal the Real Jesus Christ. Look it up. Next time, no more wannabee armchair scientists or Christian militants voting on fake hype, fake news or fake fear.

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309413.jpg

      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309414.jpg

      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309416.png

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309419_f1024.jpg

      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309424.png

      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309428.png

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309429.jpg

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309431.jpg

      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309432.jpg


      The people who voted for Trump need to remain vigilant to make SURE he isn't really just a bull in a china shop INSTEAD of a brilliant strategist - cuz that's what he looks like, now. And, you know who we're going to blame is he flucks things up other than the harmless ways you hope he does. Hint: we won't be blaming The Donald nearly as much as his supporters.

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309433.png

      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309434.jpg

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309435.jpg

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309437.jpg

      1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
        Kathleen Cochranposted 23 hours ago in reply to this

        Chick:  OMG!  Where have you been since Nov. 8th?  THIS needs to be a hub in its own right, but I appreciate you answering my question on steroids!

        I seriously asked this question because I truly believe those who voted for Trump have blocked out everything that happened before Nov. 9.  There is no way they could have taken all that into consideration when they entered the voting booth.  No one is capable of that much denial.  (I know.  Here come the HIllary bashers to rebut.  But with them considering GEN Petreaus for Secretary of State - their juice on the handling of secret information is running dry.) 
        Seriously.  This "comment" should be a hub.

        1. Misfit Chick profile image94
          Misfit Chickposted 22 hours ago in reply to this

          I've been around, pretty much cutting & pasting this info absolutely everywhere in shorter bursts (except in HP's forum section, ha!) - and, I have so much more I could write - but aren't the cartoons fun? Thanks so much, I may turn it all into a hub someday; but it seems like a constantly-evolving animal. I add more info & resource links to my already long list, every day.

          Collecting 'back-up' opinions has become quite a hobby (along with the cartoons). People have been saying a lot of this for a long time; but the people who needed to listen the most where listening to Trump.

          These are some of the best of the best:

          http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ … ump-214498

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the … use-of-me/ 

          http://www.rawstory.com/2016/11/robert- … the-media/

          http://www.christiantoday.com/article/a … 102096.htm

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won … andom_1_na


          http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309503.png

          http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309505_f1024.jpg

          http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309506.jpg

          http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309507.jpg

          http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309510.jpg

          http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13309511_f1024.jpg

          http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13309512_f1024.jpg

  2. colorfulone profile image87
    colorfuloneposted 9 days ago

    The thing is Obama has enacting laws, rules, and regulations that weren't built upon the rock of legislation, but instead by shortcuts because of his impatients, and desire to keep his promises to big businesses that enrich themselves and politicians first.

    Big businesses are realizing their short-sightedness in supporting policies build on sand that can be easily changed by a new president.  They were betting and investing in another Obama term by supporting Hillary.   

    Now, Obama's Adm. is working over-time, from what I hear from insiders, to enact more regulations that will make it more difficult if not impossible for Trump Adm. to stop policies before they become law (60 days).  Then, there will be a greater amounts of tax-payer dollars and time used to be able to make American great again.

    Well phrased words in the Obama Adm. means more cronyism capitalism in action.   (edited)  "The devil is in the details".

  3. Sychophantastic profile image83
    Sychophantasticposted 8 days ago

    Rural America and working class America has too long been ignored.

    The U.S. has been focusing on making foreigners happy, growing the globalist agenda of free trade, trying to bring up poor countries other than ours, and satisfying the needs of minority groups in the inner cities.

    All we've read about for years is how homosexuals are being persecuted, how blacks are being imprisoned and don't have jobs, how Latinos are coming across the border and being provided services, how women are being wronged. Well, this election, the core of America spoke up. Real Americans who live in the heart of this country and just go about their lives every day got sick of being ignored.

    Donald Trump is going to change America by focusing his energy on working class Americans, people who just do their jobs every day and don't complain. These are regular people who go to church on Sundays and mind their own business. Donald Trump is going to ignore the globalists and focus on the nationalists.

    I've understood all of this so much better since I started reading The Daily Stormer.

    1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
      Kathleen Cochranposted 6 days ago in reply to this

      "Donald Trump is going to change America by focusing his energy on working class Americans, people who just do their jobs every day and don't complain."  Hold that thought.

      What the heck is The Daily Stormer?  Please take a look at The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and Politico.  They have decades of experience in traditional journalism.

  4. ahorseback profile image46
    ahorsebackposted 8 days ago

    Every modern educated and time wizened economist knows pretty well that Reaganomics worked ---AFTER deducing the fact that congress willingly spent all of the gains by 1990,-- and too many leftists today cannot fathom that their representation in congress [the swamp ] spent it all ,almost as fast as it came in .

    Fact,

  5. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
    Kathleen Cochranposted 6 days ago

    "robbing the rich"?  And we know they got their riches honestly?

    1. rhamson profile image75
      rhamsonposted 6 days ago in reply to this

      It is the same as saying money is people. And some more important than others.

    2. GA Anderson profile image86
      GA Andersonposted 5 days ago in reply to this

      Do you know that they didn't?

      GA

      1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
        Kathleen Cochranposted 5 days ago in reply to this

        I believe there is some evidence that they didn't - fund managers, major bankers, AIG, Countrywide to name a few.

  6. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
    Kathleen Cochranposted 6 days ago

    Sorry.  The article is actually from the Wall St. Journal editorial board.

  7. Castlepaloma profile image22
    Castlepalomaposted 2 days ago

    When you got US 2/3 of firearms deaths are suicide. So when the US health care gets to be too much suffering, plan B is the gun.

    1. Live to Learn profile image82
      Live to Learnposted 2 days ago in reply to this

      Not after the left takes all of the guns. Then, it's down to a bb gun. We're screwed.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image22
        Castlepalomaposted 2 days ago in reply to this

        Gun withdraw would work if the Government withdrew their gun too. Since your all gun happy in building it all up and more suffering to come.

 
working