What's different about the Trump presidency.

I am perfectly fine acknowledging that nothing Trump or the Republicans will do will make you happy or thrilled with their progress. You look at a blue sky as though it's raining and gold like it is a turd. I'm fine with that. It's going to be a hard 8 years for you with that attitude though.

Yes. Every modern president before Trump has shown responsible leadership. This means that in many cases they haven't gone along with the base that voted them in. Obama, both Bushes, Clinton, Carter and Reagan all took stances that were against the wishes of their base for the good of the country.

My thesis is that most presidents lead. When their base wants something that isn't reasonable, or that doesn't match reality... most presidents stand up against their base. Of course a president can't defy their base on all issues, but on issues where following the partisan base is irresponsible, most presidents say "no" to the base. There is some leadership skill in this, messaging is important (Reagan and Clinton were both quite good at explaining to their base why what they wanted wasn't best).

I don't see many areas where Trump chooses responsible policy over his base. My belief is that this is a stark difference between Trump and every other president. With any other president, I can give examples of where they chose responsible governance against the wishes of their base.

Where did I say that "nothing Trump or the Republicans will do" will please me? Taking the national debt seriously would impress me. Rolling out an infrastructure program funded by broad-based taxes would thrill me. Acknowledging the existence of climate change would make me very happy.

No, I call a spade a spade when I see it. Trump's administration has little to show when it comes to addressing actual rather than political problems and Trump himself thrives on divisiveness and disarray.

No, because I don't dwell on this **** 24/7. I've got other, better, things to do.

You will have to do better than lip service and provide some examples of what you are talking about.

I have listed twice things that Trump has done that you have opposed. The fact that you disapprove of them as accomplishments does little to change the fact that he has done them.

I think most people that are not dogmatic Democrats or Progressive or whatever you call yourselves these days actually like where the economy is going. They like that they have more money to spend. They like that there are fewer regulations restricting their lives. They like that Trade is becoming equalized. They like that the military is being strengthened. They like the nominees for Supreme Court. They are happy to be out of the Paris Accords. They like that unemployment is at record lows. They like that North Korea may be less dangerous to America. They like that the individual madate for health insurance is gone. The list goes on and on and on.

Do you see any of these as a benefit to America?

I think I am being clear... but I will give some specific examples.

Obama's base wanted Obama to withdraw quickly from Afghanistan, and they wanted Obama to cease deportations. From campaign Obama, you would expect that these things might happen. When Obama became president with the responsibility of governing responsibly, and after talking to his advisers (military and law enforcement) he defied his deepest base on these issues. He decided that in these cases, it was important to govern responsibly... to do what his advisers were telling him was best for the country... rather than to mindlessly follow he emotions of his base.

Bush Jr. did the same with reaching out to Muslims.

Clinton did the same with law enforcement (actually Clinton was frustratingly good at defying his base and them making them think it was their idea all along).

Bush Sr. did the same with taxes.

It is called governing responsibly.. where you put the needs of the country (as you understand them after listening to unbiased experts and thinking hard about what the country needs).. above the your fervent ideological base.

I see examples of thoughtfulness and responsibility from every president. Of course no one defies their base on everything. Every president has times where he sees that what the base wants isn't what is best for the country... and then chooses to do what is best for the country.

Trump is the sole exception to this in modern times.

The examples you site are things that Trump specifically ran his campaign on, anti immigration, tax cuts for the wealthy, anti free trade, etc. You can't ding him for doing what he campaigned on. What I think is different is his attacks on his own Justice Department, the free press and traditional US allies while strongly and repeatedly supporting countries that exemplify the opposite of US ideals.

I was on a business trip with a coworker from Venezuela and we were talking about the crash of what was once one of the most prosperous democracies in South America with a large and well educated middle class. He said that no one saw the danger when Chavez was elected. After all, the legislature and all the institutions were run by moderates. But Chavez slowly eroded that, replaced the moderates, took control of the press, weakened the institutions that supported democracy. Now when there is a food shortage, the Maduro government tells the people that the government ordered lots of food but the opposition stole it before the people could get it and that is the only story they hear so that is what they believe. There is no one left to dispute the official government line.

And I offered a link to a site which lists Obama's accomplishments, which I'm sure you opposed at the time.

I believe that there are fundamental problems looming ahead which Trump won't address and, as is typical, most Americans would rather not hear about. This includes the deficit, infrastructure, and climate change. People who are "happy" about the things you mention would be resistant to our government actually addressing these things — until a hurricane strikes or a bridge collapses or a foreign country calls all our loans.

I don't think simply "making the people happy" is the smartest move. I think awakening people to structural dangers to our nation (not just terrorism and trade deficits) and helping us prepare for challenges is the better course of action. And I'll say once again, Trump's tax cuts were totally irresponsible. If we have a recession you'll know exactly why I say that. We're running up the national credit card and we are losing the means to pay it off.

Fair point Engineer,

But consider all of the brash decisions taken by the Trump administration so far; the family separation fiasco, refugees being turned away at airports, removing DACA with no replacement, or jumping into a trade war.

His campaign bluster is one thing... all presidents make campaign pledges. Usually presidential candidates are more careful with what they say.

As president, could have have governed more responsibly without breaking his campaign pledges. I think he could have.

He could, but he clearly didn't advertise or campaign that he would. The points you mention ("family separation fiasco, refugees being turned away at airports, removing DACA with no replacement, or jumping into a trade war") are exactly what he ran on and he did them the exact way he campaigned he would do them. Do I think those are irresponsible policies? Absolutely. Is he doing exactly has he promised on the campaign trail? Yes.

When you talk about other Presidents resisting calls from their bases to be irrational and violate American ideals, those Presidents never ran on violating those ideals. Trump did. That's definitely different, but it's not like he didn't advertise his intent before anyone cast a vote.

True.

I often find it funny how many were told at the time to not take those things seriously though. No one outside his base (and probably even many inside his base) thought he’d adopt some of the positions he did. Whether or not he said it on the trail. Trump says a lot of stupid **** and often takes two sides of issues and no one ever knows what will happen before it does. And even then it may be jettisoned or reversed at any time.

That is what is different to me. The randomness, the unpredictability, and the reality TV feel of this presidency.

Brash? First, do you actually think Trump got into office and INS suddenly started not allowing children to follow their parents to jail? Did you honestly not pay any attention to how the Obama regime did the same exact thing? Seriously?

Why should there be a replacement for the flawed DACA program?

The "trade war", so far, has led to better deals for America, a boost to the economy and will be an improvement for the American economy in the long run.



You keep thinking these things are irresponsible when they aren't. I know immigration is your thing, but Trump ran as an anti illegal immigration President and won. That means he is going to implement measures to stop illegal immigration.

Twitter is certainly something different with the Trump Presidency. He uses it was too much but I also think he does so to keep his opponents off balance. I think you people keep mistaking Twitter as decree and running with that.

Well he uses Twitter to fire people and announce policies (transgender ban for example) so it kinda is presidential decree and his staff has said as much.

McGentrix,

I am trying to argue that Trump is a unique presidency in that he takes actions to an extent that no other president in recent history would have taken.

Do you agree with this thesis (whether or not you think it is a good thing or not)?

It been said that his actions are like those of someone with onset of some kinds of dementia. Outside of those of Reagan in his last years, I dont have any prsonal recollection of any president showing his kinds of actions in office or in public.
Maybe Wilson and Cleveland, but those are mere recounts through history

How? What actions and why? You are repeating garbage.

What has Trump done that makes him different is the same thing that makes him hated and subject to much negative press: he advances policies that are most controversial because they hit hardest.

1) tariffs on steel and aluminum: the world makes money by selling car parts in the US. Google the per capita rate of car ownership in Europe. Europe has a huge population but much lower per-capita rate of car ownership. Germany is a powerful industrial economy that produces machinery and machine parts sold in the US and Asia, where factories use them to make commodities sold within lucrative US consumer markets. To blockade this global trade system by levying tariffs interferes with a global (imperial) economic system that benefits huge numbers of people throughout the world. US consumption is an integral part of so many businesses, jobs, and investment portfolios globally. Trump has dared to interfere with that, and that is why he is under attack.

2) drug/human trafficking: I hesitate to make this a separate topic from the rest of global trade, since it really is just another part of it. Huge numbers of people are employed worldwide growing, refining, processing, and shipping illegal drugs to be purchased at incredibly high prices by indulgent people with the money to pay for them within the US and Europe. Previous migration policies allowed people to be trafficked as mules, prostitutes, and for other kinds of illegal work with relative impunity. Catch-and-release policies mean that a trafficker can send a mother and child through the border with drug condoms in their stomachs and if they get caught, they'll just be sent back to return the drugs to be re-swallowed and try again. What's more, the cartels can afford to send lots and lots of similar mother-child pairs as decoys to draw the attention of limited border police, so Trump's policy changes have obviously threatened the trafficking industry or else there would not be so much investment in demonizing the administration with emotional journalism about family separation, etc.


3) abortion: Republicans have always had a pro-life segment but the leaders have always compromised on this issue in order to prevent war with pro-choice. Now that pro-life has ramped up its game and there are Supreme Court seats in play, the war is absolutely on. Pro-life will do anything they can to protect abortion, including pushing to impeach or otherwise disband the administration. This is because removing the consequences from sexual intercourse satisfies many lucrative interests simultaneously including but maybe not limited to: the sex industry (including porn), all the industries that make money on people dating, renting hotel rooms for sexual encounters, etc.; AS WELL AS those political interests that are concerned about population growth, especially among people who can't afford to have children. There are people who desperately want to prevent unwanted pregnancies being carried to term because they don't want to deal with orphanages, etc. This is a little-discussed but huge issue that causes even the strongest believers in pro-life to remain quiet when it comes to actually pursuing a policy agenda to stop abortion. Trump seems to be different in this regard because he has stood by pro-life Christians as well as choosing a Catholic running mate and not shying away from potential Supreme Court nominees who would fail to abort any anti-abortion case law as it gestates.

So Trump is basically different than previous presidents because he has not shied away from taking on all these incredibly controversial challenges simultaneously. Even Lincoln tried to take it slow with abolishing slavery to avoid triggering an overwhelming opposition. Trump's presidency is amazing because it has shown how powerful the forces are who seek to protect global trade, global drug/human trafficking, and abortion along with all the sexual culture and business it facilitates. We may be seeing the 21st equivalent of the protestant reformation of the selling of indulgences in pre-modern Europe. Even if Trump is somehow defeated, there will be others who follow. Ironically, the strength of conviction and will to reform is of similar strength to Islam; ironic considering this administration seems to be against Islam, or maybe just the terrorism it's become associated with.

I disagreed with Hitler at first, but I supported his death camps after.

Do you understand that in the modern developed world, drug pushing has replaced death camps as the means of exterminating 'surplus population?'

Now ask yourself which party is more supportive of illegal drug trafficking and pushing?

the antichrist is a disgrace not only to USA but the world.tune in to cnn..Trump supporters belong to a cult, a disgrace not only to the GOP [the Republican Party] but to all America.