The successes of President Donald Trump and their under-reporting by the media (please, no flaming)

[alhoon]

https://markets.businessinsider.com/...-12-1028745801

Wow... That is also one of Trump's successes. Yes, he got a good situation from Obama, but he kept the good streak going for 3 years on top of Obama's 7 years of recovery.
Unlike some of his other successes, I believe Trump's efforts (to make his billionaire friends richer and make the Swamp deeper and murkier) actually helped.

Still, I am worried how this will all play out in the future as to get the meteoric raise of USA's economy Trump removed the brakes from the tram which is awesome when you want it to accelerate but it could well lead to disaster when the bad years come and you have no breaks. But so far, he did well. Let's hope whomever is the next PotUS (Trump or democrat) will put back the breaks before it's too late.
You can't keep a good streak going forever.

[PointOfViewGun]

https://markets.businessinsider.com/...-12-1028745801

Wow... That is also one of Trump's successes. Yes, he got a good situation from Obama, but he kept the good streak going for 3 years on top of Obama's 7 years of recovery.
Unlike some of his other successes, I believe Trump's efforts (to make his billionaire friends richer and make the Swamp deeper and murkier) actually helped.

Still, I am worried how this will all play out in the future as to get the meteoric raise of USA's economy Trump removed the brakes from the tram which is awesome when you want it to accelerate but it could well lead to disaster when the bad years come and you have no breaks. But so far, he did well. Let's hope whomever is the next PotUS (Trump or democrat) will put back the breaks before it's too late.
You can't keep a good streak going forever.

So, Trump didn't royally screwed up and we're supposed to give him credit for a situation that depends on many factors. Bravo...

[alhoon]

So, Trump didn't royally screwed up and we're supposed to give him credit for a situation that depends on many factors. Bravo...

Didn't screw up yet and we're supposed to acknowledge that along the many factors, his policies were important factors.
They will probably be important factors once the breaks he removed to speed up the raise are needed to break the fall once the situation turns.

[Ludicus]

So.. we're supposed to give him credit for a situation that depends on many factors. Bravo...

You see, Trump is a man of success, great achievements and funny jokes.

[alhoon]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...jfqg463lFX5BBY

While this deal is not perfect, it is better than nothing and even if partially enforced by the Chinese (I bet they will use some loopholes or something), things would be better than if Trump never got them on the table.
But will it stay? We will see. As things are right now (and they may change in a week) this is a success for Trump ... that was under-reported by the media.

[alhoon]

https://www.langerresearch.com/wp-co...alElection.pdf

Trump has succeeded to practically reach most of the Democratic contenders except Biden. Considering that I don't believe democrats would elect a Republican-in-the-democrats to lead them (Bloomberg), it is an astounding success by Trump, and it's based on the economy.

[PointOfViewGun]

Trump has succeeded to practically reach most of the Democratic contenders except Biden.

What do you mean?

[alhoon]

I mean that Trump (in likely voters) has caught up or nearly caught up with most Democratic contenders for the nomination, except Biden that has still a solid lead over Trump. That's a huge boost since a few months ago that he was 5-10% from most of them.

[PointOfViewGun]

I mean that Trump (in likely voters) has caught up or nearly caught up with most Democratic contenders for the nomination, except Biden that has still a solid lead over Trump. That's a huge boost since a few months ago that he was 5-10% from most of them.

Sanders have been polling over Trump for almost always. He was even winning in a Fox News poll back in September. I take it you haven't checked a single poll...

[Lord Thesaurian]

The organizers say the events are run by the book and intended to promote economic development in inner cities. But the group behind the cash giveaways is registered as a 501(c)3 charitable organization. One leading legal expert on nonprofit law said the arrangement raises questions about the group’s tax-exempt status, because it does not appear to be vetting the recipients of its money for legitimate charitable need.
"Charities are required to spend their money on charitable and educational activities,” said Marcus Owens, a former director of the Exempt Organizations Division at the Internal Revenue Service who is now in private practice at the law firm Loeb & Loeb. “It's not immediately clear to me how simply giving money away to people at an event is a charitable act.”
Asked about the legality of the giveaways in a brief phone interview, the Urban Revitalization Coalition’s CEO, Darrell Scott, said that most gifts were between $300 and $500, and that the group mandates that anyone who receives over $600 fills out a W-9 form in order to ensure compliance with tax law. He did not respond to follow-up questions about how the giveaways were structured and whether they met the legal standard for a charitable act.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...veaways-108072

Looks like the Trump campaign is desperate enough to start attempting to buy support outright. The thin veil that was applied to the trade war subsidies funneled to red districts has apparently been abandoned in favor of more direct means. I guess buying votes and facing no real repercussions counts as a success.

[Cope]

Hey, that sounds like what the Democrats want to do. With other people's money.

[Phier]

Republicans better be on the look out for voter fraud, as thats going to be the game plan IMO in a few key states like Florida.

[Coughdrop addict]

Republicans better be on the look out for voter fraud, as thats going to be the game plan IMO in a few key states like Florida.

I assume you have proof of this that Trump's own investigation somehow missed? Is it in the secret pizza dungeon next to Obama's Kenyan birth certificate?

In all seriousness, most on the right long ago fell into conspiracy theory thinking: a lack of evidence just counts as more evidence. If no evidence of voter fraud/child rape dungeons/Kenyan birth certificates/ect can be found, it's only because the coverup is effective enough to fool everyone except them. Only they see the truth behind the facade, and any evidence to the contrary has been faked to discredit them.

[irontaino]

I assume you have proof of this that Trump's own investigation somehow missed? Is it in the secret pizza dungeon next to Obama's Kenyan birth certificate?

It must be with all those millions of illegals that supposedly voted and caused Trump to lose the popular vote. If you point out the complete lack of evidence, you're just a Deep State Stooge, obviously

In all seriousness, most on the right long ago fell into conspiracy theory thinking: a lack of evidence just counts as more evidence. If no evidence of voter fraud/child rape dungeons/Kenyan birth certificates/ect can be found, it's only because the coverup is effective enough to fool everyone except them. Only they see the truth behind the facade, and any evidence to the contrary has been faked to discredit them.

The globalists never counted on random YouTuber putting grainy footage and spooky music on a poorly produced video. That threw a wrench in their whole plans.

[alhoon]

Sanders have been polling over Trump for almost always. He was even winning in a Fox News poll back in September. I take it you haven't checked a single poll...

You didn't read my source, did you? Yes, Sanders polls over Trump by... 3%. It was 10%+
Now they're within the margin of error.

Republicans better be on the look out for voter fraud, as thats going to be the game plan IMO in a few key states like Florida.

Wow... those numbers are another success for Trump that I have not seen elsewhere in the media.
However the "Race Relations" seems iffy to me Phier. Are you sure this is a serious poll and not some skewed, politically motivated thing? While I did expect people to feel more comfortable over race relations since 2017 when there was doom-and-gloom, I didn't expect it to practically double.

[Akar]

Republicans better be on the look out for voter fraud, as thats going to be the game plan IMO in a few key states like Florida.

Yes because Republicans are notorious for answering polls based on facts rather than party politics and feeeeeelings. Let's look at some examples, shall we?

Here's the opinion of Democrats vs Republicans on Syrian airstrikes under the Obama admin. vs under the Trump. admin.

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.8ad12d500fe4

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

How about Republican and Democrats opinions of Vladimir Putin once Trump starts openly Putin during the election? There's even better graphs and examples within the source article.

Source: https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/1...s-over-russia/

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Here's one that perfectly highlights the hypocrisy of Republican voters. Republicans have a much higher view of Democratic policies if they think they're coming from Trump, whereas Independents are uninfluenced by Trump's stances.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/14/o...publicans.html

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

How about gun control, that's something Republicans are always consistent about, right? Nope. As soon as Obama took office Republicans suddenly hated gun control.

Source: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...or-gun-policy/

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Republicans literally dislike and distrust colleges now because Trump's uneducated and incompetent ass was elected to office. How can anyone think that a college education is a BAD thing to have? Well, leave it to Republicans.

Source: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...e-preparation/

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

It's downright laughable that anyone would try to prove a point about electoral consensus or satisfaction on any issue from a poll on Republicans, conducted by the most Republican and right-wing biased media platform in America. Please source your polls or at least back them up with an argument rather than baseless fearmongering and speculation of election tampering from Democrats. Do people seriously still believe this bogus narrative that electoral interference in 2016 and onward was conducted on behalf of and for the benefit of the Democrats?! Absurd.

[PointOfViewGun]

You didn't read my source, did you? Yes, Sanders polls over Trump by... 3%. It was 10%+
Now they're within the margin of error.

Another poll from Frox News from January puts Sanders with a 6 point lead over Trump. So, no, Sanders continuously polled over Trump with more than an margin of error percentage.

[Cope]

It's downright laughable that anyone would try to prove a point about electoral consensus or satisfaction on any issue from a poll on Republicans, conducted by the most Republican and right-wing biased media platform in America. Please source your polls or at least back them up with an argument rather than baseless fearmongering and speculation of election tampering from Democrats. Do people seriously still believe this bogus narrative that electoral interference in 2016 and onward was conducted on behalf of and for the benefit of the Democrats?! Absurd.

The poll was conducted by Gallup and was not limited to Republican/Trump voters. The concerns you raised vis-a-vis partisan hypocrisy are not confined to Republican/conservative voters either. Partisan bias is a bipartisan problem.

It is common in political discourse to hear politicians and pundits contrast the biased opinions of their political opponents with their own side’s impartial view of the facts. Our meta analysis suggests instead that partisan bias is a bipartisan problem, and that we may simply recognize bias in others better than we see it in ourselves (Pronin, 2007)...

Using different standards to evaluate information when it supports your political views than when it challenges them represents an obvious problem in terms of normative standards of judgment. Still, it can be argued that in terms of individual self-interest, a tendency to adjust one’s political views to fit with norms of important social or cultural groups makes good sense (Kahan, 2013; Kahan et al., 2012).

[Akar]

The quote "Our meta analysis suggests instead that partisan bias is a bipartisan problem, and that we may simply recognize bias in others better than we see it in ourselves" definitely echos true but nevertheless I don't think it disqualifies my primary point that Republicans are far more likely to flip flop on issues depending on who is holding them.

[Cope]

The quote "Our meta analysis suggests instead that partisan bias is a bipartisan problem, and that we may simply recognize bias in others better than we see it in ourselves" definitely echos true but nevertheless I don't think it disqualifies my primary point that Republicans are far more likely to flip flop on issues depending on who is holding them.

It isn't clear whether liberals (Democrats) or conservatives (Republicans) are more likely to be hypocritically partisan. From the study cited in the NYT article you presented:

And we doubt that our results unique to the Republican party, though they may be unique to this particular historical moment. Given the right set of circumstances—a leader of the Democratic party who began to embrace traditionally conservative principles—we would expect to see similar results on that side of the aisle. However, until such a person arrives, we are left to test these theories using the positions of Donald J. Trump, who happens to be the leader of the Republican party and holds many views with all of the permanence of cotton candy.

From the Durham Unversity study:

Mean overall partisan bias was robust (r = .245) and there wasstrong support for the symmetry hypothesis: liberals (r = .235) and conservatives (r = .255)showed no difference in mean levels of bias across studies. Moderator analyses reveal thispattern to be consistent across a number of different methodological variations and politicaltopics

It is unsurprising that the New York Times would emphasise the parts of the data which affirmed its liberal (anti-Trump) leanings in much the same way as Fox News cherry picked parts of the Gallup poll which affirmed its conservative perspective. Nevertheless, one of the more interesting aspects of the Barber and Pope study (I admit that I only skim read it it) was that its findings opened the possibility that Trump voters were less ideologically puritanical than liberals.