-
@catogrande said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@catogrande said in US Politics:
@frank said in US Politics:
Which president let China into the WTO?
President Bill Clinton
U.S. President Bill Clinton called Beijing's accession to the WTO “the most significant opportunity that we have had to create positive change in China since the 1970s” and argued that it would “commit China to play by the rules of the international trading system.”It's awesome!!!!
And on the other hand Trump was lauded by some for reaching out to North Korea. While that was a worthwhile attempt it’s not been anything of a measurable success.
My point here is not to praise or lambast either, more that such moves should be viewed by what they were trying to achieve. Was that worthwhile?
'One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.' — Milton Friedman
In the long run that is the only measure, but if that was the only criteria at the point of making important decisions then there would be little risk taking, perhaps no reaching out to traditional opponents. Many big decisions have been bad ones in hindsight and really Friedman’s quote is entirely based on hindsight.
Hard to judge impact without evidence.
Bill Clinton was singularly the worst thing to happen to the working man in the USA.
Well, like that’s just your opinion, man. Apologies to the Dude. I’m no fan of Slick Willy but that’s a long bow you’re drawing.
Not really. Plenty of analysis showing decline in economic mobility, high-wage manufacturing job losses and wage stagnation resulting from NAFTA, the >$100 billion turn around in Mexico US trade, etc.
Trump in my estimation will be remembered for lowering the office, the attempted insurrection and not much else. Unaligned political scholars (if such a thing exists in 30 years) will discuss how he was a victim of the most contrived and sustained partisan media attack.
To my mind that is true but is only a fraction of the picture. My feeling is that Trump will go down in history as the worst president ever.
On the basis of what?
-
Basically on the basis you outlined yourself in regard to how he will be remembered which will be media led and partly due to recency bias as I think maybe you suffer with regard to Clinton.
You will note I did not say I thought he was the worst President ever, just that I felt he would go down as the worst ever.
There was little of note that went right during his term and much that went wrong, mainly in terms of how divisive and vitriolic the political scene became. While this is not solely down to him, it seems to have hit its nadir during his presidency and he will own that. The bombastic nature of many of his claims, the repeated lies, the general non-presidential behaviour, the Capitol riots. All of these things will go down in history, whereas the people who adore him will die out.
The record books show win, lose or draw, not how the game was played.
-
@catogrande said in US Politics:
There was little of note that went right during his term and much that went wrong, mainly in terms of how divisive and vitriolic the political scene became. While this is not solely down to him, it seems to have hit its nadir during his presidency and he will own that
Sums up Obama
The bombastic nature of many of his claims, the repeated lies, the general non-presidential behaviour, the Capitol riots.
Sounds like Trump
-
@catogrande said in US Politics:
Basically on the basis you outlined yourself in regard to how he will be remembered which will be media led and partly due to recency bias as I think maybe you suffer with regard to Clinton.
You will note I did not say I thought he was the worst President ever, just that I felt he would go down as the worst ever.
There was little of note that went right during his term and much that went wrong, mainly in terms of how divisive and vitriolic the political scene became. While this is not solely down to him, it seems to have hit its nadir during his presidency and he will own that. The bombastic nature of many of his claims, the repeated lies, the general non-presidential behaviour, the Capitol riots. All of these things will go down in history, whereas the people who adore him will die out.
The record books show win, lose or draw, not how the game was played.
The bolded bit: not sure we're there yet.
-
@voodoo said in US Politics:
In very simplistic terms, I thought Trump did a fair bit better than expected on foreign policy, and about as awful as expected on domestic stuff.
Tough gig, but being a piston wristed gibbon doesn't help your profile.
I agree with this, partly because I kinda expected WW III to be a likely outcome of a Trump Presidency.
In the end he wasn't quite as much of a disaster as I expected.
In contrast, Biden is waay worse than I thought he could be.
-
@voodoo said in US Politics:
In very simplistic terms, I thought Trump did a fair bit better than expected on foreign policy, and about as awful as expected on domestic stuff.
Tough gig, but being a piston wristed gibbon doesn't help your profile.
A fair summation imo. Long term perception may be a different thing though.
-
@victor-meldrew said in US Politics:
@catogrande said in US Politics:
There was little of note that went right during his term and much that went wrong, mainly in terms of how divisive and vitriolic the political scene became. While this is not solely down to him, it seems to have hit its nadir during his presidency and he will own that
Sums up Obama
Yep, but Obama was more measured in his rhetoric plus he had the media onside and he knew it.
The bombastic nature of many of his claims, the repeated lies, the general non-presidential behaviour, the Capitol riots.
Sounds like Trump
Yep again.
-
@booboo said in US Politics:
@voodoo said in US Politics:
In very simplistic terms, I thought Trump did a fair bit better than expected on foreign policy, and about as awful as expected on domestic stuff.
Tough gig, but being a piston wristed gibbon doesn't help your profile.
I agree with this, partly because I kinda expected WW III to be a likely outcome of a Trump Presidency.
In the end he wasn't quite as much of a disaster as I expected.
In contrast, Biden is waay worse than I thought he could be.
Liberal media did quite a number on you (perhaps).
-
@frank said in US Politics:
@booboo said in US Politics:
@voodoo said in US Politics:
In very simplistic terms, I thought Trump did a fair bit better than expected on foreign policy, and about as awful as expected on domestic stuff.
Tough gig, but being a piston wristed gibbon doesn't help your profile.
I agree with this, partly because I kinda expected WW III to be a likely outcome of a Trump Presidency.
In the end he wasn't quite as much of a disaster as I expected.
In contrast, Biden is waay worse than I thought he could be.
Liberal media did quite a number on you (perhaps).
I dunno, sounded quite a balanced POV to be fair.
-
@catogrande said in US Politics:
Yep, but Obama was more measured in his rhetoric plus he had the media onside and he knew it.
It was certainly reported in a more measured way.
IMHO the media's reporting of Trump was the key factor is whipping up division in the US. The doctored video, selective quoting, pro-Democrat social media censorship and down-right lies have caused huge damage to US politics.
Perhaps now people have seen Biden for the weak incompetent he is, rather than the sane, sensible POTUS the media projected, the voters will start questioning media portrayals of politicians and force some change in reporting. But how ironic would it be if the media's "reporting" of Trump helps him get re-elected in 2024?
-
@catogrande said in US Politics:
@frank said in US Politics:
@booboo said in US Politics:
@voodoo said in US Politics:
In very simplistic terms, I thought Trump did a fair bit better than expected on foreign policy, and about as awful as expected on domestic stuff.
Tough gig, but being a piston wristed gibbon doesn't help your profile.
I agree with this, partly because I kinda expected WW III to be a likely outcome of a Trump Presidency.
In the end he wasn't quite as much of a disaster as I expected.
In contrast, Biden is waay worse than I thought he could be.
Liberal media did quite a number on you (perhaps).
I dunno, sounded quite a balanced POV to be fair.
Drinking the kool-aid too I see
-
I agree that the reporting was a lot more friendly, but also I struggle to remember much from Obama that was anywhere near as inflammatory as some of the stuff Trump said at his rallies and in general. Mind you, I struggle to remember much about Obama. He was something of a Nebbish President for me. Lauded for being the first POC President but not much else.
-
@bones said in US Politics:
@catogrande said in US Politics:
@frank said in US Politics:
@booboo said in US Politics:
@voodoo said in US Politics:
In very simplistic terms, I thought Trump did a fair bit better than expected on foreign policy, and about as awful as expected on domestic stuff.
Tough gig, but being a piston wristed gibbon doesn't help your profile.
I agree with this, partly because I kinda expected WW III to be a likely outcome of a Trump Presidency.
In the end he wasn't quite as much of a disaster as I expected.
In contrast, Biden is waay worse than I thought he could be.
Liberal media did quite a number on you (perhaps).
I dunno, sounded quite a balanced POV to be fair.
Drinking the kool-aid too I see
It’s only kool-ade if it’s to do with MSM. If it’s from nut-job online echo chambers that’s valid research.
-
@catogrande I think the most pertinent point is I'm a mong when it comes to spelling kool-ade.
-
@catogrande said in US Politics:
I struggle to remember much from Obama that was anywhere near as inflammatory as some of the stuff Trump said at his rallies and in general.
It wasn't as bombastic (a Trump supporter would, of course, say Trump was just more honest) but was as equally hostile towards those who didn't vote for him or who disagreed with his "progressive" politics.
By a big margin, the worst US president in my lifetime. Preening, weak on foreign policy, wedded to dogma rather than pragmatism - and possibly even more divisive than Trump
-
@frank said in US Politics:
Bill Clinton - the corporate democrat that he was and his subsequent
pay-offs by them to his "foundation". I think we all know his
motives.I think Clinton did OK overall. Putting aside his obvious sexual peccadillos, he was strong on Foreign policy, free trade and the economy in general. He didn't use divisiveness as a political tool like Obama & Trump did and tried to reach out across the political divide.
His big black mark was the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act and the poor financial services regulation that ensued - though Dubya shares the blame for that too.
-
I had to look up Glass-Steagal, I just knew it as financial de-regulation at the time. I don’t know if you’re aware but the BoE have satellite offices around the country, doing localised reconnaissance work, providing guidance and what have you. I’ve been to a few of their presentations, many of them around 2008/9 🙄
Anyway, the point I’m getting to is that following de-regulation and the intertwining of retail and investment banking, the ridiculously low levels of liquidity imposed upon the US banks was frightening. As opposed to the UK imposed limits which were…
… non-existent! Basically it was an old boys club agreement to “do the right thing”.
Anyway, de-regulation worked very well. For a while…
-
@catogrande said in US Politics:
Anyway, de-regulation worked very well. For a while…
There was actually more regulation than ever before - just that it was utterly ineffective and, from experience, done by people who knew bugger-all about the finance business. Was in Citigroup at the time. But hey, why worry when you're raking billions in tax from Banker's bonuses, getting campaign contributions and you have Basel III to console you?
Many, many people were warning what would happen but were ignored.
As opposed to the UK imposed limits which were…
The financial idiots - lauded in the UK at the time as geniuses - were simply borrowing cheap money and selling it on as mortgages in an inflated property market. It was great fun until the supply of cheap credit dried up.
(The UK had the advantage of Northern Rock as a warning. Gordon the Moron effectively ignored it)
US Politics