RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: What is Trump's Must Keep Promise? - RightNation.US

Jump to content

-----
Four years is going to go by in the blink of an eye, especially given how primary candidates start announcing their campaigns earlier and earlier. I'd expect we'll be in full campaign mode for 2020 by the end of the 2018 mid-terms. It's in the Democrats' best interest to shorten Trump's first term and freeze it in the public consciousness. For that reason, Trump has to make the first two years count. He has to keep certain promises and completely ignore others.

But which are most important? Everyone has their thing they think is priority one, but what will get him re-elected? Here's what I think:

1. Growing the Economy.
2. Immigration
3. Keeping us out of war

I know most people, especially those on the Hard Right side, think it should be immigration, the wall, etc.. But I think that's secondary to the economy. When the economy is good, people generally forget about immigration. You may also argue that controlling immigration is paramount to growing the economy. I think that's arguable, but not a given. What's not arguable is the role of regulation, taxation, trade, and monetary policies. Those are the promises he MUST keep.

The economy was doing worse in 2012 when Obama was running for re-election than it is now, yet Obama beat a successful businessman who was by all accounts competent and qualified. He was also tougher on immigration than Trump--at the time. So, what changed? Trump added an anti-globalism element to his message. It wasn't just pro-border security, it was comprehensively nationalist. That's how he won the poor white vote and even picked up a few minority votes in the process. So, he must keep his promises to renegotiate trade deals, get us out of impending ones, and using the tax code to entice American companies to come back.

Moreover, he has to support raising interest rates. It's risky because increased interest rates will almost assuredly cause a recession, but it's a risk he has to take because the middle class must have an incentive to save, and savings must precede growth. The risk can be mitigated by keeping his promises on regulatory reform. Much of the pain of a recession can be numbed by slashing the compliance and input costs of regulation. The effects of lower taxes for American companies coming back from overseas can be magnified by a freedom from regulations.

The income tax cuts and simplification are a much smaller part of the process, even if they will be the most covered in the media. He doesn't need to get everything he wants on personal income taxes in order to make all the other elements work. The most important aspects on the taxation side are the corporate rates. His challenge, as always, will be the media. They will portray the corporate tax cuts as selling out the working class to help his crony pals in big business. He has to beat them unmercifully on this. He has to get personal. Every reporter who asks him a loaded or leading question about corporate tax cuts must be humiliated and hounded. The working class voters who elected him may not understand why lowering corporate tax rates will help them, but they do understand that the media hate them. If Trump can make it about the media and not the issue, he wins. And we win.

If the economy is booming and manufacturing jobs are coming back, yet the wall is not yet complete, I think he wins in a landslide. The only other way he wins is if we are already in another war by then and voters don't want to change leaders. If that's the case, his second term will be a nightmare. I think we'd all prefer he keep us out of any new wars, get us out of the current ones, and do what the red hats says.

My Mind is Clean
0
  Like

19 Comments On This Entry

Quote

1. Growing the Economy.
2. Immigration
3. Keeping us out of war


YES. And none are mutually exclusive. Rhetoric aside, I don't necessarily expect a TD on any or all.

But, four years hence, I FULLY expect that the answer to "Are you better now than four years ago?" will be a resounding...

"YES".
0

Adam Smithee, on 25 November 2016 - 02:58 PM, said:

Quote

1. Growing the Economy.2. Immigration3. Keeping us out of war
YES. And none are mutually exclusive. Rhetoric aside, I don't necessarily expect a TD on any or all. But, four years hence, I FULLY expect that the answer to "Are you better now than four years ago?" will be a resounding..."YES".

Remember that cute little fuzzy recession we had in 1991? Remember how Bill Clinton and his operatives in the media blew it up into the worst economy in eight hundred years? We're set to have some kind of recession. It's going to happen sooner or later. Like in college football, it's better for it to happen sooner than later. It's got to have some Obama stink on it. But I agree. I think inflation is a bigger worry right now than recession. The Fed had better get its act together and pronto.
0
Yeah , I remember that:"It's the economy stupid"

I hope it eventually comes to that. Probably wont, because ifMSM.
0

Adam Smithee, on 25 November 2016 - 03:53 PM, said:

Yeah , I remember that:"It's the economy stupid"I hope it eventually comes to that. Probably wont, because ifMSM.


All I can say to them is...

0
Regarding point #3: Before the election I was thinking (and don't recall if I said so publicy) that if Trump gets elected then there's a roughly 50-50 chance of him getting us into a hot war, a shooting war, because of something he says or does. I still feel that way and hope that I'm wrong; it largely depends on whether President Trump is more temperate than Candidate Trump.
0

MADGestic, on 25 November 2016 - 08:48 PM, said:

Regarding point #3: Before the election I was thinking (and don't recall if I said so publicy) that if Trump gets elected then there's a roughly 50-50 chance of him getting us into a hot war, a shooting war, because of something he says or does. I still feel that way and hope that I'm wrong; it largely depends on whether President Trump is more temperate than Candidate Trump.

Let's look at the record since Vietnam:

Mild mannered Jimmy Carter talked detente, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. But, he didn't get us into a shooting war.

Tough talking cowboy Reagan, who was going to push the button, presided over the end of detente and the beginning of the end of the Cold War. And he said A LOT. I suppose if we're quibbling, he had Grenada. But, come on.

Kinder, gentler George HW Bush takes us to Kuwait.

Vietnam War protester Bill Clinton takes us all over the place. (A buddy of mine spent the aftermath in agony from the action he saw in the 90s.)

Humble foreign policy/compassionate conservative George W Bush, well....

Hope and Change Obama, well...

It seems to me the cowboys have the best record. (See what I did there?)
0
Yes, my friend, I see what you did; you did nothing to assuage my concerns about intemperate Trump getting us into a shooting war; something that you asserted was one of the Big Three Promises that he "must keep". I notice how very carefully you have slipped away from one of your own premises. That's okay; I hope it doesn't come to pass.
0

MADGestic, on 25 November 2016 - 11:57 PM, said:

Yes, my friend, I see what you did; you did nothing to assuage my concerns about intemperate Trump getting us into a shooting war; something that you asserted was one of the Big Three Promises that he "must keep". I notice how very carefully you have slipped away from one of your own premises. That's okay; I hope it doesn't come to pass.

I'll explain the joke if you'll explain just what the freak you're talking about.
0
I'm terribly sorry; after all this time I thought I could take you seriously. My bad.
0

MADGestic, on 26 November 2016 - 12:48 AM, said:

I'm terribly sorry; after all this time I thought I could take you seriously. My bad.


You can and you can't. But who cares. Fidel is dead! :usa: :chili:
:happydance:
:snoopydance:
0
1. Build the wall

2. Cut taxes

3. Repeal bobo-care

4. Prosecute hilda-beast.
0

Mr. Naron, on 26 November 2016 - 12:57 AM, said:

MADGestic, on 26 November 2016 - 12:48 AM, said:

I'm terribly sorry; after all this time I thought I could take you seriously. My bad.


You can and you can't. But who cares. Fidel is dead! :usa: :chili:
:happydance:
:snoopydance:

Nice use of legacy emoticons; it's encouraging that I can still bring you down to Earth.
0

MADGestic, on 26 November 2016 - 01:40 AM, said:

Mr. Naron, on 26 November 2016 - 12:57 AM, said:

MADGestic, on 26 November 2016 - 12:48 AM, said:

I'm terribly sorry; after all this time I thought I could take you seriously. My bad.
You can and you can't. But who cares. Fidel is dead! :usa: :chili: :happydance: :snoopydance:
Nice use of legacy emoticons; it's encouraging that I can still bring you down to Earth.


Anyway, what was your deal?
0

Mr. Naron, on 25 November 2016 - 09:11 PM, said:

Tough talking cowboy Reagan, who was going to push the button, presided over the end of detente and the beginning of the end of the Cold War. And he said A LOT. I suppose if we're quibbling, he had Grenada. But, come on.


Ah, yes, Grenada, the "everybody gets a ribbon" war that lasted all of about 2-1/2 days and for which more medals were handed out than personnel participating. Heck, I have a Navy Expeditionary Medal for being on board a ship that was 'assigned' to the operation but never actually left port.

New York Times, 1984: MEDALS OUTNUMBER G.I.'S IN GRENADA ASSAULT
0

Adam Smithee, on 26 November 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

Mr. Naron, on 25 November 2016 - 09:11 PM, said:

Tough talking cowboy Reagan, who was going to push the button, presided over the end of detente and the beginning of the end of the Cold War. And he said A LOT. I suppose if we're quibbling, he had Grenada. But, come on.
Ah, yes, Grenada, the "everybody gets a ribbon" war that lasted all of about 2-1/2 days and for which more medals were handed out than personnel participating. Heck, I have a Navy Expeditionary Medal for being on board a ship that was 'assigned' to the operation but never actually left port. New York Times, 1984: MEDALS OUTNUMBER G.I.'S IN GRENADA ASSAULT


Which is why it don't count for our purposes. However, it was dangerous for those who landed. Let's not act like it was a training exercise.
0
Conservative for Supreme Court.
0

BARman29, on 26 November 2016 - 06:36 PM, said:

Conservative for Supreme Court.



I can see that.
0

Mr. Naron, on 26 November 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

... However, it was dangerous for those who landed. Let's not act like it was a training exercise.


It definitely wasn't. In fact, statistically, in terms of annualized Deaths per 100,000 it was worse than even VietNam (Yes, believe it or not).

7,000 troops landed on Grenada (for which 8,600 medals were handed out)(I was one of the 1,600 "other"). 20 casualties. Normalize that to "per 100,000" for statistical purposes and that 20/7,000 becomes 285/100,000.

Compare to VietNam. In the 11 years of the conflict '64-'75 - 58,148 killed amongst the 9,087,000 who served. 58,148/9,087,000 normalizes to 639/100,000, annualized over 11 years becomes 58/100,000.

YES, statistically, Grenada was 4.4x worse than VietNam.

(Well, okay, I'm not going to any bar full of 'Nam vets and pitch that. But the numbers are there.) (And this is where numbers and statistics FAIL: Somehow the 58,000 grieving families from 'Nam might not seem to stack up to the 20 from Grenada. But yet, they do. Because we're not mere statistics.) Let us not forget:

Keven Erin Lundberg, US Navy, age 28
Stephen Leroy Morris, US Navy, age 27
Robert Rudolph Schamberger, US Navy, age 38
Kenneth John Butcher, US Navy, age 27
Jeffrey Richard Scharver, USMC, age 25
John Patrick Giguere, USMC, age 35
Jeb Franklin Seagle, USMC, Age 30
Marlin Roy Maynard, US Army, Age 28
Mark Okamura Yamane, US Army, Age 21
Russell Lee Robinson, US Army, Age 22
Gary Lynn Epps, US Army, Age 29
Keith Joseph Lucas, US Army, Age 26
Randy Eugene Cline, US Army, Age 28
Kevin Joseph Lannon, US Army, Age 22
Sean Patrick Luketina, US Army, Age 24
Michael Francis Ritz, US Army, Age 29
Stephen Eric Slater, US Army, Age 22
Mark Anthony Rademacher, US Army, Age 20
Dinesh Lal Rajbhandary, US Army, Age 19
Philip Sabastian Grenier, US Army, Age 22

YES, of course I listed US Navy first. As a Navy vet, I claim the privileged.
0

Adam Smithee, on 27 November 2016 - 06:12 PM, said:

Mr. Naron, on 26 November 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

... However, it was dangerous for those who landed. Let's not act like it was a training exercise.
It definitely wasn't. In fact, statistically, in terms of annualized Deaths per 100,000 it was worse than even VietNam (Yes, believe it or not).7,000 troops landed on Grenada (for which 8,600 medals were handed out)(I was one of the 1,600 "other"). 20 casualties. Normalize that to "per 100,000" for statistical purposes and that 20/7,000 becomes 285/100,000.Compare to VietNam. In the 11 years of the conflict '64-'75 - 58,148 killed amongst the 9,087,000 who served. 58,148/9,087,000 normalizes to 639/100,000, annualized over 11 years becomes 58/100,000.YES, statistically, Grenada was 4.4x worse than VietNam.(Well, okay, I'm not going to any bar full of 'Nam vets and pitch that. But the numbers are there.) (And this is where numbers and statistics FAIL: Somehow the 58,000 grieving families from 'Nam might not seem to stack up to the 20 from Grenada. But yet, they do. Because we're not mere statistics.) Let us not forget:Keven Erin Lundberg, US Navy, age 28Stephen Leroy Morris, US Navy, age 27Robert Rudolph Schamberger, US Navy, age 38Kenneth John Butcher, US Navy, age 27Jeffrey Richard Scharver, USMC, age 25John Patrick Giguere, USMC, age 35Jeb Franklin Seagle, USMC, Age 30Marlin Roy Maynard, US Army, Age 28Mark Okamura Yamane, US Army, Age 21Russell Lee Robinson, US Army, Age 22Gary Lynn Epps, US Army, Age 29Keith Joseph Lucas, US Army, Age 26Randy Eugene Cline, US Army, Age 28 Kevin Joseph Lannon, US Army, Age 22Sean Patrick Luketina, US Army, Age 24Michael Francis Ritz, US Army, Age 29Stephen Eric Slater, US Army, Age 22Mark Anthony Rademacher, US Army, Age 20Dinesh Lal Rajbhandary, US Army, Age 19Philip Sabastian Grenier, US Army, Age 22YES, of course I listed US Navy first. As a Navy vet, I claim the privileged.


All dead because of Castro.
0
Page 1 of 1

0 user(s) viewing

0 Guests
0 member(s)
0 anonymous member(s)

Search My Blog

Recent Entries

New Blogroll! And...World's Shortest Movie Reviews

Blog Roll
Ace of Spades
National Review
Got News
RealClearPolitics
ZeroHedge
The Federalist
African American Conservatives
Instapundit


World's Shortest Movie Reviews
American Sniper: Bradly Cooper=Best Actor
The Arroyo: Had a Pureflix feel to the acting, but well shot. Great conservative movie.
The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies: As usual, the third installment is the best--having an ending really helped.
The Maze Runner: The perfect metaphor for moving to Detroit.
Dumb and Dumber To: More jokes. Cruder jokes. Someone gets hooked on crack.
Snowpiercer: Joe Biden's idea of heaven. Everyone on the Earth living on a train. Captain America admits he was going to eat Billy Elliot.
Hunger Games: Catching Fire: This is what the world would look like without college football.
Interstellar 2001:A Space Odyssey with a soul. You will get very thirsty, so hydrate before viewing.
When the Game Stands Tall Proves my theory that it's worse when you win.
Guardians of the Galaxy Make a fun adventure movie about space and make a ton of money. Who knew? I mean, besides that Lucas guy.
Blended I don't get the "Billy Madison is genius, Blended is crap" review. It's as good as any other Sandler movie.
Mom's Night Out Hilarious. You will laugh unless you drive a black BMW and watch sunsets at the golf course.
The Amazing Spiderman 2 This series is still better than the Toby McGuire one. I actually cared if Gwen Stacy died.
Odd Thomas I understand the critics who didn't like the uneven tone. Way uneven. Still worth watching on Netflix.
Star Trek Into DarknessGood movie. Please, for the love of tribbles, let old Spock die.
Grown Ups 2 Critics, attack. Whatever you want to say about this one, I'm okay with it.
Thor: The Dark World Still very, very good. But I'd like an entire Thor movie set just in Asgard.