Trump's Presidency- Good or Bad?

What does everyone think about the controversial President Trump and his policies?

Most of what hes proposed i disagree with, but to be honest what has he even accomplished since his inauguration? As far as I can remember all that's been enacted was the travel ban. Other than that I think he's just a man child in office, but most of the people on the fellow left think he's this racist, misogynist puppet of Putin's which is just really far fetched and stupid.

The Border Wall is absolutely ridiculous. Its far too expensive and won't even stop the majority of illegal immigrants/trafficking. Besides, illegal immigrants provide cheap labor for our cheap goods. I know that sounds awful, but its the truth

I never really minded having the wall, and deporting illegal immigrants that commit crimes. However I never thought for a second that building the wall would even be feasible let alone possible. I do like a lot of his stances on issues, I just think the american public got too used to the mellow tones of Obama which many of us grew up under. I also never thought that he would be an effective president, considering how complex and difficult the job can be. To be an effective american president you have to be both diplomatic and strong. Unfortunately Trump is only strong, and lacks the legal knowledge. Despite all this, I trust him more than Hillary for president. There's no telling what kind of catastrophes that immoral psychopathic women is capable of..

I feel like it's much to early to say, he's only been president for a little over 6 months, as opposed to the 4-8 years we usually see... But judging by how things have been going so far, I have a feeling things are gonna be loaded with drama, but and rather uneventful, as he keeps failing to enact his planned policies, that wall is never gonna get built (way too expensive for almost no payoff), and he's always gonna bet butting heads with both right and left, nothing he's done so far has really had much of an impact on America or the world yet as far as I can tell, (save for all the rioting and such against him, but that's not really his fault)

The way I see it, I don't think much is really gonna happen with him, and he'll just end up being a big ol' "meh" of a president. But hey, we'll see how the rest of his term goes.

Crazy Boris wrote:I feel like it's much to early to say, he's only been president for a little over 6 months, as opposed to the 4-8 years we usually see... But judging by how things have been going so far, I have a feeling things are gonna be loaded with drama, but and rather uneventful, as he keeps failing to enact his planned policies, that wall is never gonna get built (way too expensive for almost no payoff), and he's always gonna bet butting heads with both right and left, nothing he's done so far has really had much of an impact on America or the world yet as far as I can tell, (save for all the rioting and such against him, but that's not really his fault)

The way I see it, I don't think much is really gonna happen with him, and he'll just end up being a big ol' "meh" of a president. But hey, we'll see how the rest of his term goes.

I agree, the Democrats like to throw sissy fits and make a fuss about everything he does it seems. I think the wall is a very old school way of thinking. I'm pretty sure in the near future with some sort of technology we'd inevitably have some sort of cheaper more effective conclusion for the immigrants that commit crimes. I highly doubt what he promised during the campaign would actually get done, except for more jobs. I think what is most going to define his legacy is if this whole shenanigans with North Korea blows up even more than it has already, how he would handle could potentially change the world drastically. Also If we can come to some sort of peace with Russia that would be a great thing, but the Democrats would undoubtedly throw a hissyfit about that. Its as if the whole Russia investigation thing was just a ploy to make improving relations an impossible task. Poisoning the well

Niccolo Machiavelli wrote: If we can come to some sort of peace with Russia that would be a great thing, but the Democrats would undoubtedly throw a hissyfit about that.

Why would the Democrats be upset about peace with Russia?

Why would the Democrats be upset about peace with Russia?[/quote]

Many members of congress like to portray Putin as a menacing threat to the world. Which may or may not be true because at the end of the day everyone is after power. However, every time Trump makes a comment on Putin, the establishment likes to make it seem as if there's something wrong with what he says. His obvious pro-Russian stance during the election seems to be the root that led to this whole investigation. I highly doubt that even if the Russians did hack the election that it would be on a large enough scale to actually sway it. To me it just seems like a dangerous ploy to destroy the reputation and credibility of the president, or all just smoke in mirrors. I believe that its the men in black suits running everything behind the scenes that are puppeting our congressmen, they're interests in eastern Europe are too precious to let go of; making it impossible for peace between the two countries.

For me, I'm not a huge fan of his but with on how he's been acting I feel like he's going to be an ineffective president. His travel ban has been shot down several times so likely that's not going to go far. Plus there is the whole matter of midterms, for me that will really only tell me on effective he's going to be. So I say overall to early to call.

Niccolo Machiavelli wrote:Many members of congress like to portray Putin as a menacing threat to the world. Which may or may not be true because at the end of the day everyone is after power. However, every time Trump makes a comment on Putin, the establishment likes to make it seem as if there's something wrong with what he says. His obvious pro-Russian stance during the election seems to be the root that led to this whole investigation. I highly doubt that even if the Russians did hack the election that it would be on a large enough scale to actually sway it. To me it just seems like a dangerous ploy to destroy the reputation and credibility of the president, or all just smoke in mirrors. I believe that its the men in black suits running everything behind the scenes that are puppeting our congressmen, they're interests in eastern Europe are too precious to let go of; making it impossible for peace between the two countries.

Yeah, that seems like a believable argument.

Very much against him, but I don't think he's some evil monster, just an incompetent man child.

I don't know about the policy stuff, but I do know that Trump is a shame for the overall image of the US. I don't like or dislike him - though everyone is mocking him hard around here. Colleagues, family, the media, pretty much everyone just laughs at him and still can't believe he is the president of a superpower.

Trump's accomplishments:
limited travel ban
Froze federal hiring in executive branch
imposed new regulations on lobbying
Dakota Access and Keystone pipeline's Approval
Pulls CDC out of EPA conference
EPA cut: 513 mil state and tribal assistance, 193 mil climate programs, 109 mil environment programs and management
The Clean Air act no longer applies to carbon emissions
EPA can’t overrule federal permit decisions unless the permit is in clear violation of establish law
5000 new border patrol
defunding sanctuary cities + Kate's Law
Limited Syrian Cease Fire
Reconquest of Mosul + Encirclement of Raqqa
Pulled out of Paris Climate Agreement
Weapon sales to Taiwan and Saudi Arabia
detente with Russia

Overall, the economy is great, ISIS is on the run and we haven't had a terrorist attack since he took office. If things keep going this way then he will be re-elected.

DavidlVofGeorgia wrote:Trump's accomplishments:
limited travel ban
Froze federal hiring in executive branch
imposed new regulations on lobbying
Dakota Access and Keystone pipeline's Approval
Pulls CDC out of EPA conference
EPA cut: 513 mil state and tribal assistance, 193 mil climate programs, 109 mil environment programs and management
The Clean Air act no longer applies to carbon emissions
EPA can’t overrule federal permit decisions unless the permit is in clear violation of establish law
5000 new border patrol
defunding sanctuary cities + Kate's Law
Limited Syrian Cease Fire
Reconquest of Mosul + Encirclement of Raqqa
Pulled out of Paris Climate Agreement
Weapon sales to Taiwan and Saudi Arabia
detente with Russia

Overall, the economy is great, ISIS is on the run and we haven't had a terrorist attack since he took office. If things keep going this way then he will be re-elected.

Half of those things are bad and the other things weren't directly caused by his leadership. The collapsing of ISIS was already happening and him moving into the White House wasn't going to contribute or change that. Cutting the EPA and the clean air act is a bad idea for the environment and companies know they're rich enough to find a more efficient way to make more money if limiting their pollution really hurts them that much. It's 2017 not 1917. Plus the Paris Climate Accords had reasonable goals and it was stupid to pull out. What's wrong with keeping the planet healthy for the children and grandchildren who'll inherent it? The Dakota access pipeline is an environmental nightmare and HAS ALREADY SPILLED, not to mention it's on tribal land. The limiting of lobbying is complete BS as he still lets lobbyists bribe congress and other government members. The man claimed he'd drain the swamp yet put members from Exxon and Goldman Sachs on his cabinet for pete's sake. That's not draining the swamp that's increasing it. The economy is only great because Obama got us out of the recession and there's no way it wasn't going to be doing well unless Trump screws up harder than he already has.

Also, funny how on his travel ban he didn't include Saudi Arabia, a known funding of terrorists and the country that gave us the pilots that flew into the world trade center. Why do you think he failed to include them too? Because of oil and money.

I have researched climate change extensively which is why I remain a skeptic. Here are some articles from NASA and Climate.gov that support skepticism and not blindly accepting lobbyists. https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/whats-hottest-earths-ever-been https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/what%E2%80%99s-hottest-earth-has-been-%E2%80%9Clately%E2%80%9D
Timeline of evolution: https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://static.bbci.co.uk/naturelibrary/3.1.41/images/timeline2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/history_of_the_earth&h=478&w=976&tbnid=oMLk22TSX8F-CM:&vet=1&tbnh=103&tbnw=211&docid=rozLZ3KzwxXVTM&usg=__-id6mK7f4Cfh27NiMITwCdq_9fk=&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwiykK3HoJrRAhWs34MKHXRkAaMQ9QEIHjAA

3,600°F. That was the mean global temperature from the earth’s earliest days when it was still colliding with planetesimals. Scientists estimate that the earth was 2,300 K (3,680°F) when it collided with the moon.
Even after collisions stopped, and the planet had tens of millions of years to cool, surface temperatures were more than 400°F.

-"But humans can't actually survive these temperatures?  Why mention it?"
Because it debunks the climatological "Point of no Return”. The earth was able to cool itself from a far higher temperature than humans could ever imagine. The notion of the "Point of no Return" is anti-science, contradicts the history of the earth, and is only mentioned to create hysteria.

-What about the notion that humans have warmed the earth more than the earth has ever warmed itself? False. From 600 myo to 800 myo, during the Neoproterozoic era, the earth had sea ice down to the equator. Geologists reason that volcanic activity and a lack of rainfall brought the earth out of this ice age to average global temperatures of 90°F. (The average today is 60°F.)
According to Geologists, the earth was 100% responsible for this massive mean temperature rise without human activity. This evidence reaffirms the idea that natural global warming is far more devastating than human activity.

-"Ok. So the earth is a dick to itself and the point of no return is nonsense.  But what is the warmest since after the dinosaurs?"
73°F. (Remember the average today is almost 60°F.) That was the average temperature during the PETM or Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum which occurred 56 myo. During the PETM, the poles were free of ice and palm trees and crocodiles lived above the Arctic Circle. Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that the Mesozoic era —the age of dinosaurs- saw even higher mean temperatures.
There are many questions that Climate Science can't yet answer.

If the polar ice caps are melting then why is Antarctic sea ice reaching a new record maximum?

(https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/antarctic_seaice_sept19_1.jpg) Why is only the northern polar ice cap melting?


We know the world was much warmer before mankind than it is projected to be. How did our ancestors thrive and what can we learn from them?

If the world was able to cool down from the Hadean period, late Neoproterozoic era, and PETM then isn't the climatologist "Point of no Return" a blatant lie?

If climatology is an exact science then what is the effect of 1 ton of CO2 or CH4 on global temperatures? 2 tons?

Why can't humans adapt to the conditions of a warmer world?

What percent of climate change is caused by humans?

If the #1 cause of global warming is livestock discharge then why do regulations target fossil fuels corporations? Isn’t this counterproductive?

Climate science cannot answer any of these questions, yet. The public looks to climatologists as the ultimate arbiter of public policy but they are not gods. The mean temperature has not been warming for 15 years. Cooling in the pacific, which was not predicted by any of the computer models, has balanced out the deterioration of North Pole sea ice.
The IPCC's latest report shows that in the next 100 years sea levels will only rise by 2 meters and the temperature will rise by 4-7 C and then go into a period of cooling. I have much more faith in humans near the water to slowly move away and for less people to wear sweaters than for humanity to destroy its entire economy and plunge the world into poverty. Until, of course, evidence is shown on the contrary.

My personal preference (or bias for the cynics out there) for energy is nuclear. The IPCC recommends that all countries double their nuclear output by 2050. France supplies 39% of its country on nuclear power.
If we were to stop discovering new oil, coal, and natural gas reservoirs and we stopped inventing new technology, like fracking, then we would run out of fossil fuels in 110 years. Fossil fuels are short term. As someone who has lived for 19 years less than 11 miles (17 km) from a nuclear power plant, I am confident that nuclear is the way of the future. The other half of the nearby nuclear power plant has had its construction halted for years and is deteriorating. Unfortunately, funding for nuclear has been sidelined for pie-in-the-sky solar and wind power based on ridiculous public hysteria.
I firmly believe that as we run out of fossil fuels in the coming generations that the debate will become Nuclear vs. hysteria rather than fossil fuels vs. green energy. And if that is the case then I have every belief that nuclear will win the argument.

DavidlVofGeorgia wrote:
...and we haven't had a terrorist attack since he took office. If things keep going this way then he will be re-elected.

Incorrect, we've had several. Here are links to all of them. Some are muslim extremists, some are white supremacists, some are left, some are right, but they're ALL terrorist attacks.

Jan 31 - Shooting in Denver, Colorado http://abcnews.go.com/US/denver-mosque-warned-feds-murder-suspects-alleged-radicalization/story?id=45229220

Feb 23 - Shooting in Olathe, Kansas http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/man-shouting-racial-slurs-kills-wounds-article-1.2980033


Mar 25 - Stabbing in New York City https://mic.com/articles/172157/white-supremacist-who-stabbed-nyc-black-man-says-it-was-practice-for-times-square-massacre#.YiCPS1gpd

April 13 - 18 - Shooting sprees in Fresno, California http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/crime/article144590374.html

June 14 - Man shot a congressman during a baseball game https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_shooting

June 21 - Stabbing in Flint, Michigan http://www.abccolumbia.com/2017/06/21/evacuation-at-bishop-airport-in-flint-after-officer-allegedly-stabbed/

July 10 - Bombing in Tulsa, thankfully no one died. http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/crimewatch/update-tulsa-man-jailed-in-connection-with-explosion-at-bixby/article_2dc2efb3-9491-5f62-9f90-146413ac201f.html


Trump has certainly not ended terrorist attacks in our country.

DavidlVofGeorgia wrote:I have researched climate change extensively which is why I remain a skeptic....

Just because the earth has been hotter and has cooled off before doesn't mean climate change isn't a thing. The times earth was warmer and colder was when humans weren't there. Humans and modern animals have conditions that past lifeforms did not have. That's how evolution works.

Plus this isn't just about global warming, it's also about a clean environment. It dirties the air and water which poisons many, kills off several species, and ruins what beauty our planet has left. Not to mention the goal is more efficient fueling, and is that in any way a bad thing?

Trump has plans to put solar panels on the border wall.[1] While there are concerns over wildlife protection. [2] My concern however comes from the fact that Solar energy sucks a big nut. It is so bad that while coal and fracking have had numerous regulations against them and solar has been subsidized by the government.[3] Coal and natural gas remain at the top. The United States barely produces enough Co2 to have a noticeable effect on the climate. Despite "unclean" sources being our major natural resources. The real enemy of the planet is nations like China. [4] [5] [6] Under the Paris Climate Accords the U.S was going to face major regulations and China was practically let off the hook. [7] Nuclear Energy is the clear answer to the enviorment problem. It can beat every other form of energy and has been proven to work in nations like France. [8] Not only that but Trump's economic plans and policies have already started to work. [9] If Trump could try to convince Congress to lift sanctions and tariffs on many countries and cut spending on welfare the economy could rise like a Phoenix from the ashes. Like he promised it would,but I don't see that happening.

He's been in office for 6 months and in those 6 months just about every possible form of opposition to Trump lifting a finger has manifested. I think it's way too early to tell if his presidency is a "good" or "bad" one.

Let's see how the healthcare situation shakes out, how North Korea is ultimately managed, and how the U.S. trade situation is in another year and a half.

To be quite honest, I don't like Trump, on any of the many issues that have been raised. His rhetoric inspires people to emulate it, even children, with all the vulgarity and crassness that many on both the left and right despise.

His actions thus far haven't led to anything even remotely close to any sense of stability for American politics and society. He has spent much of his presidency spouting inflammatory rhetoric that has done more to divide American society, then to unite it, inspire it, or even "make it great again".

The president has, however, shown himself to be a prolific liar and the cause of a significant uptick in hate crimes, some of which include incidents of schoolchildren bullying using his own words and slogans to bully their fellow students.

All of these things only serve to cement my initial view of Trump. In no way, form or shape, is he fit for the office of presidency.

Hatshepsut wrote:To be quite honest, I don't like Trump, on any of the many issues that have been raised. His rhetoric inspires people to emulate it, even children, with all the vulgarity and crassness that many on both the left and right despise.

His actions thus far haven't led to anything even remotely close to any sense of stability for American politics and society. He has spent much of his presidency spouting inflammatory rhetoric that has done more to divide American society, then to unite it, inspire it, or even "make it great again".

The president has, however, shown himself to be a prolific liar and the cause of a significant uptick in hate crimes, some of which include incidents of schoolchildren bullying using his own words and slogans to bully their fellow students.

All of these things only serve to cement my initial view of Trump. In no way, form or shape, is he fit for the office of presidency.

Funny how those hate crimes are against whites by blacks especially in Chicago.

Funny how those hate crimes are against whites by blacks especially in  Chicago.

Cite your sources.

Trump approval gap on election day:  -21%

Trump approval gap today: -13.1%

Take a moment to take in those stats.  Trump is MORE liked today than he was on election day. If he was dividing Americans then he is doing a piss poor job. Maybe you aren't trying to unify?

source: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html

Horrible. If he were impeached or resigned today he would be remembered as one of our worst presidents.
Let's ignore any bias I may have being a liberal. He would still be remembered as an ineffective leader who was unable to get legislation passed through Congress, who threw hissy fits on Twitter, insulted the media, let his daughter sit in for him at the G20 summit instead of a Cabinet member, and spews "alternative facts."
I'd be more comfortable with Bush or Buchanan in office than Trump, and that's saying something.

@Big The hissy fits on Twitter and insulting the Media is just a side show. The media focus on that while Trump learns how to be a politician.

Merkel (who hates Trump) actually supported letting his daughter sit in. It is a common practice by the rest of the world.