Trump-Obama-Bush-Clinton-etc.etc.etc.

[stevenash]

The best thing about our system is that if we elect someone, and they don't live up to our expectations, the system can replace them.  Happens consistently on both a local and national level.  From my perspective, two main concerns are uppermost in most people’s minds when it comes to electing someone to represent them.  My view is that those two concerns are social and economic.  Both are very valid and both need to be addressed.  In the past 8 years, this country has focused mainly on the social aspect and hasn't given much attention to the economic aspect.  When the electorate decides that a change in direction is needed, it votes accordingly.  To those of you who think the world is going to end because Trump is in office, I can identify with that because I had similar concerns when Mr. Obama was elected.  Fortunately, it’s pretty hard for this country to be brought totally to its knees in a 2,4, or 8 year period.  If Mr. Trump is as horrible as some of you think he is and if he does as much damage as you think he will, the voters will eliminate most of his advantages in two years during the mid- term elections and then, 2 years later, will replace him as well.  My guess is that Mr. Trump will focus more on the economic aspect and less on the social aspect- that is an opposite approach to what his predecessor did.  Is one right and one wrong?  No- both are right and both are wrong.  By that I mean that it was wrong for Mr. Obama to pursue his social agenda without consideration for the economy.  If Mr. Trump pursues his economic agenda with little if any regard for the social issues, that too, will be a mistake.  In both cases, the voters will make that decision.  My personal feelings are that if this country becomes economically unviable, the advancement of the economy as well as the desired social changes both become impossible.  ( you gotta have money to succeed in either or both).  It would appear that the voters have decided  to give our economic concerns priority.  Is that permanent?  No.  Does that mean minorities are about to suddenly get mistreated? No.  Does that mean that gays can no longer marry? No. Does it mean we will have transgender bathrooms in every public building by next fall?  Probably not.  If Mr. Trump does not handle things well, does that mean he will not get re-elected? Yes.  One final thought- many consider the late 50’s and early 60s ( that would be the Eisenhower and Kennedy years) to have been particularly good times for this country.  At that time, core government spending ( excluding defense) was around 6% to 7% of GDP.  Today that figure is 17% to 18% of GDP.  The bigger the government gets, the nastier the elections become because there is more to hold onto for those in power and more to fight against for those who want change.  So I am suggesting to you that, regardless of who is in power, a bigger and ever growing government is a serious problem.

[new tobie]

That like was intentional Nash! 

[stevenash]

The shock has finally passed!!!

[new tobie]

55 minutes ago, stevenash said:

The shock has finally passed!!!

Yeah i thought it was a decent article for someone like you. 

[stevenash]

12 minutes ago, new tobie said:

Yeah i thought it was a decent article for someone like you. 

[bullets13]

3 hours ago, stevenash said:

The best thing about our system is that if we elect someone, and they don't live up to our expectations, the system can replace them.  Happens consistently on both a local and national level.  From my perspective, two main concerns are uppermost in most people’s minds when it comes to electing someone to represent them.  My view is that those two concerns are social and economic.  Both are very valid and both need to be addressed.  In the past 8 years, this country has focused mainly on the social aspect and hasn't given much attention to the economic aspect.  When the electorate decides that a change in direction is needed, it votes accordingly.  To those of you who think the world is going to end because Trump is in office, I can identify with that because I had similar concerns when Mr. Obama was elected.  Fortunately, it’s pretty hard for this country to be brought totally to its knees in a 2,4, or 8 year period.  If Mr. Trump is as horrible as some of you think he is and if he does as much damage as you think he will, the voters will eliminate most of his advantages in two years during the mid- term elections and then, 2 years later, will replace him as well.  My guess is that Mr. Trump will focus more on the economic aspect and less on the social aspect- that is an opposite approach to what his predecessor did.  Is one right and one wrong?  No- both are right and both are wrong.  By that I mean that it was wrong for Mr. Obama to pursue his social agenda without consideration for the economy.  If Mr. Trump pursues his economic agenda with little if any regard for the social issues, that too, will be a mistake.  In both cases, the voters will make that decision.  My personal feelings are that if this country becomes economically unviable, the advancement of the economy as well as the desired social changes both become impossible.  ( you gotta have money to succeed in either or both).  It would appear that the voters have decided  to give our economic concerns priority.  Is that permanent?  No.  Does that mean minorities are about to suddenly get mistreated? No.  Does that mean that gays can no longer marry? No. Does it mean we will have transgender bathrooms in every public building by next fall?  Probably not.  If Mr. Trump does not handle things well, does that mean he will not get re-elected? Yes.  One final thought- many consider the late 50’s and early 60s ( that would be the Eisenhower and Kennedy years) to have been particularly good times for this country.  At that time, core government spending ( excluding defense) was around 6% to 7% of GDP.  Today that figure is 17% to 18% of GDP.  The bigger the government gets, the nastier the elections become because there is more to hold onto for those in power and more to fight against for those who want change.  So I am suggesting to you that, regardless of who is in power, a bigger and ever growing government is a serious problem.

you and I don't always agree, but you nailed this one.

[stevenash]

Red letter day for me- you and I on common ground and Tobie thinking it was decent for "someone like me"

[LumRaiderFan]

Very good post...main problem I had with Hillary getting elected is she would have possibly appointed 4 Justices that could remain on the court for 30,40 years.

I'm sure the concern from the left is the same with Trump.

Presidents have term limits...the SC doesn't.