Russia! Russia!! Russia!!!

[StCapps]

What's your point?

My point is, your analysis hits the mark way more often when you are discussing what you think is going to happen, instead of just what you hope will happen. Wishful thinking is a helluva drug, don't let it color your analysis, which it looks like it is in this instance, otherwise you wouldn't have to grasp at straws to claim Trump is worse than the alternatives.

I didn't say Trump was worse, he's just more of the same, juicing the stock market basically, which is fine, but it's already priced in. Moreover, the gains mostly got to trust fund babies like me rather than Americans living in vans down by the river.

Of course he's more of the same. But he's better at delivering on the positive aspects of the status quo, especially when compared to the candidates who ran against him 2016 and the candidates who will run against him in 2020. I'm not judging him against a standard that no POTUS will ever live up to, like nukedog or StA.

I judge Trump by what he did relative to what I expected him to be, as opposed to judging him based on what I wanted him to be, despite reasonable expectations. Unlike a lot of folks around here, who couldn't do that if their lives depended on it.

[Smitty-48]

Not to me. I've already got my blowjob from Trump, he's not actually stimulating on a broad front, it's a tax holiday, sure, which is great, but only if you have cash flow.

To make money on the Trump plan, you have to have some money to play with.

[StCapps]

To make money on the Trump plan, you have to have some money to play with.

To make money on the Democrat plan, or any other Republican's plan, you have to have some money to play with.

Not seeing this as a knock unique to Trump, it's more of the same.
/shrugs

[Smitty-48]

I'm not seeing any reason to endorse Trump.

Bear in mind, I don't endorse Reaganomics, I simply exploit it.

It's boom and bust, you just have to factor that into your plans.

[StCapps]

The only Democrat, whose plan is to give people money who don't have enough skin in the game, so they can take advantage of the plan, he has no hope of winning the nomination. Would be nice if Yang won, but he's not going to.

[Smitty-48]

The only Democrat, whose plan is to give people money who don't have enough skin in the game, so they can take advantage of the plan, he has no hope of winning the nomination. Would be nice if Yang won, but he's not going to.

Still not a reason to endorse Trump.

[StCapps]

The only Democrat, whose plan is to give people money who don't have enough skin in the game, so they can take advantage of the plan, he has no hope of winning the nomination. Would be nice if Yang won, but he's not going to.

Still not a reason to endorse Trump.

Being better than any alternative who has a chance of winning isn't a reason to endorse Trump? Sounds like a pretty good reason to me. You don't have to like every one of his policies to realize who the obvious lesser evil is.

[Smitty-48]

The only Democrat, whose plan is to give people money who don't have enough skin in the game, so they can take advantage of the plan, he has no hope of winning the nomination. Would be nice if Yang won, but he's not going to.

Still not a reason to endorse Trump.

Being better than any alternative who has a chance of winning isn't a reason to endorse Trump? Sounds like a pretty good reason to me.

Who you think is going to win is not an endorsement, If I thought Sanders was going to win, it doesn't follow that I would be endorsing him.

[StCapps]

Still not a reason to endorse Trump.

Being better than any alternative who has a chance of winning isn't a reason to endorse Trump? Sounds like a pretty good reason to me.

Who you think is going to win is not an endorsement, If I thought Sanders was going to win, I wouldn't be endorsing him.

You are forgetting the "best alternative, obvious lesser evil" part, it's the combo that matters. If he was only negligibly better than Sanders, then that wouldn't be worth an endorsement, but he's actually a solid step up from Sanders. The only Democrats who aren't obvious greater evils, have no chance of winning, so even if I endorsed them, they have no actual chance to do as good or better than Trump as POTUS, because they never be POTUS.

[Smitty-48]

Being better than any alternative who has a chance of winning isn't a reason to endorse Trump? Sounds like a pretty good reason to me.

Who you think is going to win is not an endorsement, If I thought Sanders was going to win, I wouldn't be endorsing him.

You are forgetting the "best alternative, obvious lesser evil" part, it's the combo that matters.

I'm simply agreeing with Pukerog, Trump is just another Neocon who is juicing the stock market late cycle blowjob to the shareholders, and giving blowjobs to Israel too.

I wouldn't endorse that, as something that is doing anything for Pukerogs living in swamp vans.