One was on the result of the Brexit referendum. I knew that it might be close but simply didn't believe that the leave case would get up, although I was reasonably accurate in predicting the geographic distribution of the vote. The second was Donald Trump.
I think that in both cases I allowed my perception of what I thought was sensible (or not) to influence my judgement. In the Brexit case, I thought that it was sensible for Britain to stay in the EU. In the Trump case, I thought that some of his expressed views were so way of the planet that no one would take them seriously.
I have no idea what the political effect will be. The polls suggest that Mrs Clinton is in front. You would think that this would further damage Mr Trump's campaign, but I just doesn't know.
A bit like Brexit, I haven't really assessed the results of a Trump victory in global terms because it has seemed so unlikely. I guess that we will all know soon enough. In the meantime, and as a previous avid watcher of The Apprentice, .I would like to be able to say following the election, Mr Trump, you are fired!
Postscript
2 Tanners included this funny if bad doggerel in comments on the recent presidential debate:
(With apologies to Clarke Van Ness)
'Twas an evening in October, the debate was less than sober,
Shrewish harping clashed with misplaced manly pride,
They shouted and they muttered and descended to the gutter,
And a pig came up and lay down at their side.
Then they flung mud in the gutter amidst desolation utter,
Till a pundit, passing by, did chance to say:
"You can tell the ones that lose by the company they choose,"
So the pig got up and slowly walked away..
11 comments:
(With apologies to Clarke Van Ness)
'Twas an evening in October, the debate was less than sober,
Shrewish harping clashed with misplaced manly pride,
They shouted and they muttered and descended to the gutter,
And a pig came up and lay down at their side.
Then they flung mud in the gutter amidst desolation utter,
Till a pundit, passing by, did chance to say:
"You can tell the ones that lose by the company they choose,"
So the pig got up and slowly walked away.
Was down the village the other day, and was button-holed by a couple looking for directions. Nice people, standing by their battered utility with its back taken up by a cage in which their dog was sitting, glaring at me. Turned out they were looking for the local caravan park; on a trip to never-seen Sydney - home base is Broken Hill.
Got me to thinking about somebody who may actually have been a better choice for US president than the present incumbent - Romney. As I recall he was lacerated for 3 things: bullying at school; suggesting that no matter what he did, 47% of the people wouldn't vote for him; and going on a holiday with his dog in a roof top cage. Oh yes, also "binders full of women".
Now we are where tanners says we are; with a once great country deciding between a consistently proven liar - bordering on criminal, and an unrepentant potty-mouthed philanderer.
And her case is made by that wonderful star of such romantic comedies as Taxi Driver - who wants to punch him (Trump) in the mouth for his 10 year old private views on the women he meets.
This is all just a daytime soap opera. Nobody seems to care that Obama's signature policy (health care) was passed (because you have to pass it before you can read it) on a lie (who was that guy who was quite proud of the fact that it was promoted by lies) and will in the next 2 years be found to be unsustainable. No wonder US wages are stagnant; the business owners who are responsible for providing health care as part of an employee's wage are presently being hit with healthcare increases of 60-70% with more promised in 2017.
And yes, I did watch this latest debate. And yes, I was horrified by HRC's bland statement that Russia's present air superiority should be 'challenged'. But let's get back to concentrating on a 10 year old tape of an unpleasant private conversation between two unpleasant people.
kvd
Romneycare and Obamacare were functionally identical, meaning that Romney was also prepared to backflip at the behest of his party from what had been a signature piece of legislation for him as Governor. The objective of the Affordable Health Care Act was to give more people cover AND drive the cost of health care down. According to ,a href:"http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/obamacare-aleppo-and-coal-the-second-debate-had-substance-too" fivethirtyeight /a> it only succeed in the former, but that has in part been due to blocking actions by Governors and Congress.
My final assessment, though, was that Obama was a disappointment and Romney a lightweight. Obama did do good things, all the time with a hostile congress and coming in on the heels of the GFC.
In policy terms, Democrats have been better economic managers at least since and including Reagan.
In personal terms, I can't tell the difference (hence my little poem above) so it's disappointing that there is so little substantive policy debate. But hardly surprising.
(2 t gets up and slowly walks away)
Romneycare and Obamacare were functionally identical, meaning that Romney was also prepared to backflip at the behest of his party from what had been a signature piece of legislation for him as Governor. The objective of the Affordable Health Care Act was to give more people cover AND drive the cost of health care down. According to fivethirtyeight it only succeed in the former, but that has in part been due to blocking actions by Governors and Congress.
My final assessment, though, was that Obama was a disappointment and Romney a lightweight. Obama did do good things, all the time with a hostile congress and coming in on the heels of the GFC.
In policy terms, Democrats have been better economic managers at least since and including Reagan.
In personal terms, I can't tell the difference (hence my little poem above) so it's disappointing that there is so little substantive policy debate. But hardly surprising.
(2 t gets up and slowly walks away)
"to give more people cover": that would be the signups under Medicaid - something quite separate from Medicare - or so I understand.
"Obama did good things": be interested in your (let's say) top 3 list.
"Democrats have been better economic managers": Nobody 'manages' the US or any other economy - you must get this idealistic view of the importance of government actions out of your otherwise clear thinking. But anyway, if you are happy to pin him with responsibility for tripling the national debt, stagnant growth, insipid employment, unfunded future liabilities for social service and medical care, etc. then I'll agree with you.
And then we'd have to talk about the wonderful effect upon race relations, including the incendiary inner-city abyss; the woeful foreign relations, particularly the Mid-East; the illegal circumventing of US policy in that piddling payment to Iran; the use of the IRS, and State, to pursue domestic political enemies; the almost unreported handover of the Internet administration to that wonderful body, the UN...
kvd
Anyway, regarding all this foofaraw about what DT said: has nobody read the lyrics of either Jay-Z or Beyonce? Both welcome at the White House, I understand. Happy to quote if you need, but it might excite these new-found sensibilities :)
kvd
Clinton reduced national debt and produced a government surplus. Bush spent it and Obama inherited the debts of Bush's profligacy.
Obama refused to put in place austerity policies being demanded by Republicans. Of the things he did do, Obamacare was good although euchred by some state Governors, I would argue his stimulus package and car industry rescue package was key in driving unemployment down to about 5 per cent (don't forget, Romney attacked Obama on his record on unemployment and promised 6 per cent by the end of 2016) and his 'pivot towards Asia' was sensible foreign policy.
Attempts to change gun laws and other items defeated by a hostile congress and senate, failed attempts to normalise relations with Cuba and reductions but I assume not ending of torture in Guantanamo aren't so good. Failure to close Guantanamo Bay and the failure to end US involvement in Iraq (and most of the Middle East) was, I think, his largest strategic error.
As for Jay-Z and Beyonce, not, I haven't read their lyrics but as per Trump, they are saying things to entertain whoever will listen. I'd probably actually compare Trump to Kanye, who stops an inch short of claiming to be Jesus, invades stages and hogs limelight in a way that people now look forward to it, rather than bar him from such events. But in all of their cases, I get up and slowly walk away. Again.
tanners, regarding your first paragraph, here's just one site which seeks to analyse both debt and deficit by presidential office-holder:
https://www.thebalance.com/deficit-by-president-what-budget-deficits-hide-3306151
I think you are correct in your claim of surplus, but not debt.
All presidents are faced with many things outside their personal control, so it is unfair - either for me or for you - to hold them personally responsible for 'prevailing conditions on the ground' as it were. That site by the way also includes a 'top 10' list of Obama accomplishments - and I note that three of the top 10 are listed as:
- he got re-elected
- he won a Nobel Peace Prize
- no scandal attaches personally to his name
In order to avoid extending this discussion even further away from the subject at hand, the present White House race, I won't comment further on the above. But what I would like to repeat is my continuing dismay over the 'issues' which seem to be uppermost in the minds of the blind partisans; items of little or no substance, masking much greater issues which will affect all of us - US voters and unhappy foreign bystanders alike.
I wonder if we can at least agree upon this?
kvd
Absolutely agreed.
Good to see agreement between you both!
Watching the third 'debate' I am left with the feeling that Americans must and will opt for ALL of the mistakes of the past in preference to gunslinging policy on the run. A bit frightening that this is the better option (and as kvd points out) not even the central argument
Post a Comment