Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Where is/can Donald Trump take US (sic)?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Have we had one trump policy even mentioned on here?

I doubt anyone would know of any successful policies. Its basically been media snippet half truths from Trump hating loons.

He has had some huge successes and big failures. Probably one of the most complex presidential terms from memory.


Endless lets start with separating children from their parents, unfunded tax cuts to the wealthy, cuts to health care cover for the poor, taxing US citizens for trade tariffs, how about the policy of using Trump properties for federal government business.
 
Yes we can talk about "policies". And as one goes through each policy we see a litany of environmental, social and international wreckage.

But the overriding issue of this administration is the rise and overwhelming power of a politician who knows no limits, respects no norms and is totally and utterly shameless.

And that person has created a personality cult of multi millions of people who believe everything he says regardless of reality or consequence and embraces this lawless, shameless President.

How do we deal with that in terms of "Policies" ?
 
Yes we can talk about "policies". And as one goes through each policy we see a litany of environmental, social and international wreckage.

But the overriding issue of this administration is the rise and overwhelming power of a politician who knows no limits, respects no norms and is totally and utterly shameless.

And that person has created a personality cult of multi millions of people who believe everything he says regardless of reality or consequence and embraces this lawless, shameless President.

And how is any of what you have written there useful, interesting or conducive to constructive and nuanced political discussion or debate?

This sort of post is exactly what is wrong with political debate in 2020. It is almost devoid of any content of value, laced with partisan bile, and comes across as almost hysterical in tone.

Frankly, I'm tired of it from both sides of politics. Is it really that hard to see issues from a pragmatic point of view instead of through a myopic partisan prism?

I feel like I've heard the same predictable rubbish over and over again from the partisan left and the right for years now. Nothing new or interesting is ever offered up, just the same old tired refrains repeated ad nauseum like a broken record.

There's very little discussion or debate of any value happening in any political threads here or anywhere else. It seems like an endless parade of people infatuated with their own opinions and themselves.

I'm over it.
 
Last edited:
Senator Lisa Murkowski said she would oppose confirming a Supreme Court nominee before the election. She is the second Republican senator to do so.

“For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election,” Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said in a statement. “Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed. I did not support taking up a nomination eight months before the 2016 election to fill the vacancy created by the passing of Justice Scalia. We are now even closer to the 2020 election — less than two months out — and I believe the same standard must apply.”

Senator Susan Collins of Maine had said Saturday that she did not believe that the Senate should vote on a nominee before the election.
 
I would have thought the smart thing for Trump to do personally is not rush in a replacement but make it contingent on him getting re elected.

This would help him get votes from wavering Republicans and be a good election issue and a distraction also.

Saw also overnight he is threatening getting Biden banned from becoming President by using his executive powers. I wouldn't have thought that was a vote winner but maybe it is.
 
The move to appoint a Supreme Court judge just before an election is another removal of precedent that democracy is built on.

Regarding the language / labelling used here in the thread is really disturbing as its currently the political weapon of choice to label any that any that disagree with extreme accusations creating greater divides in the community.

This is not Australia or an Australian value heaven forbid we get to the extremes currently tearing the US apart all with no moral or ethical leadership.

This is also the unresearched dribble that I get sick of putting a counter to. Hence the language. Bas often quotes from biased sources and at no point puts forward the whole story.

It says nothing against it in the constitution. Democrats are within their right to block it in the senate and appeal to the rinos in gop. They will no doubt use delay tactics.

"Overall, the Senate has met after a midterm election ten times since the Second World War and confirmed judges in nine of those lame-duck sessions. In the two most recent, Democrats confirmed nearly as many judges as in the rest combined".
 
Senator Lisa Murkowski said she would oppose confirming a Supreme Court nominee before the election. She is the second Republican senator to do so.

“For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election,” Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said in a statement. “Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed. I did not support taking up a nomination eight months before the 2016 election to fill the vacancy created by the passing of Justice Scalia. We are now even closer to the 2020 election — less than two months out — and I believe the same standard must apply.”

Senator Susan Collins of Maine had said Saturday that she did not believe that the Senate should vote on a nominee before the election.
High possibility the rinos will block the vote. Democrats are working them hard.

That's actually how democracy works.
Not threats, or protesters kicking in your door.
 
Here's one link of many. It's just bluster, his style of whipping up the audience. I don't think he would do it.

He says a lot of this stuff to his supporters. Remember "lock her up"?
A lot of his supporters were pissed it never happened.

Populist rubbish that never comes to pass. Great for a show and a stir though. And he routinely stirs the media and twitter.
 
He says a lot of this stuff to his supporters. Remember "lock her up"?
A lot of his supporters were pissed it never happened.

Populist rubbish that never comes to pass. Great for a show and a stir though. And he routinely stirs the media and twitter.
If he did though, what a constitutional crisis!
43 days left till the election. Its nearly as bad as the lockdown here in Melbourne.
 
And how is any of what you have written there useful, interesting or conducive to constructive and nuanced political discussion or debate?

This sort of post is exactly what is wrong with political debate in 2020. It is almost devoid of any content of value, laced with partisan bile, and comes across as almost hysterical in tone.

Frankly, I'm tired of it from both sides of politics. Is it really that hard to see issues from a pragmatic point of view instead of through a myopic partisan prism?

I feel like I've heard the same predictable rubbish over and over again from the partisan left and the right for years now. Nothing new or interesting is ever offered up, just the same old tired refrains repeated ad nauseum like a broken record.

There's very little discussion or debate of any value happening in any political threads here or anywhere else. It seems like an endless parade of people infatuated with their own opinions and themselves.

I'm over it.

Joe I have to disagree and this issue is the cornerstone of the seriousness of what is happening in the US and now spreading around the world.

One can easily discuss the policy failings of the Trump administration individually. In that context we could talk about different policy options offered by an alternative government or perhaps considered by a current administration.

But those discussions need to be underpinned by a political framework and set of agreed norms and values which ensure that the political system itself is respected and continues. If these are undermined the legitimacy of government itself is called into question.

The US constitution established a set of checks and balances to protect the Republic from becoming a Monarchy or dictatorship. Behind those formal laws lay a series of norms. How should leaders behave in office ? How would other politicians, the public, the media and the judiciary hold them to account if they behaved badly ?

At any other time in US history the behaviours of Donald Trump would have seen him facing a serious challenge from his party. Whether it was the endless obvious lies, the repeated undermining of the election process, the use of public office to enrich his family, the attempts to engage foreign countries to meddle in US politics.

Then there is the public denial of COVID 19 as a serious threat (even when he knew that wasn't the case ) and subsequent undermining of government efforts to deal with the epidemic which have resulted in 200,000 people dying with no end in sight. These are not the actions of a person suitable to be President.

And it's not as if these issues have been hiding. There have been a score of books and revelations from

1) Multiple cabinet members who saw at first hand what was happening and had to tell the truth
2) Department officials who saw criminal and incompetent actions and finally put their hand up
3) Trump himself who gave 18 hours of interviews with Bob Woodward and confirmed some of the most egregious behaviours

So it has come back to what I said initially

....the overriding issue of this administration is the rise and overwhelming power of a politician who knows no limits, respects no norms and is totally and utterly shameless.

Because this is an investment forum however lets look at the situation from a business perspective. (Next post)
 
How would we view a business run by someone like Donald Trump ?

Why not take look at the behavior of the current President and ask " Is this suitable for the Head of a multbillion dollar corporation"

The President is Manager of the business (not the owner) So how do we feel as shareholders if he appointed numerous family members as staff and used the business to enable his own financial interests to be tended and promoted ? Conflicts of interest here ?

How would we view this Manager if 26 women brought up a series of abuse and rape allegations which he routinely denies and then abuses each and every one of them ? How would we feel if we heard from his own lips how he aggressively pursues women and won't take no for an answer ? Would we feel confident that the allegations are still baseless ? How would we feel if he then used the companies resources to defend himself against legal charges brought by the one of the aggrieved women and he refused to supply DNA results that could clear him (or convict him ..)

What would be our thoughts if this Manager attacked and undermined numerous important business partners that have been critical parts of our business structure for many years ? How would we feel if he then starting business relationships with companies that frankly we think are shoddy, dangerous perhaps even criminal ? Are we happy as shareholders here?

When we look at the administration of the company how do we feel when Department Head after Department Head is sacked or leaves. Their pedigree seems impeccable. They have long succesful business histories. But the President won't accept anyone who doesn't totally bend to his will. And when these people leave they tell stories of mismanagement that make one concerned about whether the business can survive.

As shareholders we also hear the President repeatedly say things that are provably untrue. It gets worse when some of the most serious problems we face as a company are publicly denied (COVID 19) and then we discover he actually understood the seriousness of the problem. And because of his deception what was initially a serious problem has metastasized into a still unfolding disaster.

How do we view such a person as President of our company ?
 
2)
If he did though, what a constitutional crisis!
43 days left till the election. Its nearly as bad as the lockdown here in Melbourne.
He would be marched out imo. His base are constitution junkies that would skewer him like a pig. It would be his downfall if he even moved in that direction.
 
interesting developments in the middle east. Iran mullahs are feeling the heat. Gulf states are banding together. Might just get a regime change.
Another well played strategy.
 
How would we view a business run by someone like Donald Trump ?

Why not take look at the behavior of the current President and ask " Is this suitable for the Head of a multbillion dollar corporation"

The President is Manager of the business (not the owner) So how do we feel as shareholders if he appointed numerous family members as staff and used the business to enable his own financial interests to be tended and promoted ? Conflicts of interest here ?

How would we view this Manager if 26 women brought up a series of abuse and rape allegations which he routinely denies and then abuses each and every one of them ? How would we feel if we heard from his own lips how he aggressively pursues women and won't take no for an answer ? Would we feel confident that the allegations are still baseless ? How would we feel if he then used the companies resources to defend himself against legal charges brought by the one of the aggrieved women and he refused to supply DNA results that could clear him (or convict him ..)

What would be our thoughts if this Manager attacked and undermined numerous important business partners that have been critical parts of our business structure for many years ? How would we feel if he then starting business relationships with companies that frankly we think are shoddy, dangerous perhaps even criminal ? Are we happy as shareholders here?

When we look at the administration of the company how do we feel when Department Head after Department Head is sacked or leaves. Their pedigree seems impeccable. They have long succesful business histories. But the President won't accept anyone who doesn't totally bend to his will. And when these people leave they tell stories of mismanagement that make one concerned about whether the business can survive.

As shareholders we also hear the President repeatedly say things that are provably untrue. It gets worse when some of the most serious problems we face as a company are publicly denied (COVID 19) and then we discover he actually understood the seriousness of the problem. And because of his deception what was initially a serious problem has metastasized into a still unfolding disaster.

How do we view such a person as President of our company ?
This is the kind of emotive rubbish that got trump elected the first time
 
How would we view a business run by someone like Donald Trump ?



How do we view such a person as President of our company ?

That's a pretty good angle to take bas.

I feel that I would have sold my shares by now if he was CEO.

That sort of ego never goes well with running a corporation. The words corporate psychopath comes to mind and who would want to work for such a person besides toadies and yes men and women ?

People like that generally run companies into the ground, and I fear he has done the same with his own private and public companies.
 
How would we view a business run by someone like Donald Trump ?

I think there is direct comparison to one of the most outrageous frauds in US history that is currently unfolding.

.......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Our Conclusion: Nikola is a Massive Fraud Constructed on Dozens of Lies

Sometimes people misspeak by accident. No one has a perfect memory, and we all occasionally get things wrong.

But what we have witnessed at Nikola, and specifically from Trevor Milton, is a pattern of well-planned and deliberate acts of deception ranging from (a) the staging of non-working products as if fully functional, wrapped in numerous lies about capabilities that don’t exist; (b) the staging of misleading videos, which require extensive premeditation, planning and execution; (c) material lies about capabilities, partnerships and products that simply do not exist at all, on video and often in front of entire rooms full of people; and (d) a culture of secrecy and intimidation that to this point has largely kept it all under wraps.

We think Trevor Milton is incapable of telling the truth. We believe he lies like most people breathe. It is natural for him, and our extensive review of his history suggests it has been this way throughout his entire business career.

Every now and then a story comes around that exposes how little the “experts” really know. Theranos had inked partnerships with Walgreens, Safeway, and Cleveland Clinic and had staffed its board with luminaries. Madoff raised billions in capital from sophisticated investors across the globe.

The remarkable thing about Nikola’s story is not that someone like Trevor Milton exists, but that he has managed to parlay his stories and lies into deals with some of the best manufacturers and partners in the world by claiming to own vast proprietary technology and having successfully built revolutionary products that simply didn’t exist.


He transformed these deceptions and false promises into an empire that at one point was valued at $34 billion, larger than Ford and Fiat Chrysler. He’s signed deals with GM, Anheuser Busch, Bosch, Worthington, and a slew of significant automotive players. He received investment from Fidelity and ValueAct, among other name-brand institutions.

We truly think Nikola is both a sign of the times and a story for the ages.

 
Donald in Blunderland: Trump won't commit to peaceful power transfer at surreal press briefing
David Smith’s sketch: President takes us through the looking glass amid the kneecapping of American democracy


....“Will you commit to make sure there’s a peaceful transferral of power after the election?” Karem asked.

All of his 43 predecessors would have said yes, presumably. But Trump replied: “We’re going to have to see what happens, you know that. I’ve been complaining very strongly about the ballots, and the ballots are a disaster.”

Karem shot back: “I understand that, but people are rioting. Do you commit to make sure that there’s a peaceful transferral of power?”

Still Trump refused to commit. “Get rid of the ballots and you’ll have a very peaceful — there won’t be a transfer, frankly. There will be a continuation. The ballots are out of control. You know it. And you know who knows it better than anybody else? The Democrats know it better than anybody else.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top