Political Current Events March 7-12

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 255
  • Views: 6K
  • Politics 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mulberry Heel said:
IMO, I think he has almost no chance of succeeding Trump. He utterly lacks Trump's personal charisma and entertainment value, and comes across as smarmy, insincere, and not all that different from the type of Democratic pol that working-class Republicans love to hate, although his beliefs and political positions are obviously very different. I also think that Trump doesn't care for him and holds him in contempt. At any rate if Dear Leader does decide to not run again in 2028 (and I think he'll try even though he's blocked by the 22nd Amendment), then Vance will not be the designated successor, and likely won't even get the GOP nomination, although he'll certainly try hard to. He reminds me of another DeSantis, to be honest.
Click to expand...
Look at this scenario:
  • a major recession early in a presidential term comparable to the 1982 one when Reaganomics was widely mocked (that recession was Summer ‘81 to about Christmas 1982)
  • An elderly, obese Trump with a poor diet dies in early 2027 (January to July); smarmy JD Vance ascends to POTUS. A bad 2026 Election for the GOP is not blamed on Vance.
  • The recession ends and the economy recovers a la 1984’s “Morning in America”
  • “Moderates” and “Independents” give Vance a sympathy vote
  • Vance wins the 2028 presidential election
 
Zoo_View said:
Look at this scenario:
  • a major recession early in a presidential term comparable to the 1982 one when Reaganomics was widely mocked (that recession was Summer ‘81 to about Christmas 1982)
  • An elderly, obese Trump with a poor diet dies in early 2027 (January to July); smarmy JD Vance ascends to POTUS. A bad 2026 Election for the GOP is not blamed on Vance.
  • The recession ends and the economy recovers a la 1984’s “Morning in America”
  • “Moderates” and “Independents” give Vance a sympathy vote
  • Vance wins the 2028 presidential election
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I don't see Vance winning "sympathy" votes, as he's one of the least-sympathetic politicians going right now. Plenty of people thought that DeSantis would be a juggernaut in the primaries, and he failed spectacularly, not just because he was running against Trump but because he was an awkward dud as a campaigner, and Vance in my opinion is very much in that mold. I just don't see Vance being Trumpish enough to win over his voters in large enough numbers to win a general election or even the nomination.
 
Mulberry Heel said:
Sorry, but I don't see Vance winning "sympathy" votes, as he's one of the least-sympathetic politicians going right now. Plenty of people thought that DeSantis would be a juggernaut in the primaries, and he failed spectacularly, not just because he was running against Trump but because he was an awkward dud as a campaigner, and Vance in my opinion is very much in that mold. I just don't see Vance being Trumpish enough to win over his voters in large enough numbers to win a general election or even the nomination.
Click to expand...
I expect no one thought Harry Truman would win “sympathy” votes in 1948.

A new president in 2027-28 who ascended to the office after the President died and in the midst of an economic recovery is going to get a shit ton of sympathy votes. You seem to be forgetting how stupid American voters are.
 
Zoo_View said:
I expect no one thought Harry Truman would win “sympathy” votes in 1948.

A new president in 2027-28 who ascended to the office after the President died and in the midst of an economic recovery is going to get a shit ton of sympathy votes. You seem to be forgetting how stupid American voters are.
Click to expand...
No, I'm not forgetting, I just don't see Vance as the recipient of that sympathy. Truman was a fighter and was feisty and entertaining and even witty, qualities that Vance doesn't possess. He comes across as an ass most of the time - I certainly don't see Vance as a "Give 'Em Hell Harry" type. Your scenario involves an economic recovery under these radical GOP policies including massive budget cuts, which is unlikely to happen. At any rate we aren't going to know for sure until 2028, and I have little inclination to continue arguing about hypotheticals, so I'll let it go at that.
 
tonman said:
How much does a round of golf cost taxpayers by the prez?
Click to expand...
I love how the "socialist" is supposedly ripping us off, yet there are articles that DOGE is paying college-age kids the maximum possible government salary while firing experienced workers. I like AOC and think she's doing a great job - watching her question witnesses at committee hearings is always entertaining, as she's really good at it - but even if she was "ripping off taxpayers" AOC is a total amateur compared to Elon, Trump, DOGE and their minions. It's hilarious listening to Trumpers wax indignant about AOC while completely ignoring the massive corruption happening under Trump 2.0. This may easily be the most corrupt administration in American history, and that's saying something.
 
nycfan said:


IMG_5418.jpeg
Click to expand...



“…
In private conversations, partners at some of the nation’s leading firms have expressed outrage at the president’s actions. What they haven’t been willing to do is say so publicly. Back-channel efforts to persuade major law firms to sign public statements criticizing Trump’s actions thus far have foundered, in part because of retaliation fears, people familiar with the matter said.

Advocacy groups and smaller law firms say it has been more difficult to recruit larger firms to help with cases against Trump, which now number more than 100. …”

The chilling effect of these sorts of unconstitutional and unAmerican attacks on individual firms is precisely the point. Disappointing but not surprising to see BigLaw capitulate (for now).
 


RICK SCOTT: First off, Donald Trump walked in with a crappy economy. The number of full-time jobs has been dropping almost the entire Biden administration.

Blatant lie by Scott. But a sign they are worried about an economic downturn and desperate to convince people that anything bad that happens now is just the “Biden Economy”.
 
nycfan said:


RICK SCOTT: First off, Donald Trump walked in with a crappy economy. The number of full-time jobs has been dropping almost the entire Biden administration.

Blatant lie by Scott. But a sign they are worried about an economic downturn and desperate to convince people that anything bad that happens now is just the “Biden Economy”.
Click to expand...

Full Time Employment in the United States increased to 135896 Thousand in January from 133510 Thousand in December of 2024. Full Time Employment in the United States averaged 101470.35 Thousand from 1968 until 2025, reaching an all time high of 135896.00 Thousand in January of 2025 and a record low of 64640.00 Thousand in January of 1968.​

United States Full Time Employment

Full Time Employment in the United States increased to 135896 Thousand in January from 133510 Thousand in December of 2024. This page provides - United States Full Time Employment- actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.
tradingeconomics.com tradingeconomics.com


IMG_5445.jpeg

​

 


“… The department-wide email offered a "voluntary separation incentive payment," the source said. Employees have been given until a deadline of March 14 to reply.

… The far-reaching HHS has more than 80,000 employees and oversees several major health agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

Thousands of probationary workers across HHS were informed last month they would be fired. Probationary workers are generally those who have been on the job for less than a year. …”
 


“… The investments are being made through special-purpose vehicles (SPVs), shielding the identities of Chinese investors from public scrutiny while bypassing regulatory concerns in the United States.

… With US-China relations at a low point, Chinese capital faces increasing resistance in American markets. Many US authorities and companies remain wary of Chinese investments due to security concerns. To circumvent these restrictions, investors are using SPVs—investment structures designed to obscure their direct involvement—allowing them to participate in Musk’s ventures without drawing regulatory ire.

… Sources involved in the transactions emphasised that the primary motivation behind these investments is financial gain rather than technology transfer or policy influence. However, Musk’s longstanding interactions with top Chinese officials, including President Xi Jinping, raise questions about the implications of these financial ties. …”

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top