Trump has few actual convictions other than those that instantly make him look good...it's why he walks back stuff he says all the time...when he saw over 70 percent of the country wanted some form of gun control...he chucked the GOP under the table and went for it....he desperately needs to win something to take the attention off the dysfunction...he doesn't actually want reform, he wants poll numbers
>>> Thank you. I believe it is my position, not the conservative position. >>>Well, I think we have the lowest unemployment rate of all time now, or close. Work force participation is climbing a little too, which is a big thing. >>>> Aw well, you may have me confuse with some other, I have not bang the drum on this much at all. But then I do think the workers will benefit from this, not directly as much as from keeping the country competitive creating jobs in this country. You can not have the highest business taxes in the world and expect to keep creating jobs in this country. >>>Naw, dissent is one thing, and it is ok. I do it myself I really got pissed when the ACA stripped me and million like me of our earned compensation which was health care insurance. But to go on and on before you are harmed is illogical. To do it with vulgar language directed at our President, is disgusting. >>> I do not believe I have been the one you discribe here. But if you find where I did it, I will eat the words. >>> Yes that is exactly what I think. This President does work people, so what sort of deal will he get through Congress? Will it be some sort of composite deal? a little gun control thing and some other want on the other side, we shall see. But I also do not think it will end up being opposed by the NRA! Congressmen are not going to do that! That is terminal.
Your assessment would read fairly well if you deleted the above. You may have inferred it, But no way did I say it or imply such.
When it comes to numbers, especially those related to (un)employment, I usually fall back to the old adage that “figures lie and liars figure.” Personally, I believe this kind of “information” is nothing more than a political tool and therefore highly susceptible to serious manipulation. So it carries little actual weight when it comes to my opinions.
No, I do not see anything dishonest in the technique. It is a way to fire up negotiations and deal making. Like I say, I have used it. I opens up avenues of thinking so that progress can be made.
I understand Trump supporters like Mags who believe trump will shake things up and that alone is worth the price of admission. But I don’t understand supporters who claim certain hard line views yet the second Trump flips, they make excuses.
Well then look at tax revenues in and unemployment costs out. I read somewhere recently about welfare costs and food stamp cost falling but I don't remember where to find it. But I suppose all things can be manipulated. Perhaps when wages rise is the only thing to watch. When labor is short wage must rise, unless we import some more and damn, we have had enough of that.
You seem to think all actions stem from a political position. Not true, many actions are prompted by Management style. This is the first time we have had a real savvy Manager as the Chief Executive. About time!
Not really being a businessman or a negotiator, I likely don't understand what you mean when you refer to "the technique" then. I had interpreted this: ...as suggesting that he makes statements that aren't true in order to motivate people to act based on their belief that the statement may, in fact, be true. But that would involve saying untrue statements, which is by definition dishonesty. Since you're saying there's nothing dishonest in the technique he's using, would you be so kind as to correct my disconnect and help me understand what I'm missing?
Where I find less value in your example is that I have not seen the same amount of concern towards previous administrations.
My example? Concern towards previous administrations? I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. I'm not making value judgments on anyone. I'm just trying to understand/clarify Marazul's statement, since he took issue with one aspect of my paraphrase.
I see nothing dishonest about leaving the impression that you may get what you want and even agreeing to what you want. This and being fully aware that others will eventually shoot it down. Perhaps even so far into the process as the courts. This is completely honest negotiation and fruitful if you get what you want or part of what you seek. Perhaps even both contentious parties win or win something. Not possible if you stand on ridged ideological prohibition, as most politician do. Business managers do not.
In reading your statements that I have identified, you call out the President for doing exactly what others have done. Seems disingenuous to me.
Again, I'm not "calling him out". But even if I were, what makes you think I favored dishonesty from any previous president? Wouldn't you need some prior precedent to suggest disingenuousness?
I follow your thinking on this. The difference would be to out right lie to the public, fully knowing that what you are telling them is an untruth. "Your premiums will go down" "You can keep your Doctor" "The FBI and the DOJ are not investigating you, President Trump"
Fairly simple, I have read your statements in this thread. No need to hand pick, you know what you have written. Lets agree that you have been less than flattering towards the President. I compare that with how you have treated other administrations on here, and there is an obvious difference. I get it, you do not like The Donald. I respect your opinion. Just seems like a waste of effort to apply standards to him that others have not lived up to.
If you're attempting to suggest that I have been flattering toward previous administrations, then you're confusing me with someone else. And even in this thread, I have not made any statements about President Trump. You're welcome to try to find one, but you will not. Every post I'd made was regarding my reading of Marazul's post, not making any declarations of my own positions. You incorrectly and unfairly characterize my opinion when you have no valid basis to do so.
