Trump Promises Megathread: Kept or Broken

[zoogs]

All talk, no action. Believe me.

[BigRedBuster]

[zoogs]

The president has offered no public comment on the issue, even as he has rolled back regulations on mine operators, an omission that has not escaped the notice of Mr. VanSickle and other retired miners.

Seriously frustrating. How carelessly did you have to follow the election to not realize that this was what Trump -- and the Republican Party -- are all about? For goodness sake, he ran on dismantling government spending and control in healthcare. What part of that screamed "warrior for regulations and protecting health benefits" to anybody?!

 

Resentment blinds.

[BigRedBuster]

I can't remember what election it was. Possibly Obama vs. McCain.

 

If I remember right, Obama went into Michigan talking about how he will bring auto industry jobs back. McCain went in saying....look, auto jobs aren't coming back, we need to find new industries to bring jobs back.

 

Obama won the state in large part because auto union workers believed him.....meanwhile.....8 years later, auto jobs haven't come back.

 

This is no different.

 

Trump went into coal country claiming he will bring coal back. He won that area because people believed him.

 

Coal jobs aren't coming back no matter how bad they want them to.

 

PS....I could have the candidates wrong in my story above....but I don't think so.

[TGHusker]

 

 

What! It surprised me but then again it doesn't based on what I've seen so far. They are back peddling on almost every one of their campaign ideas. As Knapp mentioned - this was one of their top ones. What a bunch of smoke and mirrors. The art of the deal - perhaps - I tell you what I know you want to hear so I can get what I want - thus the election of DT.

 

If you think about it, this is what he has done his whole life.

 

"Honey, I love you...marry me"......cheat and divorce a few years later

 

"Come work for me, I'll pay you"........don't pay employees

 

"Supply my job site"......don't pay suppliers

 

"Vote for me and I'll do.....".......doesn't give a crap about what he has said.

 

very true

[TGHusker]

I love that this is coming as a shock for people.

That is why I added the bold: but then again it doesn't based on what I've seen so far

 

I didn't trust him during the primaries was never a fan. He's an opportunist in every way.

[zoogs]

I can't remember what election it was. Possibly Obama vs. McCain.

 

If I remember right, Obama went into Michigan talking about how he will bring auto industry jobs back. McCain went in saying....look, auto jobs aren't coming back, we need to find new industries to bring jobs back.

 

Obama won the state in large part because auto union workers believed him.....meanwhile.....8 years later, auto jobs haven't come back.

 

This is no different.

 

Trump went into coal country claiming he will bring coal back. He won that area because people believed him.

 

Coal jobs aren't coming back no matter how bad they want them to.

 

PS....I could have the candidates wrong in my story above....but I don't think so.

Are you possibly thinking of Romney versus McCain? http://blogs.reuters.com/talesfromthetrail/2009/07/15/obama-not-first-to-say-jobs-not-coming-back-to-michigan/

 

This July 2009 article is about how Obama was not the first politician to tell Michigan the hard truth that those jobs weren't coming back. If it were a stunning about face for him that'd be one hell of an omission.

 

Perhaps you're also referring to a specific policy discussion that was playing out over whether or not there should be an auto bailout.

(Politifact: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/sep/06/did-obama-save-us-automobile-industry/). The summary of the PF article is that it was a good outcome whose credit should be shared between the Obama and Bush administrations. It seems Republicans were keen on opposing the bailout, decrying it as a failure/death of the American auto industry, and skewering Obama for it.

 

PF also offers this:

 

Even Sherk at the Heritage Foundation gives Obama credit for forcing the carmakers to go through bankruptcy and the necessary restructuring that followed. The Economist concludes "by and large Mr Obama has not used his stakes in GM and Chrysler for political ends. On the contrary, his goal has been to restore both firms to health and then get out as quickly as possible."

[BigRedBuster]

It very well could have been Romney vs. McCain. I honestly don't remember.

I do specifically remember there being a distinct difference in message between two candidates and sitting back and thinking....the one who says he's bringing auto jobs back is full of crap.

 

I seriously thought it was between a Republican and a Democrat though.

[knapplc]

[TGHusker]

Good grief. Of all of the campaign pledges he keeps - it is this one. While I'm a gun rights person, most mass shootings have been by the mentally ill and these Obama restrictions were needed and did not violate the 2nd amendment. While there should be certain criteria (and certainly is) on defining the mentally ill that are so restricted so that Obama's restrictions were abused the other way, this reversal goes against the public safety.

[zoogs]

Of course he did. Promises flow freely from his lips, but it was really NOT a mystery the sorts of places where his priorities lay. It wasn't in UHC, it as in stuff like this. This is why it's so important to evaluate a politician's *priorities*. Everything is a fight. What will they push for? What will they drop and what are they going to compromise?

 

N.b, the libertarian in me feels like this isn't necessarily the "wrong" outcome for that EO. This was also opposed by the ACLU. Which I should note is in hock to telecom on ending net neutrality, so it's somewhat fair to question their civil liberties credentials too. I do think they have a legitimate angle on this one, though.

[BigRedBuster]

So, let me review this so I get this straight.

 

We haven't had a terrorist attack on the US from a refugee since something like 1970s.....but we must prevent any refugees coming here in fear they are going to kill us all.

 

We have had multiple mass shootings by mentally ill people each year....but....we don't want to restrict them getting guns.

 

 

Hmmmm...somethings just can't be explained.

[mrandyk]

So, let me review this so I get this straight.

 

We haven't had a terrorist attack on the US from a refugee since something like 1970s.....but we must prevent any refugees coming here in fear they are going to kill us all.

 

We have had multiple mass shootings by mentally ill people each year....but....we don't want to restrict them getting guns.

 

 

Hmmmm...somethings just can't be explained.

There's an explanation alright. It just doesn't involve sound reason on behalf of those making the decision.

[Moiraine]

Yup. It can easily be explained by Trump.

[C N Red]

Very disappointed. Gonna have to say broken. This is no megathread!