Jump to content
270soft Forum
vcczar

President Trump Forum Approval Poll (Nov 2017)

Pres. Trump Forum Approval Poll -- Nov 2017  

24 members have voted

  1. 1. Overall, how well has Trump handled Domestic Policy (Abortion, Drug War, Criminal Justice, Economy, Education, Energy, Environment, Health Care, Regulations, Immigration, Civil Rights, Disaster relief)?

    • He has arguably been the best president ever at Domestic Policy
      0
    • He has arguably been one of the top 10 best president at Domestic Policy
    • He has done pretty well at Domestic Policy
    • He's been above average at Domestic Policy
    • He's been mediocre in Domestic Policy
      0
    • He's been below average at Domestic Policy
    • He hasn't done very well at Domestic Policy
    • He has arguably been one of the top 10 worst presidents at Domestic Policy
    • He has arguably been the worst president at Domestic Policy
  2. 2. Overall, how well has Trump handled Foreign Policy (Trade, Diplomacy, Military overseas, Canada, Mexico, South America, Cuba, North Korea, Iran, China, Russia, Europe, Syria, Africa, etc.)

    • He has arguably been the best president ever at Foreign Policy
      0
    • He has arguably been one of the top 10 best president at Foreign Policy
    • He has done pretty well at Foreign Policy
    • He's been above average at Foreign Policy
    • He's been mediocre in Foreign Policy
    • He's been below average at Foreign Policy
    • He hasn't done very well at Foreign Policy
    • He has arguably been one of the top 10 worst presidents at Foreign Policy
    • He has arguably been the worst president at Foreign Policy
  3. 3. Which of the following general areas has Trump done reasonably well as president?

    • Making political appointments (advisers, cabinet, cabinet-level, ambassadors, communication directors, judges, etc.)
    • Being the voice of his supporters
    • Being the voice for all Americans
    • Being the leading voice of the "Free World"
    • Handling opposition politicians
    • Handling politicians of his own party
    • Handling the media
    • Handling members of his own administration
    • Inspiring confidence in the presidency and in executive government
    • Showing integrity and honesty
    • Fostering American unity
    • Fulfilling his pledge of "Draining the Swamp"
    • Adhering to Conservative and Traditional American Values
    • Adhering to his Populist platform
    • Showing an independent 3rd way, adrift of either liberal or conservative ideology
    • Inspiring a healthy dose of Nationalism
    • Other positive trait (mention below in a comment if you select this)
      0
    • None of the above


Recommended Posts

Here's this month's poll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is too early to say in my opinion. He still has 3 years to build the wall and deport the illegals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dindu said:

It is too early to say in my opinion. He still has 3 years to build the wall and deport the illegals.

I agree that he should, but there are other priorities, including not starting a war and not being impeached at this point 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, LegolasRedbard said:

I agree that he should, but there are other priorities, including not starting a war and not being impeached at this point 

There is no way that Trump will get impeached. The Republicans control congress. I think that anything was better than Hillary because she was psychotic about Russia and would maybe have started an unnecessary war with our white brothers in Russia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, dindu said:

There is no way that Trump will get impeached. The Republicans control congress. I think that anything was better than Hillary because she was psychotic about Russia and would maybe have started an unnecessary war with our white brothers in Russia.

coughcoughNixoncoughcough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, LegolasRedbard said:

coughcoughNixoncoughcough

nah, not similar situations. Nixons stepped down because he knew the democrats were in control of both chambers and easily could impeach him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LegolasRedbard said:

coughcoughNixoncoughcough

I'm not a crook! That's not great! The lyin' media and fake news keep calling me a crook! I know a real crook when I see one! And I've seen the worst of them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dindu said:

nah, not similar situations. Nixons stepped down because he knew the democrats were in control of both chambers and easily could impeach him.

coughcoughyouneedasupermajoritytoconvictcoughcough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2017‎-‎10‎-‎30 at 9:17 AM, vcczar said:

Here's this month's poll

I'm surprised @Reagan04 considers Trump, whose put the social issues so held dear by @Reagan04, to such a distant backburner in priority, and openly campaigned on so many things being higher priorities, even completely shrugging off firm statements of addressing many hot button social issues, to be one of the 10 greatest Presidents in domestic policy. I'm fearing @Reagan04's strong convictions of which he has been so proud are giving way to pure political expediency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patine said:

I'm surprised @Reagan04 considers Trump, whose put the social issues so held dear by @Reagan04, to such a distant backburner in priority, and openly campaigned on so many things being higher priorities, even completely shrugging off firm statements of addressing many hot button social issues, to be one of the 10 greatest Presidents in domestic policy. I'm fearing @Reagan04's strong convictions of which he has been so proud are giving way to pure political expediency.

Absolutely not, Trump has been great on these issues. I don't know what world you are living in but he has gotten tough on LGBT nonsense and signed abortion restrictions. He has been fantastic and slashed a lot of so-called "Civil Rights". He has been doing a lot better than I certainly thought!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Reagan04 said:

Absolutely not, Trump has been great on these issues. I don't know what world you are living in but he has gotten tough on LGBT nonsense and signed abortion restrictions. He has been fantastic and slashed a lot of so-called "Civil Rights". He has been doing a lot better than I certainly thought!

Well, from everyone I know in the U.S. that I talk to (outside of these forums), many of whom would be affected by such changes directly or have a lot of friends and family who would, these policies seem to have had the impact of a paper airplane on a blast door.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worst president ever! Impeach Trump now! Pence can have the White House, I care not a whit anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Wiw said:

Worst president ever! Impeach Trump now! Pence can have the White House, I care not a whit anymore.

Not the worst (even though I'm no fan of his). Buchanan, Pierce, arguably Hoover, and for different reasons Jackson, Polk, and McKinley, even possibly Nixon, are worse, all-In-all, in my opinion. Trump however, is an underqualified, uninformed, incendiary, egotistical, divisive, thin-skinned blow-hard, but, fortunately, he seems unable to fulfill the worst aspects of platforms (those that were realistic to perform anyways, and weren't just "promising the Moon" to get elected, at least), because many Republicans in Congress don't go along with them, and he can't keep a full cabinet together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wiw said:

They haven't committed such human rights abuses though, have they?

Buchanan pressured the Supreme Court to decide against Dred Scott.  That did more damage to African Americans than Trump could ever dream of.  160 years later it's still cited as the worst Supreme Court decision in the country's history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wiw said:

They haven't committed such human rights abuses though, have they?

And don't forget Jackson's Trail of Tears (and he wasn't the one crying).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Wiw said:

Worst president ever! Impeach Trump now! Pence can have the White House, I care not a whit anymore.

No. Here's how I'd personally rank them if Trump's presidency ended today. (1-9 = great Presidents, 10-17 = decent Presidents, 18-28 = mediocre Presidents, 29-38 = poor Presidents, 39-44 = worst of the worst)

  1. JFK
  2. FDR
  3. Washington
  4. Lincoln
  5. Teddy Roosevelt
  6. Obama
  7. Eisenhower
  8. Truman
  9. LBJ
  10. Monroe
  11. Madison
  12. Jefferson
  13. Carter
  14. Cleveland
  15. B. Harrison
  16. Hayes
  17. GHW Bush
  18. JQ Adams
  19. John Adams
  20. Van Buren
  21. Polk
  22. Garfield
  23. McKinley
  24. Ford
  25. Fillmore
  26. WH Harrison
  27. CA Arthur
  28. Coolidge
  29. Harding
  30. Tyler
  31. Grant
  32. Taft
  33. Clinton (wish I could say "which one?")
  34. Reagan
  35. Wilson
  36. Dubya Bush
  37. Taylor
  38. Pierce
  39. Andrew Johnson
  40. Trump
  41. Hoover
  42. Jackson
  43. Buchanan
  44. Nixon

I think President Hillary D. R. Clinton would be between Cleveland and B. Harrison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted that he has successfully handled the media, since, well... most of the more mainstream outlets constantly play right into his hands. He has perfected this sort of populist short-span hyperbolic disdain for integrity that many 'journalists' of the upper corporate outlets seem to either outright beg for or at the least lap up like domesticated animals. The sheer absurdity of his surface-level public persona has given him a lot of political success and I don't think anyone could deny that. It's debatable that he knows what he is doing, but I can only assume he does.

 

 

6 hours ago, Patine said:

Not the worst (even though I'm no fan of his). Buchanan, Pierce, arguably Hoover, and for different reasons Jackson, Polk, and McKinley, even possibly Nixon, are worse, all-In-all, in my opinion. Trump however, is an underqualified, uninformed, incendiary, egotistical, divisive, thin-skinned blow-hard, but, fortunately, he seems unable to fulfill the worst aspects of platforms (those that were realistic to perform anyways, and weren't just "promising the Moon" to get elected, at least), because many Republicans in Congress don't go along with them, and he can't keep a full cabinet together.

I think it's important to view Trump as part of a broader political moment, a sort of reaction or a revulsion of the mediocritous social progressivism embraced by Democrats (willingly or otherwise). Here in Texas, we've had some pretty nasty public debates over the "bathroom bill", which I am happy to argue has less to do with safety (assault already being a crime) and more to do with fostering an atmosphere of fear and pseudo-vigilantism. The creation of that atmosphere, if you consider it a goal of the movement, has definitely been a success. It's not a stretch to say that many people now fear for their lives walking down the sidewalk who might have had less problems just a few years ago. And it's not even that people they might be afraid of did not exist before, only that now the moment is theirs and they feel empowered.

Trump does not have to be successful in an institutional sense if he can accomplish the goal of whipping up reactionary fervor and upsetting that kind of "progressivism" (if you ask a typical Democrat) or "social marxism" (if you ask a typical Republican). Silence and indecision on the part of the most leftist or at least left-sympathetic portions of the population is a victory all its own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Lyly said:

I voted that he has successfully handled the media, since, well... most of the more mainstream outlets constantly play right into his hands. He has perfected this sort of populist short-span hyperbolic disdain for integrity that many 'journalists' of the upper corporate outlets seem to either outright beg for or at the least lap up like domesticated animals. The sheer absurdity of his surface-level public persona has given him a lot of political success and I don't think anyone could deny that. It's debatable that he knows what he is doing, but I can only assume he does.

 

 

I think it's important to view Trump as part of a broader political moment, a sort of reaction or a revulsion of the mediocritous social progressivism embraced by Democrats (willingly or otherwise). Here in Texas, we've had some pretty nasty public debates over the "bathroom bill", which I am happy to argue has less to do with safety (assault already being a crime) and more to do with fostering an atmosphere of fear and pseudo-vigilantism. The creation of that atmosphere, if you consider it a goal of the movement, has definitely been a success. It's not a stretch to say that many people now fear for their lives walking down the sidewalk who might have had less problems just a few years ago. And it's not even that people they might be afraid of did not exist before, only that now the moment is theirs and they feel empowered.

Trump does not have to be successful in an institutional sense if he can accomplish the goal of whipping up reactionary fervor and upsetting that kind of "progressivism" (if you ask a typical Democrat) or "social marxism" (if you ask a typical Republican). Silence and indecision on the part of the most leftist or at least left-sympathetic portions of the population is a victory all its own.

I will be perfectly frank here. I believe the hyper-focus on social issues, back-and-forth, by both major parties in the U.S. (far beyond the focus the carrying on that's really needed in rhetoric, whether socially conservative or liberal - basically, with both parties' ideologues endorsing positions on these issues that are always as far away as possible from "live and let live") is a smokescreen in the campaigning of both major to hide their policy failures of late in most over areas. Regardless of whose controlled the White House, Congress, or individual State governments of late, unemployment has been higher than it should be, the economy always at best is waddling on the precipice of a recession, the Federal Debt is growing, commodity prices are rising faster than the cost of production, shipping, and retail, housing costs are rising and availability shrinking, post-secondary education tuitions are rising while many of their degrees and certificates, except in certain fields, become less and less useful to graduates, crime levels rise, as does extra-judicial police impunity, and the U.S. struggles visibly to maintain a paramount internationally. So, with both major parties having such a track record of late of abysmal failure in governance (and in the same areas), harping endlessly on the seemingly unresolvable social issues distracts the voters and stops them from turning seriously and in number to previously marginalized Independent and Third Party candidates who may offer real solutions by not being leashed to the Duopoly's broken vision and legacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your general analysis is right on and you won't find an argument from me that these two parties have routinely failed to bolster the interests of most of their nation.

My example from before is admittedly single-issue and I think you would also tend to argue that 'success' as we're discussing in this thread has more to do with concrete policy and, as I put it, institutional viability. However I still say that political success can be achieved outside of making new policy. I also would like to point out that, by and large, conservatives, corporate interests, etc. have the system in place that they want any way. As you said, both Democrats and Republicans end up putting the same positions first and so there's not a lot of disagreement between the two political parties and what might be called the ruling class. And those social issues are hugely propped up to pre-empt any concerns of changing that when the big elections come along. Trump doesn't really have to diverge from Obama's policies for those core "ruling class" constituencies to remain satisfied in their positions.

Even so, the administration has proven itself to have real economic policy goals which diverge from Obama's. At the moment, it looks mostly like a massive smash-and-grab. Trump won in a surprise, so they're funneling up profits while the getting's good, concentrating economic power as rapidly as possible, and meanwhile opening up what few untapped markets remain in the US for domestic exploitation (see the reduction in size of National Parks, promotion of new capital for public-private projects in foreign nations, in Puerto Rico, and on the southern border, rattling about 'buy-American', and reticence about the United Nations, NATO, and the Paris Climate agreements).

I think Trump is an example of what happens when the nominally left party implements all the important policies of the right party. In a nutshell, Clintonian triangulation has made actual concrete policy positions of Republicans irrelevant or just superfluous. Capitalist interests don't have much they have to change, so the only option there is on the right of such a party is outright nationalism (and I mean that mostly in an economic fashion firstly, but not to ignore other aspects of nationalism).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Lyly said:

I think your general analysis is right on and you won't find an argument from me that these two parties have routinely failed to bolster the interests of most of their nation.

My example from before is admittedly single-issue and I think you would also tend to argue that 'success' as we're discussing in this thread has more to do with concrete policy and, as I put it, institutional viability. However I still say that political success can be achieved outside of making new policy. I also would like to point out that, by and large, conservatives, corporate interests, etc. have the system in place that they want any way. As you said, both Democrats and Republicans end up putting the same positions first and so there's not a lot of disagreement between the two political parties and what might be called the ruling class. And those social issues are hugely propped up to pre-empt any concerns of changing that when the big elections come along. Trump doesn't really have to diverge from Obama's policies for those core "ruling class" constituencies to remain satisfied in their positions.

Even so, the administration has proven itself to have real economic policy goals which diverge from Obama's. At the moment, it looks mostly like a massive smash-and-grab. Trump won in a surprise, so they're funneling up profits while the getting's good, concentrating economic power as rapidly as possible, and meanwhile opening up what few untapped markets remain in the US for domestic exploitation (see the reduction in size of National Parks, promotion of new capital for public-private projects in foreign nations, in Puerto Rico, and on the southern border, rattling about 'buy-American', and reticence about the United Nations, NATO, and the Paris Climate agreements).

I think Trump is an example of what happens when the nominally left party implements all the important policies of the right party. In a nutshell, Clintonian triangulation has made actual concrete policy positions of Republicans irrelevant or just superfluous. Capitalist interests don't have much they have to change, so the only option there is on the right of such a party is outright nationalism (and I mean that mostly in an economic fashion firstly, but not to ignore other aspects of nationalism).

I think Trump's economic policies, however, could very easily end up a similar situation to a Harding-Coolidge-Hoover situation - short-term big gains, followed by disastrous mid-to-long-term consequences, like most such reckless financial whirlwind policies with little foresight or concern for the future, even the foreseeable future, tend to be. The part about alienating most of the U.S.'s traditional trading partners may well be one of the most rued oversights of the Trump economic agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bruce Fischer said:

No. Here's how I'd personally rank them if Trump's presidency ended today. (1-9 = great Presidents, 10-17 = decent Presidents, 18-28 = mediocre Presidents, 29-38 = poor Presidents, 39-44 = worst of the worst)

  1. JFK
  2. FDR
  3. Washington
  4. Lincoln
  5. Teddy Roosevelt
  6. Obama
  7. Eisenhower
  8. Truman
  9. LBJ
  10. Monroe
  11. Madison
  12. Jefferson
  13. Carter
  14. Cleveland
  15. B. Harrison
  16. Hayes
  17. GHW Bush
  18. JQ Adams
  19. John Adams
  20. Van Buren
  21. Polk
  22. Garfield
  23. McKinley
  24. Ford
  25. Fillmore
  26. WH Harrison
  27. CA Arthur
  28. Coolidge
  29. Harding
  30. Tyler
  31. Grant
  32. Taft
  33. Clinton (wish I could say "which one?")
  34. Reagan
  35. Wilson
  36. Dubya Bush
  37. Taylor
  38. Pierce
  39. Andrew Johnson
  40. Trump
  41. Hoover
  42. Jackson
  43. Buchanan
  44. Nixon

I think President Hillary D. R. Clinton would be between Cleveland and B. Harrison.

JFK before FDR really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, WVProgressive said:

JFK before FDR really?

Two words: Japanese internment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Bruce Fischer said:

Two words: Japanese internment

But still why Kennedy I mean I like the guy but ... best president?

 

How do you rate the presidents like do you weight certain success in one area such as Healthcare Reform than failure in other areas like starting 5 new interventions when only 9% wanted to be in the two they were already in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×