Historians... What do they know?
- Thread starter davidallen
- Start date
Yes. I saw that article when I was reading up on the topic this morning. That’s what leads me to believe we will answer in a more covert manner. Just speculation on my part.
Did you do the required reading or just show up to class expecting to wing it? Even those historians identifying as Republicans rank Donnie boy near the bottom. They are much harder on BHO as well. Come back when you have something other than defensive talking points.
How do feel about taking that $226 and leaving your kids an IOU in it's place? Not once, not twice but every couple of weeks?
so you want kamala harris’s filthy mitts on your do?
cause she’s gonna do the right thing with it?
you think hank johnson will use your do to keep guam from rolling over into the ocean?
if the shit hits the fan because of tomorrow’s debt cmon back to oklahoma
i’m sure alfs got twin 50’s and a nice sized garden on his spread for you
Dude that bridge was burned long ago by the Oklahoma Legislature. Not that I couldn't find a good secular private school for my kids, but there is a ticking time bomb in Oklahoma that I want no part of...
Do you often find yourself randomly thinking about men's genitalia for no reason at all, such as in this instance?
Or does it usually take a glass or two of Pinot to loosen you up?
Yes, in my opinion, it is.. I find I don't ever think about other men's penises; ergo I don't then have to make up some rationale to justify my thoughts.
I was talking to my wife while watching the Nightly news last night. They had two stories back-to-back. The first was about Russia interfering and Sanders admitting that Russia clearly 'meddled'. The reporters pressed her for details about implementing of sanctions against Russia and us taking a tougher stance against them. The next story was about Syria dropping more bombs on 'civilian'/rebel locations and that the the region was pleading for the US to do more. So I ask, should the US say FU to the Syrians and apply full sanctions on Russia, or should we try to improve our Russian relations so we can leverage them to bring Assad to heel. Logic dictates that we can't do both here and I'm pretty sure noone wants the 3rd option of sending our own troops over there.
i don’t fully understand the syrian situation
russia moving in from the north
iran from the east
turkey from the west
i do know russia is run by thugs
assad is a thug
isis is thugs
iran thugs
the ethnic kurdish minority has been a US ally
yet terrorizes and murders turkish civilians
i don’t know what US policy is beneficial other than
1. humanitarian aid and protection against all these factions who rejoice in washing themselves in blood as sport
2. protecting our ally in israel at all costs
russia moving in from the north
iran from the east
turkey from the west
i do know russia is run by thugs
assad is a thug
isis is thugs
iran thugs
the ethnic kurdish minority has been a US ally
yet terrorizes and murders turkish civilians
i don’t know what US policy is beneficial other than
1. humanitarian aid and protection against all these factions who rejoice in washing themselves in blood as sport
2. protecting our ally in israel at all costs
JD,
You usually bring common sense to these discussions, so I ask, how much validity can an historian have on the consequence and total effectiveness of a president 13 months into his presidency? Any valid measure of Trump would be an 'incomplete' because there's no way to judge if the tax cut will be good or bad yet. We don't know if inflation becomes killer for our economy, or if its just the right amount to generate real wage growth for the middle class (something the past president's recovery efforts failed to materialize). So how, if you don't have a predisposition to a position, can you judge Trump's presidency to be the WORST of all time? This is my complaint with this article. While they imply political neutrality, only through the lens of preconceived notions or via biased expectations could you adequately judge the actions and benefits of a president this early in comparison to his peers.
You usually bring common sense to these discussions, so I ask, how much validity can an historian have on the consequence and total effectiveness of a president 13 months into his presidency? Any valid measure of Trump would be an 'incomplete' because there's no way to judge if the tax cut will be good or bad yet. We don't know if inflation becomes killer for our economy, or if its just the right amount to generate real wage growth for the middle class (something the past president's recovery efforts failed to materialize). So how, if you don't have a predisposition to a position, can you judge Trump's presidency to be the WORST of all time? This is my complaint with this article. While they imply political neutrality, only through the lens of preconceived notions or via biased expectations could you adequately judge the actions and benefits of a president this early in comparison to his peers.
Didn’t read it until you asked.
The article does kind of concede that Trump is an incomplete by talking about this being a “first draft” evaluation of him and how he has three three years to go.
Additionally, it’s all just an opinion poll with no provision of measurables upon which the decision is to be based (as far as I saw in my short scan of the article). Opinion polls on “Best” or “Worst” anything can be kind of fun, but I don’t put much stock in them because they are so affected by so many personal variables and biases. They don’t really mean anything. Designed as clickbait for both that agree and those that disagree.
I don’t why anybody would get too worked up one way or the other over that kind of opinion piece personally.
The article does kind of concede that Trump is an incomplete by talking about this being a “first draft” evaluation of him and how he has three three years to go.
Additionally, it’s all just an opinion poll with no provision of measurables upon which the decision is to be based (as far as I saw in my short scan of the article). Opinion polls on “Best” or “Worst” anything can be kind of fun, but I don’t put much stock in them because they are so affected by so many personal variables and biases. They don’t really mean anything. Designed as clickbait for both that agree and those that disagree.
I don’t why anybody would get too worked up one way or the other over that kind of opinion piece personally.
Last edited:
JD,
I apologize. I called on you when it was DA who made the original post. He usually has common sense as well although he is left of center.
No worries.
My bet would be that DA posted that primarily to watch the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the other side.
My take is it is early on Trump for anything other than fun speculation and still awfully early on BHO. I was surprised Obama was as high as he was AND DJT was as low.
