Frollein wrote:Way back when, in blackjack's mega Trump thread, I wrote "Trump is the people's way to tell the establishment 'fuck you'." And it was; I wonder how many of them truly believed his promises (many, for sure), and how many of them didn't believe a single word he said and voted for him anyway (like blackjack) just because they hated the establishment more.
I think Trump was the last safety valve; now that he's alienated both sides of the population, I'm really looking forward to your next elections, provided you'll still have them.
I think for Syria, Trump gets a pass, because his actions will deter Assad from creating the massive refugee problems the alt-right ultimately opposes too. So they are a small faction and split. Russia and Iran's reaction is telling about why Obama didn't have the balls to do something quite like that, and instead quietly went around doing his precision strikes. If Russia and Iran feel threatened, Trump is in a stronger position on the global stage even though the alt-right won't like it. Clearly, the necons loved it, and this has shattered their Russian puppet mantra, which was absurd anyway. Trump more or less had to take action, because he was conciliatory towards Assad and his military interpreted that as a license to use poison gas.
Militarily, I think the attack was too expensive. The use of Tomahawks is quite expensive. JDAMs are much cheaper, and Russian air defences apparently did nothing to stop the Tomahawks. So I would have been more inclined to a few B2s with F22 escorts. A B2 can carry 80 GBU-39s (500lb SDBs) or 16 GBU 31s (2000lb). So maybe the cost was more inspired by having a more instant reaction. As far as I could tell from the BDA, they didn't even crater the runway.
Politically, I think Trump's achilles heel is Obamacare-lite. Trump won with alt-right support, but not because of it. Blue collar workers in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin aren't alt right voters. Where Trump could be in trouble is going along with the Chamber of Commerce and RomneyCare in lieu of ObamaCare. Too much of the country doesn't want ObamaCare-lite for it ever to become a political winner. Trump seems to be trying to bargain with tax cuts and something on health care jointly. If he doesn't make reforms that actually cut the cost of health care, it will be a political loser for him.
I had my cousin and her husband out for dinner this weekend. Flaming liberals. They hate Trump, but they hate ObamaCare making them have maternity coverage at 55 with no kids in addition to pediatric coverage. So even flaming liberals who hate Trump detest the costs of ObamaCare.
As I've said, only three things seem to be more expensive now than in the past: government, education and health care. They are all protected by the establishment, they are too expensive, and far too ineffective to justify their cost. So far, Trump has shown an appetite to cut government size, but he seems as liberal as Democrats on healthcare, and I think that's going to be a deal killer for him--something, I don't think he understood or is quite prepared to deal with now.
"I read a funny story about how the Republicans freed the slaves. The Republicans are the ones who created slavery by law in the 1600's. Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves and he was not a Republican."