Posters who are rooting for a Trump collapse...why?

[ProudModerate2]

Because i like to see bad people fail....they fail? Im happy about it.

Well part of the president "failing" would include millions of good people suffering financially, and perhaps losing loved ones. That doesn't make you a very good person, in my view.

LOL.
twenty42 playing the game that he cares about other people's lives is the most hilarious thing he has ever posted.

[Calthrina950]

Because i like to see bad people fail....they fail? Im happy about it.

Well part of the president "failing" would include millions of good people suffering financially, and perhaps losing loved ones. That doesn't make you a very good person, in my view.

LOL.
twenty42 playing the game that he cares about other people's lives is the most hilarious thing he has ever posted.

Your snide insults don't reflect too well on your character other. People on here tend to use the phrase "LOL" in a demeaning and cruel way.

[Take your vitamins and say your prayers, Brother!]

Some people HAVE character.

Some people ARE characters.

Normally, I try to focus on BEING, rather than HAVING, but in this case it's the reverse.  In any event, Atlas gives me lots of opportunities to see the difference in the two.

[Cowboys for Christ]

It’s pretty well established that most partisans want the president to succeed when they’re a member of their party, and fail when they aren’t.

If you’re asking specifically why Democrats aren’t hoping for Trump to succeed, well, that depends on what you mean by succeed. If you mean succeed at making America a more prosperous nation in which anyone can get ahead and we all live in peace, most Democrats don’t believe that Trump is capable of doing that nor that his policies will accomplish that. If, on the other hand, you mean succeed as in fulfill his campaign promises (build a wall, deport all illegal immigrants while making legal immigration more difficult, end Obamacare, do nothing about climate change, etc), why would Democrats want that?

This is the correct take.

As a Democrat, I do not want Trump to succeed in both ways Mr. Xing has mentioned. I do not believe he is a remotely effective President; his policies and skills as an executive leave everything to be desired. IF Trump were to be removed from office, nothing much would change politically, considering Trump has proved himself to be the standard GOP fare. I personally do not expect Pence to actually be a better President than Trump, as I believe that his policies would be even worse for the nation than Trump's- but that is another discussion altogether.

I can think of an example in wishing for an executive to fail vs. their government failing. I do not want Pete Ricketts to win re-election. I do not agree with him politically on the major issues. The way he handled the repeal of the death penalty by the State Legislature- and threatening its independence with his vast fortune- is disgusting. His hypocrisy about life and his phony commitment to literal life and death issues is disgusting. I do not want him to be Governor. Would our state fail merely because someone like him was out of office? It would not.

The same goes for about any executive- if you do not agree with them politically, there is no reason for wishing for them to succeed in their policy initiatives. The only executives that should be opposed at any circumstance are those who wish to become literal dictators. Thinking about it, this may also a symptom of an executive gaining too much power. It begs the question: if people are equating to not supporting the President to not supporting the country, should powers be stripped away?

[ProudModerate2]

Some people use Christianity to love.

And some people use Christianity to HATE.

In any event, Atlas gives me lots of opportunities to see the difference in the two.

[Doomer]

This forum is full of people who are still students, or who don't work for a living, have accomplished little (whatever their potential may be) and exist in much of a theoretical universe.  Trump's crashing and burning will give them the ego satisfaction of being right.  As many of these types are not yet productive citizens (albeit preparing to be), they will not be paying the price the rest of America will pay.  At least not right away.

I can't afford for America to fail.  America fails when our President fails, at least at some levels.

I wholeheartedly disagree that this forum is full of people who have accomplished so little, like you say.  For myself, I'm in an occupation that is necessary to the fabric of society; my job has an impact and you'd literally die without it.  You don't know what anyone here does with their lives unless they tell you or you know them personally.

Anyway, here's my reply to the mirror thread to this one (they're both pretty dumb, btw):

I don't mind his poll numbers rising, but I want them to be rising for the right reasons.

I want Trump to do well because he's the president, and I'm an American.  Everyone should want him to succeed.  My hope is that he'll begin governing as an American and not something unrecognizable and/or horrid to our form of government.  Do I think he can do that?  No, of course not; if you keep digging a hole, eventually you can't climb out of it.  But I've always hoped he'd do well, ever since his election--I even posted that once or twice around here going as far back as his election.

[twenty42]

It’s pretty well established that most partisans want the president to succeed when they’re a member of their party, and fail when they aren’t.

If you’re asking specifically why Democrats aren’t hoping for Trump to succeed, well, that depends on what you mean by succeed. If you mean succeed at making America a more prosperous nation in which anyone can get ahead and we all live in peace, most Democrats don’t believe that Trump is capable of doing that nor that his policies will accomplish that. If, on the other hand, you mean succeed as in fulfill his campaign promises (build a wall, deport all illegal immigrants while making legal immigration more difficult, end Obamacare, do nothing about climate change, etc), why would Democrats want that?

This is the correct take.

As a Democrat, I do not want Trump to succeed in both ways Mr. Xing has mentioned. I do not believe he is a remotely effective President; his policies and skills as an executive leave everything to be desired. IF Trump were to be removed from office, nothing much would change politically, considering Trump has proved himself to be the standard GOP fare. I personally do not expect Pence to actually be a better President than Trump, as I believe that his policies would be even worse for the nation than Trump's- but that is another discussion altogether.

I can think of an example in wishing for an executive to fail vs. their government failing. I do not want Pete Ricketts to win re-election. I do not agree with him politically on the major issues. The way he handled the repeal of the death penalty by the State Legislature- and threatening its independence with his vast fortune- is disgusting. His hypocrisy about life and his phony commitment to literal life and death issues is disgusting. I do not want him to be Governor. Would our state fail merely because someone like him was out of office? It would not.

The same goes for about any executive- if you do not agree with them politically, there is no reason for wishing for them to succeed in their policy initiatives. The only executives that should be opposed at any circumstance are those who wish to become literal dictators. Thinking about it, this may also a symptom of an executive gaining too much power. It begs the question: if people are equating to not supporting the President to not supporting the country, should powers be stripped away?

You are denying the antecedent here. A bad presidency is bad for the country, no matter how you cut the cake. You are conflating passage of legislation with national conditions, but I'm pretty sure presidents are judged more on the latter. Bill Clinton's presidency is generally viewed in a favorable light among historians because the economy was booming and things were relatively peaceful on the world stage. That being said, Clinton wasn't a particularly effective president, as 1990s politics was generally marked by gridlock.

At this point, I think it is pretty safe to say that only an economic downturn will pull Trump lower than high 30s-low 40s. For this reason, it is oxymoronic to root for America to do well but root for Trump's approvals to plummet at the same time.

[Take your vitamins and say your prayers, Brother!]

This forum is full of people who are still students, or who don't work for a living, have accomplished little (whatever their potential may be) and exist in much of a theoretical universe.  Trump's crashing and burning will give them the ego satisfaction of being right.  As many of these types are not yet productive citizens (albeit preparing to be), they will not be paying the price the rest of America will pay.  At least not right away.

I can't afford for America to fail.  America fails when our President fails, at least at some levels.

I wholeheartedly disagree that this forum is full of people who have accomplished so little, like you say.  For myself, I'm in an occupation that is necessary to the fabric of society; my job has an impact and you'd literally die without it.  You don't know what anyone here does with their lives unless they tell you or you know them personally.

Anyway, here's my reply to the mirror thread to this one (they're both pretty dumb, btw):

I don't mind his poll numbers rising, but I want them to be rising for the right reasons.

I want Trump to do well because he's the president, and I'm an American.  Everyone should want him to succeed.  My hope is that he'll begin governing as an American and not something unrecognizable and/or horrid to our form of government.  Do I think he can do that?  No, of course not; if you keep digging a hole, eventually you can't climb out of it.  But I've always hoped he'd do well, ever since his election--I even posted that once or twice around here going as far back as his election.

True enough.  But you're GWBfan, so I assume you're beyond college, and I assume you're beyond the age where an American meltdown would affect you.

It's also funny how, when I sometimes call people on that, they never refute this.  Now I understand.  I was a young political activist, going to college, living on campus, coming home in the summer, and having my mother and grandmother as a backup in case of system failure.  So, yes, when I was young and partisan, I rooted for Ford and Reagan (I was a partisan Democrat then.) to fail, and I was a ranter and raver.

It's easy to root for America to fail when you have little of yours to lose and when you have backup.  I will assure you than when I was 32 years old, suddenly unemployed for 6 months, with my benefits running out, and I owned my first home, I wasn't rooting for Bush 41 to fail, and I was still a Democrat then.

Lots of people here aren't playing for keeps yet, and some others are, but it hasn't sunk in yet.  There's nothing wrong with that, and it doesn't make you an HP, but I get this from experience.

[Pericles]

People are simply wishing for more people to agree with them on Trump. Most people(there's always a fringe minority, but the vast majority) don't want there to be a war or recession. However many posters feel Trump has too much support, and wish that Trump's support were at the level they feel he deserves and people agreeing with them. Disapproval of Trump is largely due to a belief that his presidency will have negative consequences for the US and the American people-which is an understandable belief.

[Cowboys for Christ]

It’s pretty well established that most partisans want the president to succeed when they’re a member of their party, and fail when they aren’t.

If you’re asking specifically why Democrats aren’t hoping for Trump to succeed, well, that depends on what you mean by succeed. If you mean succeed at making America a more prosperous nation in which anyone can get ahead and we all live in peace, most Democrats don’t believe that Trump is capable of doing that nor that his policies will accomplish that. If, on the other hand, you mean succeed as in fulfill his campaign promises (build a wall, deport all illegal immigrants while making legal immigration more difficult, end Obamacare, do nothing about climate change, etc), why would Democrats want that?

This is the correct take.

As a Democrat, I do not want Trump to succeed in both ways Mr. Xing has mentioned. I do not believe he is a remotely effective President; his policies and skills as an executive leave everything to be desired. IF Trump were to be removed from office, nothing much would change politically, considering Trump has proved himself to be the standard GOP fare. I personally do not expect Pence to actually be a better President than Trump, as I believe that his policies would be even worse for the nation than Trump's- but that is another discussion altogether.

I can think of an example in wishing for an executive to fail vs. their government failing. I do not want Pete Ricketts to win re-election. I do not agree with him politically on the major issues. The way he handled the repeal of the death penalty by the State Legislature- and threatening its independence with his vast fortune- is disgusting. His hypocrisy about life and his phony commitment to literal life and death issues is disgusting. I do not want him to be Governor. Would our state fail merely because someone like him was out of office? It would not.

The same goes for about any executive- if you do not agree with them politically, there is no reason for wishing for them to succeed in their policy initiatives. The only executives that should be opposed at any circumstance are those who wish to become literal dictators. Thinking about it, this may also a symptom of an executive gaining too much power. It begs the question: if people are equating to not supporting the President to not supporting the country, should powers be stripped away?

You are denying the antecedent here. A bad presidency is bad for the country, no matter how you cut the cake. You are conflating passage of legislation with national conditions, but I'm pretty sure presidents are judged more on the latter. Bill Clinton's presidency is generally viewed in a favorable light among historians because the economy was booming and things were relatively peaceful on the world stage. That being said, Clinton wasn't a particularly effective president, as 1990s politics was generally marked by gridlock.

At this point, I think it is pretty safe to say that only an economic downturn will pull Trump lower than high 30s-low 40s. For this reason, it is oxymoronic to root for America to do well but root for Trump's approvals to plummet at the same time.

This is really rich coming from the party that was laying out plans to obstruct and ruin Obama's presidency before he was even inaugurated. Even in the midst of one of the worst recessions in decades. The GOP didnt give a rats arse about doing everything possible to make Obama a one term presidency but now they want to extend that phony olive branch and call for a truce

You can virtue signal all you want but nearly all polarization and bad blood in American politics comes from the GOP. The only thing your pissed about is that for the first time....the left is actually kinda sorta fighting back. Tis not so nice when the bully gets bullied now is it?

So yes, i am unashamed in hoping Trump fails and i hope he fails more than anyone else in history. Since Trump and the GOP just delight in "triggering" and going to great lengths to piss off and aggravate the left....then i will delight in watching Trump and the entire GOP get destroyed. November will be tremendous

Something else to note is that Trump is already having consistent disapproval ratings- this is not normal. Most people hold the belief that the country is not being led on the right track under Trump's leadership. It is certainly not contradictory to want Trump to fail while having America chug along. The President is not the country, nor does he dictate all policy.

[Mr. Smith]

@Fuzzy and twenty: Hate to break it to ya', but being 15 doesn't divorce you from the world and its consequences. The consequences of 2008 were just as much there for us as they were for you. It meant all the difference of what food would be on the table because our parents were laid off from jobs, it meant all the difference of finding any kind of job the next year....and being turned down because of "no experience kiddo" and being stuck in such a loop and therefore robbed of any chance for "potential".

Next, there's how Trump [and in hindsight Obama to a lesser extent, though arguably more in reaction to Cantor/Boehner/McConnell's actions than his first impulses] rewards only those who voted for him and has systematically aimed for retribution at everyone else.

This means "success" just means everyone else being left behind, and that is not a success that I myself can afford. Sure you can, you made it, you got a house, you had a family. But the rest of us are just being f*(king robbed.

Partisanship then isn't a hobby or ego satisfaction, it's the difference between being able to afford getting a migraine and being f*(ked out of half a year's paychecks because of an emergency room bill.

And unfortunately, the entire two party system + the media encourage someone and their ilk's success at the cost of someone else's chances. But at least before Trump and his media lust and active need to conquer by division, the other Presidents [well besides Bush Jr and his Iraq boondoggle] did what they could to alleviate this.

If the rock bottom is where things have to go, so be it.

[Take your vitamins and say your prayers, Brother!]

It’s pretty well established that most partisans want the president to succeed when they’re a member of their party, and fail when they aren’t.

If you’re asking specifically why Democrats aren’t hoping for Trump to succeed, well, that depends on what you mean by succeed. If you mean succeed at making America a more prosperous nation in which anyone can get ahead and we all live in peace, most Democrats don’t believe that Trump is capable of doing that nor that his policies will accomplish that. If, on the other hand, you mean succeed as in fulfill his campaign promises (build a wall, deport all illegal immigrants while making legal immigration more difficult, end Obamacare, do nothing about climate change, etc), why would Democrats want that?

This is the correct take.

As a Democrat, I do not want Trump to succeed in both ways Mr. Xing has mentioned. I do not believe he is a remotely effective President; his policies and skills as an executive leave everything to be desired. IF Trump were to be removed from office, nothing much would change politically, considering Trump has proved himself to be the standard GOP fare. I personally do not expect Pence to actually be a better President than Trump, as I believe that his policies would be even worse for the nation than Trump's- but that is another discussion altogether.

I can think of an example in wishing for an executive to fail vs. their government failing. I do not want Pete Ricketts to win re-election. I do not agree with him politically on the major issues. The way he handled the repeal of the death penalty by the State Legislature- and threatening its independence with his vast fortune- is disgusting. His hypocrisy about life and his phony commitment to literal life and death issues is disgusting. I do not want him to be Governor. Would our state fail merely because someone like him was out of office? It would not.

The same goes for about any executive- if you do not agree with them politically, there is no reason for wishing for them to succeed in their policy initiatives. The only executives that should be opposed at any circumstance are those who wish to become literal dictators. Thinking about it, this may also a symptom of an executive gaining too much power. It begs the question: if people are equating to not supporting the President to not supporting the country, should powers be stripped away?

You are denying the antecedent here. A bad presidency is bad for the country, no matter how you cut the cake. You are conflating passage of legislation with national conditions, but I'm pretty sure presidents are judged more on the latter. Bill Clinton's presidency is generally viewed in a favorable light among historians because the economy was booming and things were relatively peaceful on the world stage. That being said, Clinton wasn't a particularly effective president, as 1990s politics was generally marked by gridlock.

At this point, I think it is pretty safe to say that only an economic downturn will pull Trump lower than high 30s-low 40s. For this reason, it is oxymoronic to root for America to do well but root for Trump's approvals to plummet at the same time.

This is really rich coming from the party that was laying out plans to obstruct and ruin Obama's presidency before he was even inaugurated. Even in the midst of one of the worst recessions in decades. The GOP didnt give a rats arse about doing everything possible to make Obama a one term presidency but now they want to extend that phony olive branch and call for a truce

You can virtue signal all you want but nearly all polarization and bad blood in American politics comes from the GOP. The only thing your pissed about is that for the first time....the left is actually kinda sorta fighting back. Tis not so nice when the bully gets bullied now is it?

So yes, i am unashamed in hoping Trump fails and i hope he fails more than anyone else in history. Since Trump and the GOP just delight in "triggering" and going to great lengths to piss off and aggravate the left....then i will delight in watching Trump and the entire GOP get destroyed. November will be tremendous

Mondale's not wrong on the highlighted portion, but "The Resistance" is such that the Democrats have bought into this now.  Truthfully, I'm not looking forward to the next Presidency, however that comes about.  We are in a cycle of vengeance. 

I certainly don't approve of every initiative Trump has spawned.  I'm not a fan of his tax cuts and didn't want to see them pass.  The dismantling of Obamacare is something I'm partially OK with simply because there's no will on the part of the GOP to do what's necessary to make the plan work.  (The whole idea really went on life support once the SCOTUS voided the Medicaid Expansion as mandatory.)  But I certainly hope things go will in diplomacy.  I certainly hope that the President uses his powers in ways that don't cause the economy to tank.  I certainly hope that if he takes us into a war, even one I would disagree with, that his plan would be well thought out and the war would be won.  I wished the same for Obama, even as I wished that many of his social initiatives not be implemented.  What worries me is that this sentiment is somewhat remarkable to some.

[Orser67]

Because I think he's an absolutely terrible president, and I think he's shown conclusively by now that he's incapable of becoming a good president. And also, I don't think that a Trump collapse necessarily stems from or causes an economic collapse.

A good recent example of this is George H. W. Bush; there was a recession during his tenure, but it was relatively normal recession that was part of the natural business cycle. Trump is different even from Bush though in that he seems capable of having low approval ratings despite a strong economy.

[Sumner 1868]

If it were Ted Cruz or Jeb Bush in office I would be eager for a complete Republican wipeout because it would create the conditions where the Democratic Party could potentially be shaped in a positive way. Unfortunately, when Drumpf loses it will be blamed on him being insufficiently hawkish and not right-wing enough on economics, so we won't see anything that could make the left rise. The Drumpf collapse will simply move the Democratic Party to the right - which is why the party leaders are so eager to fight Drumpf whereas they were so lukewarm against Bush even in 2006-2008.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I mean, Atlas is terrible and I seem to remember at least one poster hoping for an economic disaster of some kind to usher in a Democratic trifecta in 2020; on the other hand, arguing that 'wanting Trump to fail' is the same as wishing ill upon the American people is bad logic, unless you literally believe Trump is synonymous with peace and prosperity. Most Democrats and liberal independents believe Trump is already a failure in terms of leading the country in the right direction, so naturally they want to convince as many people as possible of this fact so that we can start moving in the right direction (i.e. electing Democrats). It's not about wishing for failure; it's about changing public opinion.

If we define "success" as 'doing what is best for the country,' then I would personally be thrilled if Trump became a successful president. At present, I see no reason to believe he will; so because I want the best for our country, I hope as many people as possible ultimately come around to this view.

Xingkerui basically hits the nail on the head. This isn't the eleventh century; king is not synonymous with country, and depending on your ideological perspective, wishing the failure of the former may be necessary to wish the success of the latter.

[Blair]

Trump is already an unfit and erratic President (and the International standing of the US is dropping as a result) so all an approval rating drop would mean is that more people are seeing it.

It’s possible for Trump to be at 20% whilst the economy is booming, jobs rising etc. It’s based on his personality flaws, his legal woes and his erratic style of leadership.

Approval ratings are bullsh**t. My life didn’t change when Theresa May went from +60 to -20...

[Progressive Pessimist]

Trump can collapse without taking the country with him. Those things are not joined at the hip. In fact, this mentality of Trump himself being some sort of personification of the country and your support for him being a gauge of your loyalty to it, is just one example of why Trump needs to go.

[twenty42]

I mean, Atlas is terrible and I seem to remember at least one poster hoping for an economic disaster of some kind to usher in a Democratic trifecta in 2020; on the other hand, arguing that 'wanting Trump to fail' is the same as wishing ill upon the American people is bad logic, unless you literally believe Trump is synonymous with peace and prosperity. Most Democrats and liberal independents believe Trump is already a failure in terms of leading the country in the right direction, so naturally they want to convince as many people as possible of this fact so that we can start moving in the right direction (i.e. electing Democrats). It's not about wishing for failure; it's about changing public opinion.

If we define "success" as 'doing what is best for the country,' then I would personally be thrilled if Trump became a successful president. At present, I see no reason to believe he will; so because I want the best for our country, I hope as many people as possible ultimately come around to this view.

Xingkerui basically hits the nail on the head. This isn't the eleventh century; king is not synonymous with country, and depending on your ideological perspective, wishing the failure of the former may be necessary to wish the success of the latter.

Trump can collapse without taking the country with him. Those things are not joined at the hip. In fact, this mentality of Trump himself being some sort of personification of the country and your support for him being a gauge of your loyalty to it, is just one example of why Trump needs to go.

I am not arguing that Trump himself or support for him are synonymous with America. What I am arguing is that approval ratings are an effect, not a cause. Like it or not, presidents are judged a lot more heavily on wars and the economy than they are judged on scandal and corruption. Rooting for Trump's approvals to plummet into the 20s IS rooting for economic downturn, because at this point that is what will move the needle. I really don't think his base gives two $hits about Stormy Daniels or campaign finance foibles, but they certainly do care about their 401(k)'s.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I mean, Atlas is terrible and I seem to remember at least one poster hoping for an economic disaster of some kind to usher in a Democratic trifecta in 2020; on the other hand, arguing that 'wanting Trump to fail' is the same as wishing ill upon the American people is bad logic, unless you literally believe Trump is synonymous with peace and prosperity. Most Democrats and liberal independents believe Trump is already a failure in terms of leading the country in the right direction, so naturally they want to convince as many people as possible of this fact so that we can start moving in the right direction (i.e. electing Democrats). It's not about wishing for failure; it's about changing public opinion.

If we define "success" as 'doing what is best for the country,' then I would personally be thrilled if Trump became a successful president. At present, I see no reason to believe he will; so because I want the best for our country, I hope as many people as possible ultimately come around to this view.

Xingkerui basically hits the nail on the head. This isn't the eleventh century; king is not synonymous with country, and depending on your ideological perspective, wishing the failure of the former may be necessary to wish the success of the latter.

Trump can collapse without taking the country with him. Those things are not joined at the hip. In fact, this mentality of Trump himself being some sort of personification of the country and your support for him being a gauge of your loyalty to it, is just one example of why Trump needs to go.

I am not arguing that Trump himself or support for him are synonymous with America. What I am arguing is that approval ratings are an effect, not a cause. Like it or not, presidents are judged a lot more heavily on wars and the economy than they are judged on scandal and corruption. Rooting for Trump's approvals to plummet into the 20s IS rooting for economic downturn, because at this point that is what will move the needle. I really don't think his base gives two $hits about Stormy Daniels or campaign finance foibles, but they certainly do care about their 401(k)'s.

Economies are extremely complicated and intricate. Trump being unpopular is not going to automatically cause a recession or depression. It's dubious enough to assert that anything he has directly done even affects the economy for the reverse to happen. He may think so, but his very existence as President is not tied to the economy either.

[Devout Centrist]

I can't afford for America to fail. America fails when our President fails, at least at some levels.

We're well past that point

[twenty42]

I mean, Atlas is terrible and I seem to remember at least one poster hoping for an economic disaster of some kind to usher in a Democratic trifecta in 2020; on the other hand, arguing that 'wanting Trump to fail' is the same as wishing ill upon the American people is bad logic, unless you literally believe Trump is synonymous with peace and prosperity. Most Democrats and liberal independents believe Trump is already a failure in terms of leading the country in the right direction, so naturally they want to convince as many people as possible of this fact so that we can start moving in the right direction (i.e. electing Democrats). It's not about wishing for failure; it's about changing public opinion.

If we define "success" as 'doing what is best for the country,' then I would personally be thrilled if Trump became a successful president. At present, I see no reason to believe he will; so because I want the best for our country, I hope as many people as possible ultimately come around to this view.

Xingkerui basically hits the nail on the head. This isn't the eleventh century; king is not synonymous with country, and depending on your ideological perspective, wishing the failure of the former may be necessary to wish the success of the latter.

Trump can collapse without taking the country with him. Those things are not joined at the hip. In fact, this mentality of Trump himself being some sort of personification of the country and your support for him being a gauge of your loyalty to it, is just one example of why Trump needs to go.

I am not arguing that Trump himself or support for him are synonymous with America. What I am arguing is that approval ratings are an effect, not a cause. Like it or not, presidents are judged a lot more heavily on wars and the economy than they are judged on scandal and corruption. Rooting for Trump's approvals to plummet into the 20s IS rooting for economic downturn, because at this point that is what will move the needle. I really don't think his base gives two $hits about Stormy Daniels or campaign finance foibles, but they certainly do care about their 401(k)'s.

Economies are extremely complicated and intricate. Trump being unpopular is not going to automatically cause a recession or depression. It's dubious enough to assert that anything he has directly done even affects the economy for the reverse to happen. He may think so, but his very existence as President is not tied to the economy either.

Well this is somewhat false. Uncertainty leads to people pulling out of the stock market, which makes stocks go down. If Trump's approval ratings are at Nixon/GWB levels by 2020 and his unseating is all but assured, people are going to be pulling out. If his approval ratings are near 50% and his reelection seems likely, people are likely to stay the course. It may be a self-fulfilling prophecy, but there is a reason that incumbent presidents tend to get reelected.

[pbrower2a]

Donald Trump is an example of what has been tried in other countries and has been ruinous to them. Demagoguery, Left or Right, is dangerous. If he isn't the caudillo, he is the sort of leader who makes one possible due to the chaos that demagogues make a certainty.

It's not that he is a raw deal. For young adults, Ronald Reagan was a raw deal who gave us more work -- but at abysmal wages. But there is far worse than the shopping-center and fast-food culture that went with the Reagan economy, and Trump is giving us something far worse.

He sees the world divided between winners and losers, people most like himself being winners and people unlike himself being losers who deserve to be punished even more severely for being 'losers'. Good leaders alleviate economic distress and find ways to give us a chance. Imagine, if you will, Donald Trump recognizing that the Tennessee Valley had poor people but great resources of energy that could make people less poor -- and bring the people into the modern world. Would there be any Tennessee Valley Authority charged with building big energy projects to bring cheap energy and the jobs that go with it? Let's put it this way: it was the cheap energy that made the aluminum industry possible. Aluminum -- only the second-most-heavily used metal, after only iron.

But no -- those losers deserve the full consequences of being losers.   

He turns words into lies, much like the cynical bureaucrats of George Orwell's nightmarish 'Oceania' in Nineteen Eighty-Four -- or in real history as in Hitler's Third Reich and Stalin's Hell-frozen-over  Soviet Union. Such adds to the debasement of life by making people unable to think.

He has Castro-style rallies in which he vilifies anyone who disagrees with him or exposes him for the fool or liar that he is, and stirs up anger. That is new to America, and I hope that nobody ever imitates that.

He gets cozy with leaders of dictatorial regimes and neglects our allies.

I want him to fail because he must fail if we are to have any hope in America.

[Badger]

The question is Promised on the assumption that there is no difference between Trump collapsing in America collapsing. Nothing could be further from the truth. The sooner Trump and his crime family are out of power, the sooner America can recover and prosper.

[CookieDamage]

Was twenty42 around during the Obama years? Let's look at all his posts back then and see how much he wanted Obama to fail since he has a lot of garbage spewing out of his mouth in this thread.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Was twenty42 around during the Obama years? Let's look at all his posts back then and see how much he wanted Obama to fail since he has a lot of garbage spewing out of his mouth in this thread.

Self-awareness and introspection aren't really in the wheelhouse of these people.