Discussion » Questions » Politics » Trump detractors always use his style against him in criticisms of him. They never address actual accomplishments that have been made while

Trump detractors always use his style against him in criticisms of him. They never address actual accomplishments that have been made while

in office. Is it because they won't?

Posted - May 23, 2017

Responses


  • 16792
    Because HE HASN'T ACCOMPLISHED ANYTHING. Apart from obstructing the course of justice, dismantling all environmental protections (I don't know how he can look Barron in the eye) and repeated attempts to overturn the Constitution, that is.
      May 23, 2017 7:46 AM MDT
    4

  • 7939
    What positive things has he accomplished? That is a legit question...
      May 23, 2017 9:40 AM MDT
    3

  • 7792
    Please tell me one positive thing Der Fuhrer has accomplished since he took office. Something that benefits the less fortunate and NOT the wealthy.
      May 23, 2017 9:49 AM MDT
    4

  • 19937
    When he accomplishes something of value as opposed to merely obsruction, perhaps I would consider praising him.
      May 23, 2017 10:25 AM MDT
    3

  • 34284
    Anything Trump does is going to be considered as a negative....as you can see from the answers already here. So in their mind there is no credit to give.
      May 23, 2017 10:25 AM MDT
    2

  • 19937
    Yet you haven't posted anything positive that he has accomplished.  Shouldn't take you long - it's a short list.
      May 23, 2017 10:29 AM MDT
    1

  • 34284
    That was not the question. 
    But here is a partial list:
    Scotus Judge
    Defunding PP and other abortion providers through Title X
    Removing nearly $9 Billion of worldwide abortion funding
    Repealed many of Obama regulations
    Immigration is already down over 70+% (numerous laws here)
    Veterans can now get medical services at places other than just the VA
    Keystone Pipeline approved
    Unemployment is down. 
    Manufacturing is way up.
    Cut all Obamacare taxes. 
    Told PA to put the drug dealers in prison. 

    There is much much more. But that is a start.

    This post was edited by my2cents at May 23, 2017 8:42 PM MDT
      May 23, 2017 10:57 AM MDT
    1

  • 19937
    Scotus Judge - APPOINTED AFTER REFUSING TO ALLOW OBAMA'S NOMINEE TO EVEN BE INTERVIEWED
    Defunding PP and other abortion providers through Title X - THAT LEGISLATION IS IN A BUDGET WHICH HAS NOT BEEN PASSED
    Removing nearly $9 Billion of worldwide abortion funding - THAT LEGISLATION IS IN A BUDGET WHICH HAS NOT BEEN PASSED
    Repealed many of Obama regulations - PUTS MANY ASPECTS OF OUR QUALITY OF LIFE AT RISK - LEGISLATION NOT ENACTED
    Immigration is already down over 70+% (numerous laws here) - UNFAIRLY DEPORTING SOME WHO ARE HERE LEGALLY
    Veterans can now get medical services at places other than just the VA - NOT ALL VETERANS CAN AVAIL THEMSELVES OF THIS
    Keystone Pipeline approved - PUTTING AT RISK PEOPLE IN THE AREA SHOULD THERE BE A LEAK
    Unemployment is down - THIS IS A RESULT OF THE LAST QUARTER OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION 
    Manufacturing is way up - WHERE DO YOU GET THE FACTS TO BACK THIS UP?
    Cut all Obamacare taxes - LEGISLATION NOT ENACTED 
    Told PA to put the drug dealers in prison - THIS CANNOT BE DONE WITHOUT DUE PROCESS

    So, I will ask you, again, what laws have been enacted?
      May 23, 2017 2:12 PM MDT
    3

  • 34284
    The defunding of abortion providers is not through the budget....it is the Title X and the Mexico City Policy. 

    But thank you for proving my statement that he will not be given credit. 

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-manufacturers-still-charging-ahead-ism-finds-2017-04-03
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/signed-legislation?field_legislation_status_value=0&page=1
      May 23, 2017 4:29 PM MDT
    1

  • 7939
    That policy removes funding for any entity outside the US that actively promotes abortion as an option. http://kff.org/global-health-policy/fact-sheet/mexico-city-policy-explainer/

    It was not the only one he targeted, though. Through the budget, he planned to nail the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program (TPP), and cut its budget in half. Since its inception, that program has reduced teen pregnancy rates by nearly 40%. Had that measure made it through the budget, I would hardly call it an "accomplishment." Most of that money goes to evidence-based teachings on how to prevent pregnancy and STDs. There are some states that don't even allow sex ed programs to discuss condoms and failure rates- they can only talk about abstinence. Removal of funding from the programs that teach actual facts isn't just going to reduce abortions, it's going to send teen pregnancy rates through the roof again, all the while cutting funding for other programs that can help struggling families. He should be ashamed for those measures. That's not something to be proud of. He might as well say, "I'm taking away education funding, and then I plan to watch you all squirm while you, your children,and society struggle for your ignorance. (Which I could have prevented.)" Either he didn't read about what he was cutting funding from or he only cared about ending abortion- not preventing pregnancy or what happens to those lives when they're here. That budget initiative was some piece of work. He really should be ashamed. Might as well cut off his nose to spite his face.

    Here's info on that: https://www.statnews.com/2017/04/20/successful-teen-pregnancy-prevention-program-threatened-funding-cuts/
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/us/politics/planned-parenthood-trump.html
      May 23, 2017 5:15 PM MDT
    6

  • 34284
    I agree sex Ed is needed. But if these programs want the money then they must quit funding/supporting abortion. 
    Our tax money is not supposed fund abortion. 
      May 24, 2017 8:26 AM MDT
    2

  • 19937
    From your article:

    "A resurgence among American manufacturers that began last fall and picked up after the election of Donald Trump ..."  Last fall, Obama was in office and the uptick after the election was the industry's response to having a definitive election.

    "
    The Institute for Supply Management said its manufacturing index fell slightly to 57.2% last month from 57.7% in February. That was a bit below the 57.8% forecast of economists polled by MarketWatch.  February was under Trump's term.

    After contracting in late 2015 and early 2016, U.S. manufacturing is now expanding,”  Late 2015 was under Obama's term.

    "Despite the generally sunny outlook, production did slow down. The production index dropped 5.3 points to 57.6%. 

    A similar manufacturing survey from IHS Markit, released Monday, also reflected a cutback in production. The Markit index was somewhat more negative, suggesting that the manufacturing index might be losing some steam. The Markit manufacturing PMI fell to a six-month low of 53.3 in March, down from 54.2 in February. 
    This was during Trump's term.

    With all due respect, the legislation that has been signed is relatively insignificant.  I wouldn't crow about legislation authorizing a memorial, removing privacy laws for people using the internet. naming a veteran's center in Pago Pago, American Samoa, restricting the Bureau of Land Management to amend their procedures.  

    Now, please tell me what Trump has actually done to improve the lives of the majority of middle and low income citizens.
    XX
      May 23, 2017 8:17 PM MDT
    2

  • 34284
    Yes 2015 and early 2016 was under Obama and as the article said manufacturing was contracting (reducing... loosing jobs). Until Nov 2016 when manufacturers knew Obama was out then did it start expanding.... Yes there was a dip in March but as the article said it was still good news anything over 50% is good. 
    But gotcha , the lower unemployment in March is Obama's credit but the slight dip in manufacturing in March is all Trump discredit. 

    If all the legislation signed means relatively nothing, then why does the left have such a fit when it is signed
      May 24, 2017 8:13 AM MDT
    0

  • 19937
    The left isn't complaining about what was signed.  The left is complaining about proposed legislation.  It's complaining about Trump trying to undo everything Obama has done.  Are YOU in favor of reducing the importance of the FDA, EPA, gutting the consumer protections under Glass-Steagall?  Are you so wealthy that you don't mind if financial advisors are more concerned about how much they can glom from their clients than how much they can produce for their clients?  You don't mind having the possibility of a leaking oil or gas line running under wherever you live?  You don't mind if public land (national parks, etc.) are open to drilling or shale production?  It makes no difference to you whether or not we have clean water?  Well, if that's the case, then you've got the right president.  Manufacturing didn't contract because of Obama - iot contracted because manufacturers were waiting to see who the new president would be.  Once the election was settled, it picked up again.  There is always a pausity of spending when emajor elections are near.  Trump claims to have brouht back jobs, but the truth is that most manufacturing and job increases were being planned before Trump was in office.  Trump claimed that he saved Carrier 1500 jobs when in fact only 800 were saved. 
      May 24, 2017 9:35 AM MDT
    1

  • 34284
    I am not wealthy (yet...but I am working on it) but I am a small business owner and I can tell you the EPA does cost jobs and increase costs along with decreasing quality. There are products that I use in my business that they want to outlaw...in fact there are several states where you cannot buy the good product anymore because of them. I dread the day when they do. It will not be any better for the environment because a person has to use five times as much of the junk they like to get the same quality. So increases cost, labor and does not help environment. 
    I got no problems drilling for oil....there is a well 200 ft from my parents house....you know what it hurts.... nothing.  They inspect them things all the time. 
    800 or 1500 either way it is jobs still here. And yes jobs left because of Obama, he told coal people don't open a coal mine cause I will bankrupt you. You think stuff like that does not hurt job growth? Well, Trump is in now and coal mines are back in Obama's state of IL. 

    Yes, you are right I do have the right President. 
      May 24, 2017 4:39 PM MDT
    0

  • 7280
    Sheesh (exclamation informal---used to express disbelief or exasperation.) 

    Six posts by you clarifying the meaning of specious reasoning---thank you for that.

    Your choice to not respond to my question when I explained how I did not curse when you edited one of my posts for "cursing" now makes perfect sense.

    And would have to agree with you when you say that you "do have the "right President." 


      May 24, 2017 5:06 PM MDT
    0

  • 19937
    So it seems it doesn't matter to you that we want to have good air and water.  If you think there's something clean about coal, you're wrong.  You would prefer to burn coal and have people working, even if they wind up with black lung and the air everywhere around them is polluted?   Frankly, I'd rather pay a little more for products and know they aren't ruining the environment than to save a few pennies and have air that will look like China's and water like Africa's.  Actually, why don't we all bathe in our rivers, lakes and streams and do the rest of our business there - look how much we'll save in water and sewer taxes. 

    There really isn't any point in trying to discuss this with you.  Neither of us is going to change out opinions - even if yours is wrong.
      May 24, 2017 5:38 PM MDT
    1

  • 34284
    You are right, we are not gonna agree. 
    You do have electricity....the majority of the electricity produced in the US is by coal burning...you want a higher electric bill? Personally I don't want nuclear power. 
    No Republican want dirty air and water. But as I explained you have​ to have a balance. Like with my product, if they outlaw it, it does not help the environment because I have to use 4-5 times the amount and it still doesn't last as long so will have to be redone sooner. So worse for environment, costs more in labor and materials and is a junk product. Just an all around loser policy that the EPA is pushing. 
      May 25, 2017 7:21 AM MDT
    0

  • 16792
    "Keystone Pipeline approved"
    http://www.iflscience.com/environment/dakota-access-pipeline-has-been-leaking-oil-and-its-not-even-operational-yet/
      May 23, 2017 9:30 PM MDT
    2

  • 34284
    That is not the Keystone Pipeline. And the leaks were small and fixed quickly. 
      May 24, 2017 8:35 AM MDT
    0

  • 19937
    And what happens when the leak is big and can't be contained fast?  Remember the results of the Exxon Valdiz and how long it took to clean up?  But not to worry - there will be plenty of jobs created to do that cleanup, so it's OK.
      May 24, 2017 5:39 PM MDT
    1

  • 34284
    They inspect them all the time....do you have any idea just how many pipelines we already have in the US? And just how little problems we have with them? I mean really you have to go back to Exxon Valdez and that was not a pipeline... neither was the BP gulf spill. So just when was the last big pipeline spill/leak anywhere in the US?

      May 25, 2017 7:33 AM MDT
    0

  • 10052
      May 25, 2017 9:23 PM MDT
    1

  • 34284
    Thank you. It did look like most accidents were Natural gas and gasoline. And many listed were people not having an area marked properly before digging. 
    How do should we get our oil, gas and natural gas to our refineries and consumers? I would say pipelines are the safest most economical and environmentally friendly method.
      May 26, 2017 6:25 AM MDT
    0