They are all nasty pieces of the MAGA Co-dependent Community, but she stands alone in having pretended to be the tip of the spear of the "principled Republican" opposition to Agent Orange for months, then getting her knee pads out for the man who traduced her with racist gibes and insulted her family. For what? Selling your soul for nothing?
Hi Michael - The answer to your question is actually pretty straightforward and simple. It's because as much as Haley and most of us see Trump as an arrogant, offensive buffoon, we see his likely policies as much better for our country than Biden's.
And national polls consistently show more than half the country shares that view. I know you are viscerally opposed to Trump, but that is the answer to your question whether it was rhetorical or not.
So Haley is supporting Trump because more than half of the country does? She bases her views on what other people think? I have pointed out to you before that the Nazi party in Germany had more support than other political party in the early 1930s. But that didn’t make its policies good. The fact that approximately half of our country is going to vote for a cruel fascist who openly adopts Nazi rhetoric, who has promised to use the American military to round up immigrants and asylum seekers into internment camps, who is responsible for taking away from women their right to reproductive freedom, and who is virulently anti-LGBTQ+ just shows that the United States is not immune to Naziism.
Hi Joanie - Nope, I did not at all say that she is supporting Trump because half the country is. I said that she is supporting Trump because LIKE over half the country, we see the likely policies under another Trump presidency as better for our country than under Biden. That's all. Simply trying to explain the non-mystery of why Halley announced she is supporting Trump. I am well aware and that you viscerally dispise Trump and truly believe he will portend terrible things for our country, and I respect your view. Have a good day!
I don’t think that I viscerally despise Trump. I despise and am frightened of his policies. Trump’s modus operandi is to “other” certain groups of people, claim that they are vermin and are threatening our country, and promise to restore a past national greatness, much like Hitler in Germany in the 1930s.
David, having had past discussions with you, I respect your opinion. Unfortunately it is based on false premises. What do you think Trump will do differently? He makes lots of promises he can't keep after his staff tells him it's illegal. I'm not in favor of what he did. He eviscerated environmental and consumer protections. He cut taxes while not raising revenue or cutting the budget leading to a deep budget hole. He alienated many of our allies, not a wise thing to do in a time of riding tensions and pushes by China and Russia. Like many, I feel you are reacting to questionable moves by Biden. He has not been particularly effective. But things Trump has already said, such as potential moves affecting democracy, are just plain scary. We should remember the United States and the White House are not Trump's personal playpen. Democrats and Republicans as well as others, live here and have the same rights. As I said, Biden has not been effective. But I see him as the lesser evil.
Which policies exactly are you looking forward to?? The trade war with China over the tariffs that Trump doesn't understand that the US consumers would pay? The cruel forced birth policies of the red states that he would sign into Federal law? The destruction of our natural lands to extract oil? The increase in hurricanes and wild fires from his rejection of climate change remediation?
If you can find a good policy in his confefe, let me know.
David, are you convinced that Trump is capable of articulating these policies and governing in good faith to see them through? If I were a regular Republican voter, I’d struggle to see how he could be trusted to establish any kind of consistent, reliable focus on the issues that matter to most people. At this point he’s basically a pro wrestling entertainer (one of his past gigs). I’m hoping that good-faith GOP voters will do whatever they can to return the party to one that is policy-centered and led by those who can be trusted with steady, non-divisive oversight of those policies.
David, you mention Trump’s “policies”. For example, can you articulate what his abortion policy is? Mystery to me.
Border policy, first build a wall and stop everyone, now it is let everyone in and then I will expel them when I am President. However no real details on how he will do it. I will use the military, yeah right, in your dreams.
What about health care, still want to eliminate Obamacare? And how is that comprehensive health plan coming along? Are we going to reduce MediCare?
What is his policy for reducing inflation and drug prices?
Help me, I can’t seem to find any detailed policies on important issues.
Or do you define his slogans of the day to be his “policies”.
Finally, his website mentioned a Reich, then whoops mistake by some minion.
So is Donald Trump making “policy” or is it minions because Donald neither reads or governs. FYI to the minion, since the Third Reich has come and gone, you and your Republican wackos would be instituting a Forth Reich.
Suggest instead of a Nazi salute, institute a new a new salute. The MAGA folks kiss their fingers then touch their ass.
Hi Peter - You made me smile at the imagery of me and my "fellow Republican wackos" doing your new proposed maga salute! 😆. (But, full disclosure, I am not as much a Republican as I am a conservative.)
Look, I fully appreciate that you and likely in the upper '90s percentile of PS readers loath Trump, and it seems like a waste of time and energy for me to attempt to justify my preference for Trump over Biden because it is something we are just not going to agree upon and will have to agree to disagree.
But perhaps the top issue for a lot of people supporting Trump is border security. The fact is that through his remain in Mexico policy and constructing sections of border wall at key locations, illegal immigration during the Trump presidency was a fraction of the tsunami of illegals flooding across our virtually open border the past 3 years. Both the Department of Homeland Security and FBI have issued advisory notices of concern about potential terrorists among the estimated 1.5 million people who illegally crossed our border and were not even apprehended. Biden has maintained an essentially open border for the benefit of the chamber of commerce who welcomes cheap labor and also the left flank of the Democrat party who wants open borders.
Biden claims that he has no authority to do anything on his own about border security. However, in his first 100 days in office, Biden reversed 96 Trump executive orders that pertained to border security. So there is a lot that he could do but chooses not to out of political calculus. (The bipartisan border security legislation that was proposed was a joke as it did not even trigger any changes in policies or administration unless illegal immigrant crossings averaged over 4, 000 per day for a number of days. The primary additional funding in the bill was for more administrative processing which essentially simply gets people released into our country faster after they have illegally entered.)
Again the fact is that Trump's border policies resulted in a fraction of the illegal immigration that Biden allows. And that is one of the biggest if not the biggest reasons that many people will support Trump over Biden.
I'm not sure how many people on the Democrats side of the political spectrum appreciate how much Biden's policies are disliked. Biden did a campaign stop in New Hampshire this week and there were literally less than 100 people in the room. Trump did an outdoor rally in bright blue New Jersey last week and mainstream media estimated the crowd in excess of 30,000. The latest New York times polling shows that Trump is within single digits of Biden in the state of New York - New York! And not only is Trump presently leading a national polling, but more importantly he is leading in six of the seven battleground states, leading by double digit average in three of them. The same pulling shows that the Hispanic vote is now almost evenly split between Trump and Biden, and Trump is registering almost 20% with black voters. I tell you this not in any predictably failed attempt to get you on board with Trump, but simply to illustrate the very deep and widespread level of dissatisfaction with Biden's policies across our country. Bill Maher, a longtime mainstream Democrat who truly despises Trump states it very well when he says that people who support Trump generally do not like him personally, but see him as their bulwark against the excesses of the left that have been occurring in our country during the Biden administration.
I'm sure that you continue to strongly disagree with me, and that's just fine. But to dismiss over half the country as wackos is doing a disservice to an understanding of the American political dynamic at present.
David, I do appreciate your willingness to swim in this veritable sea of lefty sharks (myself included, mostly).Really! I still think you’re not being clear about policy. Discussing crowd sizes and polling results is exactly what Trump does because he’s a lifelong hype man, but it doesn’t address the issues. With profit-minded media outlets willing to make any misleading statement to keep the payers paying, can we zero in on reality? Discussing ideas rather than personal perceptions can help us to common ground, right?
Does it not matter to you that so many people that actually worked closely with Trump, generals like Jim Mattis, McMaster and John Kelly, as well as serious conservatives like John Bolton and Mark Esper have expressed unequivocally that Trump is unfit for office? Not to mention former VP Mike Pence? Does Trump’s border policy mean more to you than his attempt at a coup, and if Pence were injured or killed, hey, the end justifies the means? You seem like a thoughtful person but there is way more to being POTUS than tax cuts (for corporations and wealthy folks) and border policies.
Hi, David. There is a point here not being discussed.. Yes, there is opposition to Trump. It includes me. But one must be able to separate Republican policies from Trump. They are only locked together because of the cowardice of Republicans. Spending is determined by Congress, not the White House. The same things could have been done without Trump. Now, in order to pass those policies, Haley and other politicians feel locked into an evil man that, through his own words, threatens democracy. They may feel it's too late in the game to shift gears now. They may even fear the loss of their Trump-backing constituency. That's their fault. They didn't do anything about when they could have. Now they're stuck, putting politics ahead of the country. You get no sympathy from this quarter. You and I have had this discussion before. You know I have issues with Biden and Demicrats, particularly in Illinois. But keep a few things in mind. Biden is not as bad as many Republicans claim, particularly Trump, who lies on any day ending in y. The dementia thing is moronic. Based on Trump's own words and actions, it could easily be used against him. The German people voted for Hitler based on his promises to make Germany great again. How did that turn out?
Hi Laurence - Thanks for replying and sharing your thoughts in your usual reasoned manner.
The stark electoral reality for the American voters is a choice between Biden and Trump, a choice I might add, that a clear majority of Americans wish was otherwise. (Perhaps in 2024 we can look forward to substantive policy debates between Nikki Haley and Gretchen Whitmer!). But, left with that sole bifurcation, about half of the country believes the country will be better off with the policies resultant from a Biden reelection, and about half the country firmly believes the country will be better off with the policies resultant from Trump coming back into office.
Your position seems to include a belief that Trump personally is the proverbial threat to democracy, but I can tell you that people on my side of the political spectrum feel just as strongly that Biden represents absolutely the same threat. And both sides have their talking points to support their position.
New York Times writer David Brooks wrote what I believe is a very introspective opinion piece a few months ago suggesting that the progressive excesses of the left were the catalyst for people seeing Trump as their champion against these and a willingness to overlook his admittedly brash and hyperbolic personna. Here is a link...
The upcoming election is like artwork, that it's appreciation is solely determined by one's perspective. Some people love Picasso and hate Rockwell, and others feel the opposite. I believe that's much the way The American body politic exists today, and it will not be reconciled, but one or the other view will prevail in November.
Not buying, David. Try to differentiate between Republican policies and what Trump wants, which, in many cases, are two very different things. Republicans have some fine ideas. Unfortunately there are too many on the far right with very objectionable ideas. I lived through a Trump administration that did its very best to eviscerate environmental and consumer protections in favor of big money. Don't try and sell me on trickle down, which didn't work when Reagan tried it and still doesn't work. As a retired educator, I abhor what conservatives are trying to to schools in southern states. I want to puke every time Trump and his followers brag about what he did. He tells better fairy tales than Grimm. Did Biden handle the pandemic well? It depends on which economist you ask. Blaming Fauci for policies he didn't enact is moronic. Yes, Democrats have their faults. Did Brandon Johnso really say that Chicago is the blackest city in America, which is neither factually or symbolically accurate? And all the cuts the city has made were purely out of racism and not the city running out of money? I can very easily vote for the right Republican. Adam Kinsinger was my congressperson until Democrats gerrymandered my district. But I'd rather cut my throat than vote for Trump.
I think it's less about spinelessness and more about political reality. It has been proven that opposition to Trump can be the death knell for politicians. Our own Adam Kinzinger is a prime example. Yes, we can hope for moral conviction and courage from those that believe Trump is slime. But if one plans to continue if politics, it can be perilous to oppose Trump. So the question is, what are Haley's future plans? I also have another thought. This person worked for Trump at one time and supported him. I'm sorry she turned out just to be another target of his. But I have little sympathy for her pro-Trump sentiments before she decided to run against him.
Wouldn’t you say Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney have a stronger spine than Nikki Haley? For Trumpism to fail, someone has to have a spine. Someone has to form a principled and credible conservative party that doesn’t want to put asylum seekers in concentration camps, to take away women’s rights to reproductive health care, and to take health care away from LGBTQ+ people and put them back in the closet. It’s easy to go along with incipient fascist movements. Just look at Hindenburg and 1930s Germany.
Absolutely! But who in the Republican Party is listening to them? If anyone was, they would still be in office or running for something. Are you a Republican? Can you vote for them? They would need to win primaries before they could even get to the election. Hey, I would accept either one for the White House ahead of Trump. Are they running? Right now they can't even influence the GOP, other than to keep indicating their disgust with Trump which we already know.
RE Name games: So should we say that Jason Van Dyke is a "justice impacted individual"? I don't buy that changing the label from "criminal" or "ex-convict" makes him any more repulsive than knowing what he did to get that label.
As for past actions defining a person, that is often valid. Someone who wrote books for their job and has stopped is still an author. Why can't someone who has robbed banks be considered a robber?
That is not to say that I don't believe there should be redemption - especially for a single isolated case of bad judgment.
I wish more of them were more fully impacted. Way too many criminals are never caught, get sweet plea deals, or light sentences. The recent NBC News Chicago series 'Dismissed' reported that only 1.5% of sexual assault cases result in a conviction with jail time. And of course, there is the felon that I mentioned on Tuesday that was on supervised release for illegal gun possession when he was arrested for illegal gun possession.
So anyone who ever got a DUI should be known for the rest of their lives as a “criminal” or “ex-convict”? As opposed to, say, a “neighbor,” or a “Dad,” or a “Mom,” or a “friend”? I really get tired of the self-righteous “othering” that is shown by so many people when the subject of the criminal justice system comes up. It sorts of illustrates why some folks are promoting this change in our language. I have defended people accused of crimes since 1981. I had a few bad eggs that I represented: sociopaths if you will. But most of my clients were either regular people who made a bad decision under difficult circumstances or innocent.
That is a good point. I is very hard to stop people from making blanket judgments on those who have a criminal record. I don't think changing words used is going to matter. It reminds me of how terms to refer to intellectual disability changed over time. They would get dropped after they became terms of derision in the general language. Simpleton and moron were once clinical terms. Mentally Retarded was a clinical term until fairly recently and has been replaced with intellectual disability. The downside of the last change is that it causes confusion. If a psychologist evaluates a child and tells the parents that their kid has an intellectual disability, then sometimes do not take it seriously. If they are told the kid is MR, then it would always get their attention. This is very important because the diagnosis is used to compel public schools to provide appropriate accommodations.
The basic problem is not the term, it is the tendency to "othering".
It should also be noted that the language change as I understand it only applies to people who are candidates for alternative sentencing options, like the aberrant behavior example of a DUI. People such as John Gacy and the other notorious defendants listed would not qualify.
Building the casino on the Trib printing plant site is yet another of the incompetent decisions of Lori Lightfoot, who would be called Chicago's worst mayor, other than the fact that Brandon Johnson is outdoing her in that, being even worse than her, every day! It takes real talent to be worse than Lightfoot!
It may be less than a mile from Michigan Ave. & just over a mile from The Loop, but it's a pain to get to, with slow moving streets the only way there.
I'm surprised that Bally's isn't demanding the taxpayers pay for a huge new rail station on the UP North & Northwest Lines which pass by there less than a block away from it. Of course that would mean realigning those tracks, along with condemning some private property to widen the right of way to add platforms & stairs to street level.
For those who don't know the history of the site, it was originally the Northwestern Railway's long distance coach yard, which wasn't needed after Amtrak took over the service in 1971.
The sole logical place for the casino was the original McCormick Place building, which is actually the second building, as the first burned down in January 1967. It has a rail station just a block away & the semi-secret private busway along the IC tracks from The Loop, directly to it.
Speaking of justice impacted individuals, last night on channel 5 news they did a story detailing how websites that purport to do background checks often miss people with records. As part of the story they showed photos of a handful of offenders’ and told what their past crimes were and how the website was not flagging them. I thought it a poor, bad taste use of offenders who had served their sentences. You would have been appalled.
Pretty sure that registered sex offenders are registered for a reason. They didn't pick guys with a single, old, or minor offense. I understand your point and generally agree. But these guys seemed to be a good fit for the story and would seem like the kind of people that you would hope to identify if you were doing a background check on someone that you were going to let into your home.
You can be a first time relatively minor offender and be a registered sex offender. An 18 year old high school senior who has consensual sex with a 15 year old classmate can be stuck on the registry for 25 years (at least in Michigan, where I practiced law). Not all registered sex offenders are rapists or child molesters. Yes, many are and should be but don't assume all registered sex offenders are disgusting creeps.
Regarding the Bally’s casino. I’m not a prude, but whenever I read about a new casino or pot dispensary I think we are turning into Pottersville from It’s a Wonderful Lufe.
History has shown that Potter was the progressive one in that movie. Upstate NY was to become part of the rust belt. Tourism and Indian casinos were the future.
I shook my head yes repeatedly while reading Heidi Steven’s’ article the other day. (Yes, I read my e-Trib every day.) My daughters, now 28 and 25, wouldn’t be the amazing women they are now, if it weren’t for my village of my sisters, my parents, school nurses, teachers, after school care givers, baby sitters, etc. With my husband working downtown, and traveling for work constantly, my village was there for us consistently and without complaint. I will never be able to thank them enough for those years of support.
When I first heard the term "justice-impacted individual" on the radio, my first thought was "victim?" That's seems the implication. Justice received or denied impacts the true victims of criminal acts, not the perpetrator.
The Clery Foundation has worked diligently to address campus safety since their daughter Jeanne Clery was raped and murdered in her dorm room in 1986. During an interview in a 20/20 segment in the 1990s, Jeanne's mother said that they discovered that some colleges trying to cover-up the number of rapes on campus had changed the word rape to "Advances without sanction."
Eric, I enjoyed your discussion concerning your right to remain silent. I have been on 3 juries in my life including jury foreman in a federal case.
As a juror in the Trump case (I am projecting here), I would listen to Ms.Daniels discuss having sex with Trump. Since there were only two folks involved, I would wait/ expect to hear Trump’s side of the story.
When he does not take the stand, I would likely take Ms. Daniels version as true. The Judge can tell me not to hold Trump’s lack of testifying against him; but if Trump fails to give his side of the story, I’m going with Ms. Daniels version as true.
I get that. And it is easier when everybody 'knows' going in that the defendant is a scumbag and 'probably guilty'. But given the common lawyer tactic of character assassination to impugn credibility and mention of unrelated relationships and actions; there are plenty of reasons for a person to remain mute. Sustained objections do nothing to purge the memories of the jurors, and probably reenforce memory.
I agree with many legal scholars that the right against self-incrimination is kinda ridiculous. It means that just about everyone can be compelled to testify in any proceeding except the most important person in the most important proceeding, the defendant in a criminal trial. Even if we found it icky to require the defendant to answer charges against them, I do think juries should be permitted to draw negative inferences from a defendant's refusal to do so. Re talking to police, nobody should be forced to do so, but our approach should be akin to what I know from British TV shows, which warns defendants, "You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defense if you do not mention when questioned something you later rely on in court." No other country I'm aware of has so strong a right against self-incrimination. Meanwhile, it doesn't really do much to protect suspects in the real world, who fall prey to all manner of legal trickery, including lies about the facts and false promises, to elicit dubious confessions. The self-incrimination right mainly protects the savvy suspect (or the one who has a good lawyer on speed-dial) who knows that the best thing to do if you think you might be a suspect is to say nothing.
I actually disagree, though, that, given our system, it makes sense for the rest of the world to draw negative inferences from not taking the stand. Every lawyer is going to tell every defendant in almost every case that they shouldn't testify, even innocent defendants, because it opens them up to a potentially brutal cross-examination on facts/issues that would otherwise be inadmissible. It therefore seems wrong to assume anything because of that fact alone other than "he's doing what his lawyer told him."
(thumbs up) I did vote for that one since I have been sharing Wordle scores daily.
In general I prefer the ones that are timely -- e.g., cicadas -- over ones that could have been written any time (lawn furniture, coffee cups, Shakespeare). Wordle isn't "May 2024" timely but it is at least "2020s timely."
Changing language is hard. If I were to be mugged, raped, or shot with bullets meant for someone else like Tavon Tanner, I wouldn't want my life to be defined as being a victim as I'd like to believe there's more to my life than one, albeit impactful, incident. From then on out, apparently I am an individual impacted by a justice-impacted individual.
Concerning the reckless driving plague in the Chicago area. I’m not the timid type. I don’t usually get rattled in threatening situations. But these idiots who endanger all drivers and weave through traffic at 100+ mph need to be ruthlessly reigned in.
I mean you’re driving along at a reasonable speed and suddenly you’re thrown into the Indy 500.
Law enforcement isn’t do much if anything to alleviate the problem. Rarely do I see any pull overs by State Police who I believe are responsible for highway safety on interstates.
Perhaps that’s not a feasible approach when some maniac is driving a 3,000 pound chunk of metal at subsonic speeds in a populated area, but something needs to be done.
I imagine these lawless jerks have a sense of impunity because of law enforcement’s laissez faire attitude toward this issue. S
Therefore things will not change unless the hammer comes down on there heads.
And more people will undoubtedly be injured or killed
I totally agree. All of us are probably guilty of occasionally exceeding the posted speed limit a bit, sometimes intentionally if the flow of traffic is generally above the limit as regularly occurs on Lakeshore Drive, or perhaps sometimes inadvertently. But driving at speeds of 100 mph is an appalling lack of concern for the safety of others and I would like to see severe consequences for doing so such as a one-year suspension of driving privileges, with a lifetime forfeiture of driving privileges for a repeat offense to remove these unrepentant criminals from our streets. Word does spread and consequences can change behavior.
I agree with you and David. But our experience with drunk driving laws and drunk drivers makes me skeptical about our justice system actually doing anything useful here. Not to mention the failure to enforce laws that would address street racing, intersection take overs for drifting, and road rage incidents.
There are people driving on the expressway who think they’re in a Nascar race, and sometimes on regular streets. Most are drunk or high on something, but some are young people who are just into the thrill of driving that fast and the challenge of going from lane to lane weaving in and out of traffic. They’re good at it in the video games they play, so they should be good at it in real life, right?
And they get tons of attention when they post their asinine, criminal behavior to social media. There was a story on PBS NewsHour last night about teen gang members and hangers on posting videos of themselves robbing and beating people for pocket change.
The statistics on public assessment of the economy were depressing. But you should have mentioned that the report also said that 49% of Democrats and 53% of Independents were among those that believe we are in a recession. I think this means three things. First most people do not know or understand economic terms. I doubt that most could correctly define 'recession'. Second, people respond to such questions based on how they feel about their own situation with regard to the economy. And third, the media/government are terrible (intentionally?) at sharing the facts. This includes stories that inanely state that 'prices will come down as inflation slows'. No one should be surprised that people that believe this will be disappointed when prices do not come down, which they won't because price rises due to inflation are permanent. Similarly, reporting on the stock market focuses on the daily fluctuations which are just as often down as up. The reported percentages and nominal values are not understood, but always include nonsensical 'reasons' for the change which are usually 'reactions' to 'good' or 'bad' economic news. So, there are many days where viewers are being told things are bad.
Also, I have seen at least a dozen news stories reporting the monthly and quarterly changes in inflation data that reported inflation increases. None reported the long-term trend. It is easy to imagine people reacting to the headline. This is usually accompanied by a report that the Fed is unlikely to lower interest rates until inflation gets under control. Also, mortgage rates have continued to rise and were at 7.11% until the recent fall to just below 7%. But the main story line that is incessantly repeated is that homes are unavailable and unaffordable because of the economy and interest rates.
I think most people's feelings about the economy are rooted in their own experiences, particularly at the gas pump and the grocery store. I don't know who here does grocery shopping for his/her/their families, but I do for mine and prices are insane. I judge everything by the price of a box of Cheerios, b/c I buy that all the time, and it's been more than 8 bucks a box for quite some time now. I filled up my car last week, and while it hasn't been the highest in the past three years (when I got it) it's pretty high, and higher than it was. You can't tell me that "the economy is humming along," because that is not my experience (except with the retirement accounts -- and I know what goes up can come down. But I like the totals at the moment). Everyday experience counts for a lot of the negativity among huge swaths of the American public.
Beth, what about drugs. For some folks that is close to their number 1 expense.
Biden is trying to reduce those costs. Trump has never dealt with that issue.
Exactly what will Trump do to reduce gas prices? More drilling? You will not see any change in price for years. Stand by for the summer blend gas farce increase, your issue there is with the oil companies, not Biden or Trump.
Any thoughts how Trump will reduce the cost of Cheerios?
If gas and cereal prices are you biggest concern, sounds like things are not that bad.
My sister who has diabetes, living on social security, just had her meds raised $40 bucks in one month. She would love to be in your gas/Cheerios economic situation.
She is a Biden supporter as she fears Trump will destroy medical plans and in no way counter drug price increases.
Peter, hadn't thought of drug costs, to be honest. My asthma drug is the most expensive one in our family -- and may I say Biden has done nothing about that one. And if your sister's meds just went up $40, why isn't she hacked off at Birden? Biden caused a lot of this with the stimulus package passed early in his presidency. My point wasn't that I have it easy with gas and cereal being my big concern, it's that people who fill up shopping carts and cars/trucks have it slammed home every single time that everything costs more, in some cases lots more. And they know who's in charge and they see him not doing a whole heck of a lot except telling people they're wrong.
If Craven Spinelessness were an Olympic event, former governor Haley would win the gold medal.
Nah, she would have too much competition - McConnell, McCarthy, Cruz, Graham, Vance, you get the drift.
They are all nasty pieces of the MAGA Co-dependent Community, but she stands alone in having pretended to be the tip of the spear of the "principled Republican" opposition to Agent Orange for months, then getting her knee pads out for the man who traduced her with racist gibes and insulted her family. For what? Selling your soul for nothing?
Hi Michael - The answer to your question is actually pretty straightforward and simple. It's because as much as Haley and most of us see Trump as an arrogant, offensive buffoon, we see his likely policies as much better for our country than Biden's.
And national polls consistently show more than half the country shares that view. I know you are viscerally opposed to Trump, but that is the answer to your question whether it was rhetorical or not.
So Haley is supporting Trump because more than half of the country does? She bases her views on what other people think? I have pointed out to you before that the Nazi party in Germany had more support than other political party in the early 1930s. But that didn’t make its policies good. The fact that approximately half of our country is going to vote for a cruel fascist who openly adopts Nazi rhetoric, who has promised to use the American military to round up immigrants and asylum seekers into internment camps, who is responsible for taking away from women their right to reproductive freedom, and who is virulently anti-LGBTQ+ just shows that the United States is not immune to Naziism.
Hi Joanie - Nope, I did not at all say that she is supporting Trump because half the country is. I said that she is supporting Trump because LIKE over half the country, we see the likely policies under another Trump presidency as better for our country than under Biden. That's all. Simply trying to explain the non-mystery of why Halley announced she is supporting Trump. I am well aware and that you viscerally dispise Trump and truly believe he will portend terrible things for our country, and I respect your view. Have a good day!
I don’t think that I viscerally despise Trump. I despise and am frightened of his policies. Trump’s modus operandi is to “other” certain groups of people, claim that they are vermin and are threatening our country, and promise to restore a past national greatness, much like Hitler in Germany in the 1930s.
David, having had past discussions with you, I respect your opinion. Unfortunately it is based on false premises. What do you think Trump will do differently? He makes lots of promises he can't keep after his staff tells him it's illegal. I'm not in favor of what he did. He eviscerated environmental and consumer protections. He cut taxes while not raising revenue or cutting the budget leading to a deep budget hole. He alienated many of our allies, not a wise thing to do in a time of riding tensions and pushes by China and Russia. Like many, I feel you are reacting to questionable moves by Biden. He has not been particularly effective. But things Trump has already said, such as potential moves affecting democracy, are just plain scary. We should remember the United States and the White House are not Trump's personal playpen. Democrats and Republicans as well as others, live here and have the same rights. As I said, Biden has not been effective. But I see him as the lesser evil.
Which policies exactly are you looking forward to?? The trade war with China over the tariffs that Trump doesn't understand that the US consumers would pay? The cruel forced birth policies of the red states that he would sign into Federal law? The destruction of our natural lands to extract oil? The increase in hurricanes and wild fires from his rejection of climate change remediation?
If you can find a good policy in his confefe, let me know.
David, are you convinced that Trump is capable of articulating these policies and governing in good faith to see them through? If I were a regular Republican voter, I’d struggle to see how he could be trusted to establish any kind of consistent, reliable focus on the issues that matter to most people. At this point he’s basically a pro wrestling entertainer (one of his past gigs). I’m hoping that good-faith GOP voters will do whatever they can to return the party to one that is policy-centered and led by those who can be trusted with steady, non-divisive oversight of those policies.
David, you mention Trump’s “policies”. For example, can you articulate what his abortion policy is? Mystery to me.
Border policy, first build a wall and stop everyone, now it is let everyone in and then I will expel them when I am President. However no real details on how he will do it. I will use the military, yeah right, in your dreams.
What about health care, still want to eliminate Obamacare? And how is that comprehensive health plan coming along? Are we going to reduce MediCare?
What is his policy for reducing inflation and drug prices?
Help me, I can’t seem to find any detailed policies on important issues.
Or do you define his slogans of the day to be his “policies”.
Finally, his website mentioned a Reich, then whoops mistake by some minion.
So is Donald Trump making “policy” or is it minions because Donald neither reads or governs. FYI to the minion, since the Third Reich has come and gone, you and your Republican wackos would be instituting a Forth Reich.
Suggest instead of a Nazi salute, institute a new a new salute. The MAGA folks kiss their fingers then touch their ass.
Hi Peter - You made me smile at the imagery of me and my "fellow Republican wackos" doing your new proposed maga salute! 😆. (But, full disclosure, I am not as much a Republican as I am a conservative.)
Look, I fully appreciate that you and likely in the upper '90s percentile of PS readers loath Trump, and it seems like a waste of time and energy for me to attempt to justify my preference for Trump over Biden because it is something we are just not going to agree upon and will have to agree to disagree.
But perhaps the top issue for a lot of people supporting Trump is border security. The fact is that through his remain in Mexico policy and constructing sections of border wall at key locations, illegal immigration during the Trump presidency was a fraction of the tsunami of illegals flooding across our virtually open border the past 3 years. Both the Department of Homeland Security and FBI have issued advisory notices of concern about potential terrorists among the estimated 1.5 million people who illegally crossed our border and were not even apprehended. Biden has maintained an essentially open border for the benefit of the chamber of commerce who welcomes cheap labor and also the left flank of the Democrat party who wants open borders.
Biden claims that he has no authority to do anything on his own about border security. However, in his first 100 days in office, Biden reversed 96 Trump executive orders that pertained to border security. So there is a lot that he could do but chooses not to out of political calculus. (The bipartisan border security legislation that was proposed was a joke as it did not even trigger any changes in policies or administration unless illegal immigrant crossings averaged over 4, 000 per day for a number of days. The primary additional funding in the bill was for more administrative processing which essentially simply gets people released into our country faster after they have illegally entered.)
Again the fact is that Trump's border policies resulted in a fraction of the illegal immigration that Biden allows. And that is one of the biggest if not the biggest reasons that many people will support Trump over Biden.
I'm not sure how many people on the Democrats side of the political spectrum appreciate how much Biden's policies are disliked. Biden did a campaign stop in New Hampshire this week and there were literally less than 100 people in the room. Trump did an outdoor rally in bright blue New Jersey last week and mainstream media estimated the crowd in excess of 30,000. The latest New York times polling shows that Trump is within single digits of Biden in the state of New York - New York! And not only is Trump presently leading a national polling, but more importantly he is leading in six of the seven battleground states, leading by double digit average in three of them. The same pulling shows that the Hispanic vote is now almost evenly split between Trump and Biden, and Trump is registering almost 20% with black voters. I tell you this not in any predictably failed attempt to get you on board with Trump, but simply to illustrate the very deep and widespread level of dissatisfaction with Biden's policies across our country. Bill Maher, a longtime mainstream Democrat who truly despises Trump states it very well when he says that people who support Trump generally do not like him personally, but see him as their bulwark against the excesses of the left that have been occurring in our country during the Biden administration.
I'm sure that you continue to strongly disagree with me, and that's just fine. But to dismiss over half the country as wackos is doing a disservice to an understanding of the American political dynamic at present.
The leaders of Wildwood NJ, have said it's not possible for more than 15,000 to fit in the space where his Nazi rally was held.
Yo David, you gave me a load of horse poop. What is his border policy NOW?
What is his abortion policy? Answer the question.
Do not bring Biden into this, just tell me Trump’s policies.
I do not disagree with you yet, as you have not been able to articulate any of Trump’s current policies!
I am not interested in past policies issues and polls, I want specific current Trump policies.
What are they? Let’s start with abortion, what is his policy NOW?
David, I do appreciate your willingness to swim in this veritable sea of lefty sharks (myself included, mostly).Really! I still think you’re not being clear about policy. Discussing crowd sizes and polling results is exactly what Trump does because he’s a lifelong hype man, but it doesn’t address the issues. With profit-minded media outlets willing to make any misleading statement to keep the payers paying, can we zero in on reality? Discussing ideas rather than personal perceptions can help us to common ground, right?
Does it not matter to you that so many people that actually worked closely with Trump, generals like Jim Mattis, McMaster and John Kelly, as well as serious conservatives like John Bolton and Mark Esper have expressed unequivocally that Trump is unfit for office? Not to mention former VP Mike Pence? Does Trump’s border policy mean more to you than his attempt at a coup, and if Pence were injured or killed, hey, the end justifies the means? You seem like a thoughtful person but there is way more to being POTUS than tax cuts (for corporations and wealthy folks) and border policies.
Hi, David. There is a point here not being discussed.. Yes, there is opposition to Trump. It includes me. But one must be able to separate Republican policies from Trump. They are only locked together because of the cowardice of Republicans. Spending is determined by Congress, not the White House. The same things could have been done without Trump. Now, in order to pass those policies, Haley and other politicians feel locked into an evil man that, through his own words, threatens democracy. They may feel it's too late in the game to shift gears now. They may even fear the loss of their Trump-backing constituency. That's their fault. They didn't do anything about when they could have. Now they're stuck, putting politics ahead of the country. You get no sympathy from this quarter. You and I have had this discussion before. You know I have issues with Biden and Demicrats, particularly in Illinois. But keep a few things in mind. Biden is not as bad as many Republicans claim, particularly Trump, who lies on any day ending in y. The dementia thing is moronic. Based on Trump's own words and actions, it could easily be used against him. The German people voted for Hitler based on his promises to make Germany great again. How did that turn out?
Hi Laurence - Thanks for replying and sharing your thoughts in your usual reasoned manner.
The stark electoral reality for the American voters is a choice between Biden and Trump, a choice I might add, that a clear majority of Americans wish was otherwise. (Perhaps in 2024 we can look forward to substantive policy debates between Nikki Haley and Gretchen Whitmer!). But, left with that sole bifurcation, about half of the country believes the country will be better off with the policies resultant from a Biden reelection, and about half the country firmly believes the country will be better off with the policies resultant from Trump coming back into office.
Your position seems to include a belief that Trump personally is the proverbial threat to democracy, but I can tell you that people on my side of the political spectrum feel just as strongly that Biden represents absolutely the same threat. And both sides have their talking points to support their position.
New York Times writer David Brooks wrote what I believe is a very introspective opinion piece a few months ago suggesting that the progressive excesses of the left were the catalyst for people seeing Trump as their champion against these and a willingness to overlook his admittedly brash and hyperbolic personna. Here is a link...
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/02/opinion/trump-meritocracy-educated.html
The upcoming election is like artwork, that it's appreciation is solely determined by one's perspective. Some people love Picasso and hate Rockwell, and others feel the opposite. I believe that's much the way The American body politic exists today, and it will not be reconciled, but one or the other view will prevail in November.
I wish you well and a relaxing weekend!
Not buying, David. Try to differentiate between Republican policies and what Trump wants, which, in many cases, are two very different things. Republicans have some fine ideas. Unfortunately there are too many on the far right with very objectionable ideas. I lived through a Trump administration that did its very best to eviscerate environmental and consumer protections in favor of big money. Don't try and sell me on trickle down, which didn't work when Reagan tried it and still doesn't work. As a retired educator, I abhor what conservatives are trying to to schools in southern states. I want to puke every time Trump and his followers brag about what he did. He tells better fairy tales than Grimm. Did Biden handle the pandemic well? It depends on which economist you ask. Blaming Fauci for policies he didn't enact is moronic. Yes, Democrats have their faults. Did Brandon Johnso really say that Chicago is the blackest city in America, which is neither factually or symbolically accurate? And all the cuts the city has made were purely out of racism and not the city running out of money? I can very easily vote for the right Republican. Adam Kinsinger was my congressperson until Democrats gerrymandered my district. But I'd rather cut my throat than vote for Trump.
I think it's less about spinelessness and more about political reality. It has been proven that opposition to Trump can be the death knell for politicians. Our own Adam Kinzinger is a prime example. Yes, we can hope for moral conviction and courage from those that believe Trump is slime. But if one plans to continue if politics, it can be perilous to oppose Trump. So the question is, what are Haley's future plans? I also have another thought. This person worked for Trump at one time and supported him. I'm sorry she turned out just to be another target of his. But I have little sympathy for her pro-Trump sentiments before she decided to run against him.
Wouldn’t you say Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney have a stronger spine than Nikki Haley? For Trumpism to fail, someone has to have a spine. Someone has to form a principled and credible conservative party that doesn’t want to put asylum seekers in concentration camps, to take away women’s rights to reproductive health care, and to take health care away from LGBTQ+ people and put them back in the closet. It’s easy to go along with incipient fascist movements. Just look at Hindenburg and 1930s Germany.
Absolutely! But who in the Republican Party is listening to them? If anyone was, they would still be in office or running for something. Are you a Republican? Can you vote for them? They would need to win primaries before they could even get to the election. Hey, I would accept either one for the White House ahead of Trump. Are they running? Right now they can't even influence the GOP, other than to keep indicating their disgust with Trump which we already know.
RE Name games: So should we say that Jason Van Dyke is a "justice impacted individual"? I don't buy that changing the label from "criminal" or "ex-convict" makes him any more repulsive than knowing what he did to get that label.
As for past actions defining a person, that is often valid. Someone who wrote books for their job and has stopped is still an author. Why can't someone who has robbed banks be considered a robber?
That is not to say that I don't believe there should be redemption - especially for a single isolated case of bad judgment.
Yeah, I'm really gonna refer to John Gacy & Richard Speck as "justice impacted individuals!"
I sure hope the loons who came up with that term become "crime impacted individuals!"
Yo Garry, so I went to Vietnam as a “drafted impacted” person who worked hard to avoid being a “ bullet impacted individual”.
Now that I am old, wait I mean “an age impacted person”, I find you and your post show common sense, I mean “wisdom impacted comments” :)
I too am age impacted, also weight impacted & no hair impacted!
Luckily, I was medically impacted & thus 4F during Viet Nam!
I wish more of them were more fully impacted. Way too many criminals are never caught, get sweet plea deals, or light sentences. The recent NBC News Chicago series 'Dismissed' reported that only 1.5% of sexual assault cases result in a conviction with jail time. And of course, there is the felon that I mentioned on Tuesday that was on supervised release for illegal gun possession when he was arrested for illegal gun possession.
So anyone who ever got a DUI should be known for the rest of their lives as a “criminal” or “ex-convict”? As opposed to, say, a “neighbor,” or a “Dad,” or a “Mom,” or a “friend”? I really get tired of the self-righteous “othering” that is shown by so many people when the subject of the criminal justice system comes up. It sorts of illustrates why some folks are promoting this change in our language. I have defended people accused of crimes since 1981. I had a few bad eggs that I represented: sociopaths if you will. But most of my clients were either regular people who made a bad decision under difficult circumstances or innocent.
That is a good point. I is very hard to stop people from making blanket judgments on those who have a criminal record. I don't think changing words used is going to matter. It reminds me of how terms to refer to intellectual disability changed over time. They would get dropped after they became terms of derision in the general language. Simpleton and moron were once clinical terms. Mentally Retarded was a clinical term until fairly recently and has been replaced with intellectual disability. The downside of the last change is that it causes confusion. If a psychologist evaluates a child and tells the parents that their kid has an intellectual disability, then sometimes do not take it seriously. If they are told the kid is MR, then it would always get their attention. This is very important because the diagnosis is used to compel public schools to provide appropriate accommodations.
The basic problem is not the term, it is the tendency to "othering".
It should also be noted that the language change as I understand it only applies to people who are candidates for alternative sentencing options, like the aberrant behavior example of a DUI. People such as John Gacy and the other notorious defendants listed would not qualify.
Building the casino on the Trib printing plant site is yet another of the incompetent decisions of Lori Lightfoot, who would be called Chicago's worst mayor, other than the fact that Brandon Johnson is outdoing her in that, being even worse than her, every day! It takes real talent to be worse than Lightfoot!
It may be less than a mile from Michigan Ave. & just over a mile from The Loop, but it's a pain to get to, with slow moving streets the only way there.
I'm surprised that Bally's isn't demanding the taxpayers pay for a huge new rail station on the UP North & Northwest Lines which pass by there less than a block away from it. Of course that would mean realigning those tracks, along with condemning some private property to widen the right of way to add platforms & stairs to street level.
For those who don't know the history of the site, it was originally the Northwestern Railway's long distance coach yard, which wasn't needed after Amtrak took over the service in 1971.
The sole logical place for the casino was the original McCormick Place building, which is actually the second building, as the first burned down in January 1967. It has a rail station just a block away & the semi-secret private busway along the IC tracks from The Loop, directly to it.
Speaking of justice impacted individuals, last night on channel 5 news they did a story detailing how websites that purport to do background checks often miss people with records. As part of the story they showed photos of a handful of offenders’ and told what their past crimes were and how the website was not flagging them. I thought it a poor, bad taste use of offenders who had served their sentences. You would have been appalled.
Pretty sure that registered sex offenders are registered for a reason. They didn't pick guys with a single, old, or minor offense. I understand your point and generally agree. But these guys seemed to be a good fit for the story and would seem like the kind of people that you would hope to identify if you were doing a background check on someone that you were going to let into your home.
You can be a first time relatively minor offender and be a registered sex offender. An 18 year old high school senior who has consensual sex with a 15 year old classmate can be stuck on the registry for 25 years (at least in Michigan, where I practiced law). Not all registered sex offenders are rapists or child molesters. Yes, many are and should be but don't assume all registered sex offenders are disgusting creeps.
This is the first time I didn't vote for a single Tweet of the Week.
They all sucked!
I agree it was not a particularly good crop. Some weeks are like that.
Regarding the Bally’s casino. I’m not a prude, but whenever I read about a new casino or pot dispensary I think we are turning into Pottersville from It’s a Wonderful Lufe.
Chicago hasn’t been Bedford Falls for some time.
And knowing Potter didn’t help Violet Bik one bit. Pottersville is a fearsome place where apparently even clout doesn’t work.
History has shown that Potter was the progressive one in that movie. Upstate NY was to become part of the rust belt. Tourism and Indian casinos were the future.
I shook my head yes repeatedly while reading Heidi Steven’s’ article the other day. (Yes, I read my e-Trib every day.) My daughters, now 28 and 25, wouldn’t be the amazing women they are now, if it weren’t for my village of my sisters, my parents, school nurses, teachers, after school care givers, baby sitters, etc. With my husband working downtown, and traveling for work constantly, my village was there for us consistently and without complaint. I will never be able to thank them enough for those years of support.
I hope you mean nodded your head!
When I first heard the term "justice-impacted individual" on the radio, my first thought was "victim?" That's seems the implication. Justice received or denied impacts the true victims of criminal acts, not the perpetrator.
Great follow up column by Mary Schmich!
RE: changing vocabulary
The Clery Foundation has worked diligently to address campus safety since their daughter Jeanne Clery was raped and murdered in her dorm room in 1986. During an interview in a 20/20 segment in the 1990s, Jeanne's mother said that they discovered that some colleges trying to cover-up the number of rapes on campus had changed the word rape to "Advances without sanction."
Eric, I enjoyed your discussion concerning your right to remain silent. I have been on 3 juries in my life including jury foreman in a federal case.
As a juror in the Trump case (I am projecting here), I would listen to Ms.Daniels discuss having sex with Trump. Since there were only two folks involved, I would wait/ expect to hear Trump’s side of the story.
When he does not take the stand, I would likely take Ms. Daniels version as true. The Judge can tell me not to hold Trump’s lack of testifying against him; but if Trump fails to give his side of the story, I’m going with Ms. Daniels version as true.
I get that. And it is easier when everybody 'knows' going in that the defendant is a scumbag and 'probably guilty'. But given the common lawyer tactic of character assassination to impugn credibility and mention of unrelated relationships and actions; there are plenty of reasons for a person to remain mute. Sustained objections do nothing to purge the memories of the jurors, and probably reenforce memory.
I agree with many legal scholars that the right against self-incrimination is kinda ridiculous. It means that just about everyone can be compelled to testify in any proceeding except the most important person in the most important proceeding, the defendant in a criminal trial. Even if we found it icky to require the defendant to answer charges against them, I do think juries should be permitted to draw negative inferences from a defendant's refusal to do so. Re talking to police, nobody should be forced to do so, but our approach should be akin to what I know from British TV shows, which warns defendants, "You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defense if you do not mention when questioned something you later rely on in court." No other country I'm aware of has so strong a right against self-incrimination. Meanwhile, it doesn't really do much to protect suspects in the real world, who fall prey to all manner of legal trickery, including lies about the facts and false promises, to elicit dubious confessions. The self-incrimination right mainly protects the savvy suspect (or the one who has a good lawyer on speed-dial) who knows that the best thing to do if you think you might be a suspect is to say nothing.
I actually disagree, though, that, given our system, it makes sense for the rest of the world to draw negative inferences from not taking the stand. Every lawyer is going to tell every defendant in almost every case that they shouldn't testify, even innocent defendants, because it opens them up to a potentially brutal cross-examination on facts/issues that would otherwise be inadmissible. It therefore seems wrong to assume anything because of that fact alone other than "he's doing what his lawyer told him."
The tweet poll has the "Wordle score" item listed twice.
Crud. I left out one of the better ones by mistake. Ah well, have fixed it and will credit the Wordle tweet with the duplicate votes.
(thumbs up) I did vote for that one since I have been sharing Wordle scores daily.
In general I prefer the ones that are timely -- e.g., cicadas -- over ones that could have been written any time (lawn furniture, coffee cups, Shakespeare). Wordle isn't "May 2024" timely but it is at least "2020s timely."
Changing language is hard. If I were to be mugged, raped, or shot with bullets meant for someone else like Tavon Tanner, I wouldn't want my life to be defined as being a victim as I'd like to believe there's more to my life than one, albeit impactful, incident. From then on out, apparently I am an individual impacted by a justice-impacted individual.
Concerning the reckless driving plague in the Chicago area. I’m not the timid type. I don’t usually get rattled in threatening situations. But these idiots who endanger all drivers and weave through traffic at 100+ mph need to be ruthlessly reigned in.
I mean you’re driving along at a reasonable speed and suddenly you’re thrown into the Indy 500.
Law enforcement isn’t do much if anything to alleviate the problem. Rarely do I see any pull overs by State Police who I believe are responsible for highway safety on interstates.
Perhaps that’s not a feasible approach when some maniac is driving a 3,000 pound chunk of metal at subsonic speeds in a populated area, but something needs to be done.
I imagine these lawless jerks have a sense of impunity because of law enforcement’s laissez faire attitude toward this issue. S
Therefore things will not change unless the hammer comes down on there heads.
And more people will undoubtedly be injured or killed
I totally agree. All of us are probably guilty of occasionally exceeding the posted speed limit a bit, sometimes intentionally if the flow of traffic is generally above the limit as regularly occurs on Lakeshore Drive, or perhaps sometimes inadvertently. But driving at speeds of 100 mph is an appalling lack of concern for the safety of others and I would like to see severe consequences for doing so such as a one-year suspension of driving privileges, with a lifetime forfeiture of driving privileges for a repeat offense to remove these unrepentant criminals from our streets. Word does spread and consequences can change behavior.
I agree with you and David. But our experience with drunk driving laws and drunk drivers makes me skeptical about our justice system actually doing anything useful here. Not to mention the failure to enforce laws that would address street racing, intersection take overs for drifting, and road rage incidents.
There are people driving on the expressway who think they’re in a Nascar race, and sometimes on regular streets. Most are drunk or high on something, but some are young people who are just into the thrill of driving that fast and the challenge of going from lane to lane weaving in and out of traffic. They’re good at it in the video games they play, so they should be good at it in real life, right?
And they get tons of attention when they post their asinine, criminal behavior to social media. There was a story on PBS NewsHour last night about teen gang members and hangers on posting videos of themselves robbing and beating people for pocket change.
The statistics on public assessment of the economy were depressing. But you should have mentioned that the report also said that 49% of Democrats and 53% of Independents were among those that believe we are in a recession. I think this means three things. First most people do not know or understand economic terms. I doubt that most could correctly define 'recession'. Second, people respond to such questions based on how they feel about their own situation with regard to the economy. And third, the media/government are terrible (intentionally?) at sharing the facts. This includes stories that inanely state that 'prices will come down as inflation slows'. No one should be surprised that people that believe this will be disappointed when prices do not come down, which they won't because price rises due to inflation are permanent. Similarly, reporting on the stock market focuses on the daily fluctuations which are just as often down as up. The reported percentages and nominal values are not understood, but always include nonsensical 'reasons' for the change which are usually 'reactions' to 'good' or 'bad' economic news. So, there are many days where viewers are being told things are bad.
Also, I have seen at least a dozen news stories reporting the monthly and quarterly changes in inflation data that reported inflation increases. None reported the long-term trend. It is easy to imagine people reacting to the headline. This is usually accompanied by a report that the Fed is unlikely to lower interest rates until inflation gets under control. Also, mortgage rates have continued to rise and were at 7.11% until the recent fall to just below 7%. But the main story line that is incessantly repeated is that homes are unavailable and unaffordable because of the economy and interest rates.
I think most people's feelings about the economy are rooted in their own experiences, particularly at the gas pump and the grocery store. I don't know who here does grocery shopping for his/her/their families, but I do for mine and prices are insane. I judge everything by the price of a box of Cheerios, b/c I buy that all the time, and it's been more than 8 bucks a box for quite some time now. I filled up my car last week, and while it hasn't been the highest in the past three years (when I got it) it's pretty high, and higher than it was. You can't tell me that "the economy is humming along," because that is not my experience (except with the retirement accounts -- and I know what goes up can come down. But I like the totals at the moment). Everyday experience counts for a lot of the negativity among huge swaths of the American public.
Beth, what about drugs. For some folks that is close to their number 1 expense.
Biden is trying to reduce those costs. Trump has never dealt with that issue.
Exactly what will Trump do to reduce gas prices? More drilling? You will not see any change in price for years. Stand by for the summer blend gas farce increase, your issue there is with the oil companies, not Biden or Trump.
Any thoughts how Trump will reduce the cost of Cheerios?
If gas and cereal prices are you biggest concern, sounds like things are not that bad.
My sister who has diabetes, living on social security, just had her meds raised $40 bucks in one month. She would love to be in your gas/Cheerios economic situation.
She is a Biden supporter as she fears Trump will destroy medical plans and in no way counter drug price increases.
Peter, hadn't thought of drug costs, to be honest. My asthma drug is the most expensive one in our family -- and may I say Biden has done nothing about that one. And if your sister's meds just went up $40, why isn't she hacked off at Birden? Biden caused a lot of this with the stimulus package passed early in his presidency. My point wasn't that I have it easy with gas and cereal being my big concern, it's that people who fill up shopping carts and cars/trucks have it slammed home every single time that everything costs more, in some cases lots more. And they know who's in charge and they see him not doing a whole heck of a lot except telling people they're wrong.
Beth, my sister is watching Biden trying to bring down MediCare drugs. He is defending Obamacare and Medicare.
Trump has been trying to get rid of Obamacare and is hinting he will mess with MediCare.
Biden has been working on insulin drug relief, Trump has done nothing in this area.
Biden has been trying to bring down inflation and has been partially successful.
No President has control over prices and lots of stores take advantage of “inflation” to mark up their prices over inflation.
I see nothing from Trump discussing how he would bring down inflation or prices.
He is running to stay out of jail and no other reason.
The man has no plan, does not read, does not govern and cares ONLY for himself.