Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "Trump Delivers Bonkers Interview With Fox News" video.

  1.  @dashx1103  Obama was a polished neoliberal - so it was much easier to have misconceptions about him. Plus in relaxed interviews and on the campaign trail he and his wife come across as likeable, cool and witty. Most people do not have the time, energy and interest to follow politics and policies so closely. The racists were ugly, liberal media did not call him out, and Fox did not call him out for the right things (but over Dijon mustard in hotdogs, tan suits in summer, alleged death panels, birth certificate). He is intelligent and gives coherent interviews. He did not embarrass the nation, and has the vocabulary, sentence structure, and manners that you would expect from a president. So the normal Democratic leaning voter and consumer of "news" is excused from believing that Obama was a decent president, that he intended to do good, that he could have done more if only Republicans had been less hostile. Democrats had the president and the Senate and Congress in 2009 and 2010. They had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate in spring 2010 (for 60 days). Then they passed the healthcare insurance "reform", then they could have passed anything. Never mind tantrum throwing Republicans. As in the time of FDR, some Democratic "representatives" were the problem. FDR twisted arms of Democrats to get the New Deal bills passed. Which made him even more popular with the voters, which gave him even more leverage over unwilling members of the House or Senate. Obama was an opportunistic careerist that hoped to become a member "of the club". The family of FDR had been richa and in the club for many generations. I guess that gets boring after a few generations and FDR started to like his role as benefactor of the masses. Hope and Change was Obama's sales pitch to become "the first black president". He could have become a beloved reform president - but he never had the intention to put up a fight. he got a LOT of Wallstreet money in 2008, he sold out to the donors in 2008 already. But Obama was good in maintaining decorum and appearances. Trump on the other hand has a personality disorder (grandiose / malignant narcissist is an educated guess) and he is dumb and uninformed on top of that, likely in cognitive decline. And not declining from a high level. That was glaringly obvious even in 2015. To quote Jimmy Dore: Obama was a pretty face on ugly things. Trump is an ugly face on ugly things. Obama did not have the big donor friendly healthcare "reform" because he is too stupid to understand the issue or the merits of single payer or at least public option. Trump would be fooled easily by special interests - even if he had good intentions. Obama was not fooled. It was intentional.
    2
  2. Imagine the Social Media director gets his hands dirty to denigrate the infectious disease expert (with posting a caricuature * with a hostile text). After the hostile op-ed of economic advisor Navarro. - Trump stays in the background and they likely do the polling to see if something sticks. The goal is to demote Fauci as trusted source of information - especially ! among the Trump base. Fast forward 1 month of slander and they will have convinced the cult - with help of Fox - that it is all Fauci's fault. He has a nefarious agenda to damage the economy OR and that is even more likely: they can safely ignore Fauci and his warnings and objections - also when they manipulate the database. They could of course fire Fauci, but at the moment he is very popular, I think even a lot of Trump supporters trust him. After being fired Fauci would make the tour on the "liberal" networks. And then he could be more open. He is very polite and diplomatic - but he can shut down idiots, so he could also do interviews with hostile Fox interviewers. They are no match for him.
    1
  3. Trump and his enablers are not concerned about appearances internationally, and they know a good part of the U.S. population does not trust them. At. All. But if the loyal base gives up on Trump when too many die... When the economy tanks even more, and there is no bailout for them ..... there is no chance to win the election. Trump and Republicans have no intention to bail out the workers. They bailed out the donors. Not to forget: with help of the Corporate Democrats, and Schumer and Pelosi who kept Progressives busy with fighting to get at least some crumbs for the regular people. Major mistake, the progressives should have flipped the table on Schumer, Pelose and talked about rent strike, tax stike, and a version of a general strike suited for a pandemic, .... also getting smaller businesses on board. They lack the guts, sadly. So even the Trump base will feel it soon - and the question is: What to do ? How to keep the chances intact to win the elections - with a lot of voter suppression. If the case numbers are bad in Nov. and there is no mail voting .... of course the Democrats blew that, the Repubs wanted the first stimulus bill for their donors (the same donors that finance the Democras). So the Democrats could have made that a condition, for the big first bill. But of course the D establishment did not show their fangs, they only do that against Progressives. The plan of Trump and the big donors. FORCE people to return to work, sure a lot of them will die, but many of them are older, so we save on SS and Medicare for them. the culling is O.K. - always assuming that the pitchforks do not come out and that not most of the population turns on Republicans and Trump. At some point (1 - 2 years) there will be a vaccine or the virus will run its course. They would not care if that kills 1 million or 500,000 or 300,000 people. But Fauci so far enjoys a lot of public trust. He also cannot be lumped in with Democrats, so they cannot rile up that base with that. So if he speaks out that it is not necessary to have and accept that many dead people - he is an obstacle to the agenda. Or he he tells the American people that those sacrifices are not necessary. If the situation gets bad in fall and the top expert says another lockdown is the only chance (because the admin gambled away the insufficient gains of the first sort-of lockdown) - then there is no other chance than to bail out the masses. That would mean higher taxes or innovative concepts of money creation (see MMT). Either way - you cannot just create money, you have to back that up with domestic production (over time). So end of free trad deals. The oligarchs / big donors want nothing of that. The Republicans do not want it, and the Corporate Democrats do not want it either.
    1