I wouldn't consider myself a politics expert, but I handicap politics and have made quite a bit of money from handicapping over the past decade. This is an exercise that I suggest to determine how much political understanding you actually have.

Indicate if you are a supporter/not a supporter for both Obama and Trump.

If you are supporter, name two points of criticism and one point that the administration did well. If you are not a supporter, do the opposite: name two points that you thought the administration did well and one point of criticism.

I find that if you cannot do this, or if you can only do this in a sarcastic sense, then your political understanding is probably extremely low. Even Harding and Nixon did good for the U.S. Heck, even Chuck Schumer praised Trump for several things his administration did.

I'll start. Not a supporter of Obama, am a supporter of Trump.


Things Obama did well:
- I supported his détente of Cuba. The policies put in place were a cold war relic that really had no bearing anymore in today's world, and was basically held hostage by voters in Florida. Although Obama probably ceded control of Florida to the republicans for the next 15-20 years, I will admit that what he did was a good example of putting country over politics.
- Expansion of fracking deregulation in 2014 as a stop-gap to reduce carbon emissions. His administration did well to actually understand the science behind fracking and although he would not openly admit it, did a lot to assist the shale gas industry with a goal to become independent from oil from the middle east as well as reduce carbon emissions, which Trump has then expanded.

Things Obama didn't do well:
- For a hope and change candidate, outside of a few social issues and Cuba/Iran he was pretty much identical to W in foreign policy and economic policy, and pretty much expanded on W on most everything else. So I don't understand why the liberals like him so much.

Things Trump did well:
- The U.S. needs to stop subsidizing the rest of the world, especially through the Bretton Woods framework that doesn't really have any bearing to the modern age since there is no more Soviet Union. Trump is the best bill collector we could hope for and the first President to actually address this issue.

Things Trump didn't do well:
- Engaging the PPT after a 16% stock market correction, compelling the Fed to capitulate on rate hikes and intervening in the stock market to go perpetually up is completely asinine and will ultimately lead to a 1930 style event which will cause his downfall.
- Jared and Ivanka are diametrically opposed to everything MAGA voters stood for and Trump should stop listening to them policy wise, and be more in tune with Stephen Miller.

So your claim that you've allegedly made money handicapping politics means that we should accept your premise that you have the key to assessing the level of others' political understanding?

In my experiences, when people begin a discussion by declaring how knowledgeable they are it's a sure sign they are afraid that nothing else that they say is going to make this point for them.

Admittedly, I phrased it poorly in the sense that I meant that this is an exercise as to what I do to assess if I have political understanding or not for handicapping, and kind of just wrote it out as "you" in general.

This is the internet, so feel free to assume that I am lying about everything and am just a bum in the basement without a dollar to my name and know jack all about anything. Mostly I just want to see what answers people come up with.

I think it is an interesting exercise for people to look at things from a different angle. Even Trump has bumbled his way into doing some things right.

like what?

for the record i dont agree with regards to foreign policy in the first post. every step trump has taken in foreign policy has been an international blunder that has played right into the hands of russia and china and increased their standing in the world while decreasing ours.

also stephen miller is a white supremacist and lol at OP being a supporter of trump AND wanting him to be more like stephen miller..

Trump-promises-to-fully-fund-prison-reform-law

My guess is there will be some nitpicking with claims that "Trump is going to gut this program!", but ultimately, it will be up to Congress to assure that the plan is funded correctly.

He pardoned that grandma also I guess he gets some credit for that, although he probably only did it because he's hoping to sleep with Kim Kardashian.

Obama basically saved the country from complete economic collapse, saved the US auto industry, saved countless public sector jobs, implemented ACA. Those things alone are enough to make him one of the all-time greats. People forget where we were at when he took office.

Also the complete opposite of the current President in terms of class, civility, smarts, empathy, etc. etc.

it's a pr stunt. this senate wouldnt pass any actual meaningful prison reform.

sure its nice to go from 20yrs down to 15 yrs on some mandatory minimums,
and sure its nice to go from life(30yrs in cases with parole) to 25 years for third strike cases. but 3rd strike laws are draconian and without merit and should be eliminated. along with most mandatory minimums all together

the law was really about funding faith based evangelical programs to go into the prison.. that's why its being "fully funded"..

however, despite in being nearly entirely a PR stunt, i will cede the point that it is the only criminal justice reform at all in a while, which is worth something i guess.

the grandma was serving a sentence for drug trafficking i believe, which trump said isn't worth more than 25 years. but over 40% of all life sentences in the federal system are for drug trafficking, so i guess its who you know.

Me trying to come up with a pro-Trump contribution for this thread.

Trump has nominated sane, educated people to the Federal Reserve (to this point) that have kept the economy in good shape.

He hasn't been as war-happy as I feared he might be. Of course we still need $750B for the military for some reason (up 50% since 2015 - absolute madness). But at least we're mostly just throwing that money into a hole instead of destroying lives (as much).

I am bad at this stuff. Was Obama screwing up the whole western World a good thing or a bad thing? I think it depends from which side you are looking at it. From the standpoint of the United Nations where the poor countries have the majority of votes, it could not have been better. From the standpoint of the taxpayers from the western countries who had to pay for the party it was a total disaster.

Same goes for Trump and his attempt to turn it around. It's totally awesome for one side, but absolutely terrible for the other. I don't know which side to take. I'd like to take the side of my country, but that makes me an egoist. Someone please help me out on this.

Can you be more specific about how Obama screwed up "the whole western World"?

And what was the disastrous "party" that was paid for by multiple western countries at Obama's insistence?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standa..._United_States
https://www.economist.com/economic-a...3/19/world-gdp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS

'Performance art', as this kind of thing tends to be known in the increasingly outmoded medium of internet discussion forums (most of the action having been transferred to Twitter long ago), is, as its name suggests, an art. And, as you yourself observe, you aren't very good at it.

Sorry dude, I refuse to give you any free info that will benefit your future handicaps without seeing any positive return for myself.
Nice try, Mori sh ita!

Are these Wikipedia articles supposed to be some sort of airtight proof that Obama screwed up "the whole Western world"?

Nope, they just provide evidence. The final conviction is up to the jury.

We need a little explanation of why you think it is evidence. Perhaps you can help.

Counterpoint:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo-taoshi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axolotl
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Lay

Seems like Shandrax is suggesting that we were being outpaced by emerging world powers as our standard of living plummeted and GDP stagnated during Obama's tenure

And this means he didn't do a fantastic job

As I explained in another thread, using the most common measure of standard of living (GDP per capita), U.S. standard of living went up steadily from 2009 to present. It was outpaced by emerging economies, but that's no surprise. The rate of economic growth almost always is higher in developing economies than it is in highly developed economies.

You need a little explanation. In fact you don't, because you know exactly, what this evidence means. You just want to get to step two of the 2-step-method of dismissing any conclusion that isn't based on math.

Step 1: Please be more specific
Step 2: That's just your opinion!

This is preposterous. You think standard of living went down during Obama's administration that Obama was not responsible. You haven't cited any evidence for this belief other than three wikipedia articles that don't obviously support your conclusion.

When I explain that standard of living did not go down using traditional measures of standard of living, you still don't explain, and instead accuse me of dismissing any conclusion "that isn't based on math."