3 ms·

Here's a list of radical actions, even if you think these were good ideas I don't see how you can argue they're not radical in the sense that it's outside anyth

Here's a list of radical actions, even if you think these were good ideas I don't see how you can argue they're not radical in the sense that it's outside anything previous presidents have tried to do - increased military spending to Iraq war levels during peace time - trillion dollar deficits during boom times - fired dozens of cabinet members and other top officials whenever they didn't display dictator levels of obsequience to him - got impeached for using US diplomacy for personal political gains - tried to kick millions off of SNAP - had DOJ help states kick people off voter roles - reduced confidence in the election process - changed DOJ's long standing definition of civil rights to instead protect religious people and white and asian discrimination - pulled out of major international agreements with little notice including the Paris Agreement and the Iran deal - attacked european allieas and weakened NATO - cut legal immigration in a bunch of ways including cut refugee by 80% and cut H1B. And implemented draconian inhumane policies on illegal immigrants. - appointed hundreds of extremely ideological judges (hopefully d ang doesn't slap us down for discussing politics)

rayiner 6y ago
You seem to be using "radical" as a synonym for "bad." "Radical" means taking an ideology to an extreme. Being an incompetent grifter isn't "radical." > - increased military spending to Iraq war levels during peace time The defense budget is significantly smaller as a percentage of GDP than under Obama: https://www.factcheck.org/2018/07/trumps-defense-spending-exaggerations/ https://www.factcheck.org/2018/07/trumps-defense-spending-ex... > - trillion dollar deficits during boom times Bad, but not radical. > - fired dozens of cabinet members and other top officials whenever they didn't display dictator levels of obsequience to him > - got impeached for using US diplomacy for personal political gains Bad, but not radical. > - tried to kick millions off of SNAP Clinton did way more welfare reform than Trump. > - had DOJ help states kick people off voter roles Cleaning up voter rolls is required by federal law. > - reduced confidence in the election process Bad, but not radical. > - changed DOJ's long standing definition of civil rights to instead protect religious people and white and asian discrimination Not radical. In Evanston, Illinois, Asian kids are now being held back from returning to in-class instruction: https://www.wsj.com/articles/can-school-be-antiracist-a-new-superintendent-in-evanston-ill-has-a-plan-11601982001 https://www.wsj.com/articles/can-school-be-antiracist-a-new-.... We can debate the merits of this, but it's not radical to suggest that discrimination against asians is a violation of civil rights laws. > - pulled out of major international agreements with little notice including the Paris Agreement and the Iran deal It's not "radical" to pull out of an agreement we had been part of for less than a year since its effective date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement Presidents change course on foreign policy all the time. Trump's foreign policy has been relatively successful. > - attacked european allieas and weakened NATO Are you talking about a concrete policy? > - cut legal immigration in a bunch of ways including cut refugee by 80% and cut H1B. Not radical. European countries have done the same thing recently, after realizing their 2015 actions on refugees were ill-advised. Calling a cut to H1B "radical" is hard to credit. Is every small shift to the right from a Republican President "radical?" > And implemented draconian inhumane policies on illegal immigrants. Very bad, maybe radical. > - appointed hundreds of extremely ideological judges No, just normal conservative judges. The "extremely ideological judges" are ones that think you can look at a 230-year old document and find new things in it that nobody realized were there before. We have normalized that gaslighting, but taking a view that the words on the page mean what they say isn't "radical."

rayiner 6y ago

You seem to be using "radical" as a synonym for "bad." "Radical" means taking an ideology to an extreme. Being an incompetent grifter isn't "radical." > - increased military spending to Iraq war levels during peace time The defense budget is significantly smaller as a percentage of GDP than under Obama: https://www.factcheck.org/2018/07/trumps-defense-spending-exaggerations/ https://www.factcheck.org/2018/07/trumps-defense-spending-ex... > - trillion dollar deficits during boom times Bad, but not radical. > - fired dozens of cabinet members and other top officials whenever they didn't display dictator levels of obsequience to him > - got impeached for using US diplomacy for personal political gains Bad, but not radical. > - tried to kick millions off of SNAP Clinton did way more welfare reform than Trump. > - had DOJ help states kick people off voter roles Cleaning up voter rolls is required by federal law. > - reduced confidence in the election process Bad, but not radical. > - changed DOJ's long standing definition of civil rights to instead protect religious people and white and asian discrimination Not radical. In Evanston, Illinois, Asian kids are now being held back from returning to in-class instruction: https://www.wsj.com/articles/can-school-be-antiracist-a-new-superintendent-in-evanston-ill-has-a-plan-11601982001 https://www.wsj.com/articles/can-school-be-antiracist-a-new-.... We can debate the merits of this, but it's not radical to suggest that discrimination against asians is a violation of civil rights laws. > - pulled out of major international agreements with little notice including the Paris Agreement and the Iran deal It's not "radical" to pull out of an agreement we had been part of for less than a year since its effective date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement Presidents change course on foreign policy all the time. Trump's foreign policy has been relatively successful. > - attacked european allieas and weakened NATO Are you talking about a concrete policy? > - cut legal immigration in a bunch of ways including cut refugee by 80% and cut H1B. Not radical. European countries have done the same thing recently, after realizing their 2015 actions on refugees were ill-advised. Calling a cut to H1B "radical" is hard to credit. Is every small shift to the right from a Republican President "radical?" > And implemented draconian inhumane policies on illegal immigrants. Very bad, maybe radical. > - appointed hundreds of extremely ideological judges No, just normal conservative judges. The "extremely ideological judges" are ones that think you can look at a 230-year old document and find new things in it that nobody realized were there before. We have normalized that gaslighting, but taking a view that the words on the page mean what they say isn't "radical."