CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
c.) What they chose to talk about it, and how they chose to talk about it.
But a significant proportion is to do with perception that Trump will:
1.) Say anything to make himself look good.
2.) Say anything to make his opponent look bad.
3.) Ignore the truth when inconvenient, and lie if they are convenient.
4.) Cares more about how people perceive him, than fulfilling his duty as President.
5.) throw out statements about what he's going to do that any rational human being knows he isn't going to do; and claims he never said he was going to do it when he says he admits it.
Former President Barack Obama is causing frustration among Democrats by going on a plethora of luxury vacations following his exit from the White House.
Obama has taken his family on a series of tours of millionaire and billionaire luxury retreats in the last few months, according to Democrats and activists.
Visiting actor Marlon Brando's private island
Four Seasons in Bali, where rooms cost $2,000 per night minimum
A Palm Springs Estate
Sir Richard Branson's Necker Island
Mid Pacific Country Club in Oahu, Hawaii
Left-wing activists are upset with what they see as Obama's distancing from the base of the Democratic Party. Left wing activists now say that this is part of Obama trying to join the one percent.
Crazy AL why are the Progressives upset with Obama now ?
Hey, I thought the right wing mantra was that wealthy people should be able to spend THEIR money however they wished!? If they didn't want it to "trickle down" (we all know Trump likes stuff that ....trickles down ... keeps his hair yellow,;-)), it was THEIR business! Why are the right wingers upset with a "liberal", (not really), spending his money as he wishes?? HE earned it, not by stiffing contractors, not by stiffing students of his "university", not by borrowing money from our national enemies, ... by running the country with "r-e-s-p-e-c-t"!
I'm a Democrat, (used to be an independent before the GOP went rogue), and I'm not frustrated a bit. More power to him (them). Enjoy, BO!
I can see why outhouse60 is a Trump supporter, they both have the same 7th grade mentallity and think everyone ELSE is "crazy" .... like Mika and me! ;-) Crazy people often think everyone ELSE is crazy .... they don't like mirrors!
Obama was a self proclaimed cocaine addict who liked to dance at innapropriate times and do interviews high. Your claim is more leftist bullshit. Your description of Trump fit Obama to a "T". Wanna have that debate? Fire it up.
Your specific claims about Obama are neither factually accurate, nor supported by the evidence; they are, like the other 20 lies you have told, merely deliberate misrepresentations and distortions of reality.
Bronto Lie Counter: #22
The claim that my description of Trump fit Obama to a Tee is also a flagrant lie.
1,2,5 and 6 do not apply to Barack Obama at all in any way shape or form, and your bland assertions are not an argument.
Points 3 and 4 applies to literally every politician on the planet, so it's no surprise it fits Obama; but most assuredly is applies an order of magnitude more specifially to Trump than to Obama.
In fact, I think that what you said is so much of a lie, it warrants an additional lie on the Bronto Lie Counter. Can we do that? Let me consult the score keeper...
Your specific claims about Obama are neither factually accurate, nor supported by the evidence; they are, like the other 20 lies you have told, merely deliberate misrepresentations and distortions of reality.
He admitted to everything I said in his book "Dreams from my Father". Saying a fact is a lie is... a lie. So you're like 0 for 32 or something. Your offense isn't doing well today.
You haven't cited or proven even one claim yet. I have. I've destroyed your arguments with facts. Not only are you a bad debater, but you are a demonstrably and provably horrible debater. Since you are keeping track, you are down 35 to 0. In America we call that, a shutout. Obama admitted to cocaine abuse. You called that a lie. That means you lose.
5.) throw out statements about what he's going to do that any rational human being knows he isn't going to do; and claims he never said he was going to do it when he says he admits it.
A person is not elected to be President for all People, he is elected to be Executive officer for all. President is a legal limitation to representation before basic principle and legal precedent. There are always two sides to any legal argument by basic principle to a United States Convolutional legal test. If a President is representing everyone by democracy it means a side had gone unrepresented before the United States Constitution.
By the separation granted by United States Constitution. A person like myself could declare grievance that neither executive officer represented a legal grievance before Untied States Constitution. As any representation may have simply been a political deal to push legislation, the legislators themselves Presented, legislation unconstitutional with no public protection to the general welfare of common defense, making it responsible for attacks directed upon a United State of the union.
First would be woman disqualifies a female form Presidency, a woman can be elected to become a Prasedera and hold executive office only by basic principle of law. Also any civil union of private partnership recognized by Congressional legislation cannot manipulate the witness. Starting with self-evident truth a law should not be use plagiary as a test to hold a political office as this is a self-incrimination to all people.
Yes, the right felt very included with the demonization of Christianity and glorifying of Islam. And the race baiting felt very inclusive. Obama was a racist. I've read his book and listened to him speak. White people seem to be last on his list of favorites.
Flipping off the Middle East means you're awake and aware of threats. Petting Islam means you are ignorant beyond measure. They've destroyed and killed everywhere they've been welcomed. At some point common sense locks the door.
Barack Obama was not a President for all and Barack Obama was a total failure on the world stage. Before Barack Obama came into power had you ever heard of ISIS ?
I'm pretty sure, the reason Trump is so reviled is because of "WHAT" he is:
A lying, self-agrandising, foul mouth, unbalanced, uncouth, unprepared, and unwilling to learn demagogue, who whips people like you into a frenzy with the same accusations you've seen in every not-job conspiracy website, and promising you everything you ever wanted, whilst single handedly working contrary to the wellbeing of people like you in almost every single way; whilst ridiculing and attacking anyone who makes him look bad.
All of those are "What" Trump is.
In the case of Obama, while you may disagree with him on pretty much everything, but when he spoke at least you didn't feel like he was a rambling old man off his medication. He exuded calm and confidence, was well liked almost all of his allies, and unlike Trump, you felt like try and deal with uncomfortable issues, rather than to attack and pretend like there was nothing happening.
As mentioned; your portrayal of Obama is a grotesque misrepresentation of the facts; rendering this statement a flat-out lie.
Bronto Lie Counter #25.
Trump is reviled by Liberals, but the pretense that it is ONLY liberals, is so untrue that it predicates a second lie on your lie counter.
In reality, Trump is reviled by liberals and an unprecedented number of republicans too; today the number of Republicans queuing up to chastise and berate him, combined with the historical numbers of republicans that are saying EXACTLY the same thing as the liberals have been saying all along were quite frankly so extraordinary as to render your assertion that it is liberals so farcical that you should feel bad.
As mentioned; your portrayal of Obama is a grotesque misrepresentation of the facts; rendering this statement a flat-out lie.
He admits his disdain for whites and talks about his cocaine addiction in his own book "Dreams From my Father". You haven't read it? No wonder you supported a racist. You knew nothing about him.
No, that assertion is based on a massively distorted misrepresentation both of what he said and what he obviously meant.
It can only be construed in the way you claim if you are massively and deliberately dishonest.
But given you have flagranatly lied 29 times in nearly every single one good your replies to me prior to this; that you take such a position is not particularly surprising.
But given you have flagranatly lied 29 times in nearly every single one good your replies to me prior to this; that you take such a position is not particularly surprising
Calling everything a lie, even video of what someone actually said ver batum is losing you ground quickly in a landslide. You haven't disproven any single claim I have made, much less 29.
Trump is reviled by Liberals, but the pretense that it is ONLY liberals, is so untrue that it predicates a second lie on your lie counter
There are liberals who opposed Obamà like Matt Damon. See how that bullshit works? You're right. Everyone hates Trump. That's why the electorate map is red and he won over 90% of the counties in America.
Deliberately misrepresenting facts and reality. The number of republicans coming out and opposing Trump was unprecedented: Deliberwly ignoring contratry evidence, including prominent republicans such as Jeb Bush, GWB, Mitt Romney, John McCain, john Kasich, to name but few; and not limited to these by any means renders your reply flagrantly dishonest.
Jeb Bush, GWB, Mitt Romney, John McCain, john Kasich
Using people you revile to discredit someone is exactly what you accused me of but worse. Watching you contradict your own claims and be a hypocrite is fun entertainment. Go ahead. Continue long diatribes that embarress yourself, see if I care.
Bwahahahaha! Says the person that says video of someone saying things isn't proof of them saying things but a "misrepresentation of facts". And I thought dermot was the worst debater on here....
So does Vladimir Putin. Temperment doesn't fix or help the country. You can be likeable and cause the country to tank.
was well liked almost all of his allies
Egypt and Turkey accused him of conspiracy with the Muslim Brotherhood. He destroyed Libya. The Chinese wouldn't even bring him a staircase to get off of his plane.
Bronto misrepresents a position yet again: this is an argument about why Obama was liked and Trump was not: demeanor and behaviour is a big part. The argument was not, as implied that Obama was a great leader because his calm and confidence.
Bronto lie counted #27:
Calmness under pressure, thinking before acting, not lashing out and deliberately acting rather than simply reacting are hall marks of good leadership (though not exclusive to it), and likezise contrary behavior often damages your political position: trump is an example of this, with the acceleration and prominence of the Russia investigation and the appointment of a special prosecutor largely down to his own lack of temperament and therefore mostly his own doing.
Bronto lie counter #28
Recent international polls.int show that Obama is more popular than Trump in almost every country barring Israel and Russia.
Bronto lie counter #29
Even we're your argument not completely false on those other grounds, only one of your cited countries are allies, further validating my claim that he was well liked by "almost all" amies. In not sure whether Egypt is now an Ally or not, so let's say all but two. This obviously points out the absurdity of your argument.
Calmness under pressure, thinking before acting, not lashing out and deliberately acting rather than simply reacting are hall marks of good leadership (though not exclusive to it), and likezise contrary behavior often damages your political position
1)He was high during an interview about the Olympics.
2)He dropped more bombs than Bush Jr and turned the Middle East into the threshold of hell by ousting Mobarek and Kadafi. He even admits that Libya was the biggest mistake of his presidency.
3)He had an epic racist meltdown where he commanded and demanded blacks vote for Hillary or it "would be an insult to his legacy!" Would you like that video? Say the word.
with the acceleration and prominence of the Russia investigation and the appointment of a special prosecutor largely down to his own lack of temperament and therefore mostly his own doing
I'm still waiting for you to show us a flaw in Trump's acts as President which has negatively effected the typical American citizen. I can dismantle Obama like a broken clock on this issue. I don't care about Obama's smile or his personality. As a President, his actions were destructive, not only here but world wide.
Post ignores that Trump has performed a staggeringly small number of acts.
In reality, the lowering of standing of the US, the undermining of alliances and the freepress, te acceleration of division and the rhetoric that has likely caused an uptick in hate crimes against American citizens, not to mention long term environmental harm and lack of foreign influence caused by budgetary changes and rollback of environmental regulations and changes in Us stance on the environment....
And that's just in 6 months! Just imagine if he had actually passed something major!
In reality, the lowering of standing of the US, the undermining of alliances and the freepress, te acceleration of division and the rhetoric that has likely caused an uptick in hate crimes against American citizens,
China, Egypt, Israel and Russia like us better now.
Obama kept Fox News out of his press conferences and feuded with them constantly.
No the terrorist supporting Libya under Muhammad Gaddafi was not a us ally.
Bronto lie counter #42
You are deliberately misrepresenting my argument and trying to change the subject. Obama was more popular with US allies than Trump, with the exclusion of Israel.
That is true, and using two examples of countries hating Obama does not show a) all countries or even many countries or b) these countries hate trump less.
Repeatedly and demonstrably lying is not "calling someone out", simply throwing out outrageous accusations that are not supported by facts or an argument and seeing what sticks is not "calling someone out" either.
As I am pointing out, thoroughly: almost every single thing you say is objectively false.
Starting in 2003, the Libyan government restored normal diplomatic ties with the European Union and the United States and has even coined the catchphrase, "The Libya Model", an example intended to show the world what can be achieved through negotiation rather than force when there is goodwill on both sides.[60]
On 30 August 2008, Gaddafi and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi signed a historic cooperation treaty in Benghazi.[61][62] Under its terms, Italy will pay $5Â billion to Libya as compensation for its former military occupation. In exchange, Libya will take measures to combat illegal immigration coming from its shores and boost investments in Italian companies.[63] The treaty was ratified by Italy on 6 February 2009,[61] and by Libya on 2 March, during a visit to Tripoli by Berlusconi.[64]
On 31 October 2008, Libya paid $1.5 billion, sought through donations from private businesses, to a fund that would be used to compensate both US victims of the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 and the 1986 bombing of the La Belle disco in Germany. In addition, Libyan victims of US airstrikes that followed the Berlin attack will also be compensated with $300 million from the fund. US state department spokesman, Sean McCormack called the move a "laudable milestone ... clearing the way for continued and expanding US-Libyan partnership." This final payment under the US-Libya Claims Settlement Agreement was seen as a major step towards improving ties between the two, which had begun easing after Tripoli halted its arms programmes. George Bush also signed an executive order restoring Libya's immunity from terror-related lawsuits and dismissing pending compensation cases
in not sure whether Egypt is now an Ally or not, so let's say all but two. This obviously points out the absurdity of your argument.
You openly admit that I'm right on two out of three... and then say that shows its absurdity? You'll have to do better than that Ramshutu. I'm faster than you on my slowest day, and on your fastest day. If Trump DID the things Obama DID, you'd crucify him and call him the worst President all time.
Imagine if Trump dropped more bombs than Bush, had a healthcare plan that tanked, told whites vote for me or it's an insult to my legacy, was a cocaine user, ousted foreign leaders opening up a vacuum for ISIS, claimed Russian hacking but did nothing, took a year to provide a birth certificate, had been raised in a foreign region hostile to America, tried to influence an Israeli election, was accused of conspiracy with terrorists by multiple countries, watched happily as Christians were genocided throughout the Middle East without lifting a finger, and pandered to Iran for hundreds of billions in sanctions. The left would destroy Trump if that was HIS legacy.
You ignore I said "most allies" and then pretend I implied all of them. As I said this is a lie
Bronto lie counter #37
You ignore the recent international polling data I raised. Trump is seen more negative in all countries bar Russia and Israel.
Bronto lie counter #38, 39 and 40.
You seem incapable of representing other people accurately. So I've added 3 lies for your incoherent, intellectually dishonest rant when you continue to misportray and misrepresent the majority of "facts".
It actually seems many conservatives appear to pretend as if the issues people have with him are just sour grapes; as if they are not able to own the person they voted for, and that any criticism is automatically invalid/sour grapes/fake news/the deep state/the establishment/liberals.
It's as if shaggys "it wasn't me" became a political movement.
Again a Great Rant as if that makes you seem smart in your own mind but now we must move on. The only issues that are to be had belong to the American Left. It's just not that hard to figure out.
How could Obama have been so celebrated while Trump is so reviled?
One suggested he slain a person who had made a self-incriminating confession publicly without trial in the pursuit of justice.
The understanding given is Executive officer Barrack Obama did not say anything to get elected, he simply publicly suggested and accepted the responsibility for the Death of a suspected criminal, without Constitutional separation for the protection of the general welfare of the people of the United States.
Where Executive officer Donald Trump as a once democratic business man now feels as though the Constitutional separation may have been prudent to insure the nation’s general welfare.
People tend to relate to the feeling of getting screwed by business more then attacked for not alienating a biased death sentence to a Capital crime. As the cost in protection had been spent like money on other public services.
The way I read this is the U.S. mainstream media (excepting FOX) loved Obama and hate Trump. When we look at the fact that all these outlets are both pro-establishment and left wing (at least in my perception) it's self explanatory.
Trump was vocally opposed, and reviled by a significant portion of the right wing as well as the left. Politicians, former presidents, former nominees, members of the senate and congress came out against him. He was frequently admonished by Ryan, and other members of the republican party; many members of the party refused to endorse him, and those that did often did so with a variety of weasel words.
You had at least one good-standing members of the republican party staging a press conferences telling everyone that Trump is a liar, and is saying anything to get elected.
With his frequent gaffes and outrages, the republican party basically queued up to admonish him, and tell him how his behavior was not acceptable, and more. You've had members of the intelligence community, foreign policy community; democrats and republicans alike telling the public that they could not trust Trump to do a good job.
It has been republicans that launched congressional and senate investigations into Russia, and a republican who appointed a special prosecuter.
The push back against trump was absolutely unprecedented as I have ever seen in politics; not just from the left, but importantly from the right as well.
Trump, his campaign, and his supporters have made a litany of excuses to dismiss personal criticism of Trump. The media's portrayal is wrong because it's "Fake news", any politician on the left that says bad things are just "hysterical democrats", or "dishonest liberals"; any politician on the right that says bad things are "part of the establishment", or "part of the swamp".
In reality, the correct approach is to assume that there is something wrong with Trump, rather than that there is something wrong with every single other group from both the left and right that said bad things about him.
We have the same thing over here in the U.K. with our Labour party socialist candidate Jeremy Corbyn. His party has turned against him, the media hate him, he's somewhat of an outsider and so on. As such, I don't see this as a problem unique to Trump.
If the media support you then you will be blessed with public approval, if they turn on you you will be cursed with public loathing. This, in my estimation, is what is most important in determining public support. With the rise of independent media this is changing, but for now public support is easily won over with media propaganda.
As aforementioned I'm not a fan of Trump (or in my country Corbyn), I just don't think public approval is based upon one's merits. If one looks at Obama's record on civil liberties, treatment of whistle-blowers, privacy, worker rights, military spending etc. then Obama should have been despised, in particular by the left. The media, however, seemed to hero-worship Obama and this seems to have kept his approval afloat.
Wait are you saying that Trump is worse than Bush? Pray tell me what Trump has done that tops the illegal war in Iraq that was based on complete lies? Or something worse than the suspension of habeas corpus and the introduction of indefinite detention and torture of, among others, U.S. citizens. I could go on but has Trump done anything that is even comparable to either of these things?
The media wasn't as harsh on Bush as it has been on Trump (sources 1,2). Yet Bush was genuinely committing war crimes and torturing people (many of whom were later found innocent)(source 3). These facts, taken together with Bush's approval ratings (source 4), support the idea that approval ratings are more susceptible to the media portrayal of the president than the president's actual actions.
"Wait are you saying that Trump is worse than Bush?"
I'm going to point out that you've ignored the other major examples I pointed out; I can appreciate that the Bush point is more nuanced; but you have to appreciate that media were not friends with either Romney, or McCain, and yet treated them better mainly because of them not being outrageous.
The answer to your question. Absolutely. Bush in 8 years of presidency, and 1 year of campaign has definitively caused more problems that are now evident 16 years after his first election than are evident after 6 months of a Trump presidency.
Considering at this point in his presidency, Bush had not done ANYTHING you mention, the press coverage was generally much more positive at the time. Both your sources cite benchmarks of the 100 day mark for the former presidents; thus your comparison is not valid.
Over time, the media coverage (after 9/11, Iraq War and the effect of the media not holding the administration accountable), towards the end of his term, the Media were very much more harsh (Remember the Valarie Plame Affair, or the coverage of Katrina, as an example?), and have been relatively scathing of him since he left office too.
So, if you compare like for like; Trump is getting worse Press than Bush has had in the first 100 days of his presidency: However Trump is acting objectively worse than this point of the Bush presidency.
So indeed, far from undermining my point, it tends to validate it.
One thing I will leave you with, however:
If approval ratings are more susceptible to the media portrayal of the president than his actions, and you are claiming that the coverage of bush was worse than Trump: Why is it that Trump has worse approval ratings. If your argument is valid, one would expect Trumps approval ratings to be much lower. Indeed, one would have expected him not to have won the election at all.
You're right about the media coverage point, I cited it in haste as an afterthought. Bush had done little in his first 100 days.
Nonetheless, Trump's approval is at 37% currently (source 1) which was Bush's average approval for his second term. Since Trump hasn't done anything even close to as bad as Bush, it is clear that one's actions are not the most important determinant in public approval. I personally would largely attribute his low approval rate to the actions of the media, though I cannot find data on long term media slant against Bush. How do you explain the fact that Bush's second term presidential approval was on average the same as Trump's approval now?
I never claimed Bush had worse media coverage than Trump, rather my instinct and argument is that the opposite is true (at the very least their coverage had similar levels of negative slant). Even if it weren't, however, it is still clear that one's approval isn't even close to being based on one's merits.
"You're right about the media coverage point, I cited it in haste as an afterthought. Bush had done little in his first 100 days. "
No problem, we've all done it :), I have a great deal of respect for you saying it out loud, though; that's never easy.
But it's very difficult to compare Bushes approval rating to Trumps approval rating; especially without correcting for the benefit of hindsight.
The reasons are simple.
Firstly, during first few years, Bushes approval ratings were artificially sky high due to the response to 9/11, and America appearing to rally together.
This was the time, if you recall, many voted for war in Iraq, the press was largely non-critical of the president, and were limited in their own rebuke.
Whether that high approval rating was due to the press coverage; or the press coverage being effected by the same thing that drove the high approval ratings; it's not possible to say without speculating.
What is clear; is that the realization of the impact of Bushes actions mainly started becoming clear later on in the presidency. The indictments for the Plame Affair came in 2005, iirc, The torture memo's only became public in 2004, and not longer before (was it early 2004, or late 2003) where the Abu Graib scandal broke.
What this led to, was after an initial general wave of support for the president after 9/11 started waning, to the point where people started questioning his actions, Iraq, etc.
So the lowering of Bushes approval rating seeems to have more to do with circumstances AND his actions over time (together with both psychology
and sociology).
Case in point you stating that he was engaged in an illegal war in Iraq. I think a majority of people today would argue it was damaging and unwarranted; even illegal. That wasn't the opinion or conclusion of a majority of people at the time: that new position is the result of a change in public opinion over time.
That opinion takes a while to change, and the resulting falling of his approval over time is specifically because of his actions and merits changing peoples minds over time.
As a result: I think it's quite valid to claim it was Bushes actions that yielded his low approval ratings: I mean, do you think Bush leaving office with an approval rating in the 20's had anything to do with all the bad stuff you claimed he did? Or was it unrelated?
But saying that, this is why I was specifically referencing the media's treatment of Bush in the early comparable stages. They are the only portions that are directly comparable.
"What is clear; is that the realization of the impact of Bushes actions mainly started becoming clear later on in the presidency. The indictments for the Plame Affair came in 2005, iirc, The torture memo's only became public in 2004, and not longer before (was it early 2004, or late 2003) where the Abu Graib scandal broke."
I was referencing Bush's average approval in his second term at 37%, at which point all this had already happened. This also includes negative media coverage for all the events you've cited.
I'm not saying Bush's actions had no impact on his approval ratings. However, if approval ratings are based solely (or even largely) on actions rather than other factors Trump's rating should be well above Bush's second term ratings. As such, I look to other variables, the most obvious one being the negative media bias (though there are of course others).
"I was referencing Bush's average approval in his second term at 37%, at which point all this had already happened. This also includes negative media coverage for all the events you've cited."
"I'm not saying Bush's actions had no impact on his approval ratings. However, if approval ratings are based solely (or even largely) on actions rather than other factors Trump's rating should be well above Bush's second term ratings"
I believe I explained this.
You don't lose approval all at once; it happens over time. You lose your loose supporters first, then the hardcore over a longer period. Most of the big scandals were at the end of Bushes first term, and bled into his second; if you note his highest approval in his second term was at the start; and rapidly bled away.
This indicates fairly clearly that Bushes ACTIONS were responsible for his low approval ratings, with the "media bias" being relatively limited.
In addition, if you note that Trumps current approval is 37% (or thereabouts), but his average approval for his term so far is much higher. So even in that measure, Trump scores better.
Comparing to Trump through the second term is fairly invalid for the reasons I stated: there are justifiable reasons why Bush had higher approval ratings at the start of his second term, while the events had happened, they only became obvious, and only started to majorly effect his based over a longer period of time.
So in that regard, the comparison is fundamentally flawed before you begin, as you're not comparing like examples with like examples.
Maybe, if we go 2 years, with Trump having accomplished something, and his approval ratings are more in the toilet then we can have a conversation about objective equivocacy, but right now; you can't draw the comparison because of all the other issues related to it.
But fundamentally, the main issue is that 95% of the big stories the press reports on, are really just things Trump does or says. Pretending that those have no effect on the nature of the coverage, or the response; is a rather important omission.
"This indicates fairly clearly that Bushes ACTIONS were responsible for his low approval ratings, with the "media bias" being relatively limited."
Well, as aforementioned the media was no friend of Bush so we have a mix of variables at play here. I also stated Bush's actions were certainly a factor. Trump's actions, however, are not even comparable to Bush's. Yet, as discussed further below, there is very little difference in average approval of Bush in his second term compared to Trump in his first quarter.
"In addition, if you note that Trumps current approval is 37% (or thereabouts), but his average approval for his term so far is much higher. So even in that measure, Trump scores better."
The average approval for Trump over the past three months is 41% (source 1). This difference is so tiny it barely needs mentioning.
"Comparing to Trump through the second term is fairly invalid for the reasons I stated: there are justifiable reasons why Bush had higher approval ratings at the start of his second term, while the events had happened, they only became obvious, and only started to majorly effect his based over a longer period of time."
Guantanamo bay detention camp was opened in 2002 (and the torture there was public knowledge). The WMD narrative was found to be false in Sept. 2004 by the ISG report (before Bush's second term)(source 2). These were widely reported by the media at the time. As such, it makes sense to state that the torture and illegal invasion based on false information impacted Bush's approval in his second term from the very start.
"But fundamentally, the main issue is that 95% of the big stories the press reports on, are really just things Trump does or says."
What else would they report on? If the media were to just write ad hominem attacks without any frame of reference with current events they wouldn't be news media. In that case they would just be hurling insults rather than reporting. The issue is that overwhelmingly the coverage which was slanted has been negative in tone.
Well if the media had rallied behind Trump in the same way they did with Obama I believe that the approval figures would be similar. The media have a powerful effect on what people think. It's too late for that now though, the damage is already done and there are actually a relatively large number of people who think Trump is comparable to Hitler.
I'm not a fan of Trump, I just don't think Obama was any good for the country either and certainly didn't change the system as he claimed he would. Think Libya, Syria, civil liberties, privacy, the treatment of whistle-blowers, the assassination of U.S. citizens by drone etc.
EXCON the Left seems to be having a problem with Obama now.
Former President Barack Obama is causing frustration among Democrats by going on a plethora of luxury vacations following his exit from the White House.
Obama has taken his family on a series of tours of millionaire and billionaire luxury retreats in the last few months, according to Democrats and activists.
Visiting actor Marlon Brando's private island
Four Seasons in Bali, where rooms cost $2,000 per night minimum
A Palm Springs Estate
Sir Richard Branson's Necker Island
Mid Pacific Country Club in Oahu, Hawaii
Left-wing activists are upset with what they see as Obama's distancing from the base of the Democratic Party. Left wing activists now say that this is part of Obama trying to join the one percent.
EXCON the Progressives are truly having a problem with Obama. So he is not being celebrated now because Obama is breaking rank and the Progressives are figuring out now Obama is a Liar and always wanted to be part of the one percent.
EXCON you must pay attention here. Can you do that ?
Trump is reviled by the MSM because Killary was and is a 2 time loser.
Trump is reviled by the MSM because they just can't take him out as hard as they have tried they have failed.
What is so entertaining is to watch the MSM hang on to every tweet. Trump is playing the MSM like a fiddle and they are so filled with rage they are unable to understand that.
