The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

You want somebody to create change in this country.

You vote for a President who wants to create that change and tries to do so.

For various reasons, he is unsuccessful.

What do you do then?

Trump has been successful in some of things he promised to do for the country, such as securing our borders.

In other things, he has not been successful

Is this next step trying to get Congress to become even more red?

It's odd that his moves have been unsuccessful even though the GOP controls the government now

Edit:  Idk why I didn't check but this is NOT in the right forum.  Please move it somebody

I think you have to let things play out. Trump is trying to do something almost every president before him promised to do. If it was easy, they would have done it. It is ridiculous that the GOP controls the legislature but can't get any of Trump's policies into law. There are too many Republicans and Democrats as part of the establishment to really do too much change.

has he actually tried to do something with the legislature ? it looks like he's just issuing executive orders left and right without actually proposing a bill

He promised to lower prices.  That is difficult to do, but tarrifs are the exact opposite.

They're not working because they're bad policy.  Tariffs like this are dumb -- they're being used improperly.  He was told, he did it anyway, ergo market crash and pretending that it was for negotiating or whatever other lie they're trying to fall back on.

I sound like a tea-party Republican, but I believe in separation of powers.  Congress is supposed to control money and check the president.  Even when they agree and they're in the same party, the responsibility to do certain things rests with certain branches.  We just aren't there right now and Congress has given their power away.  Worse than the tariffs is the uncertainty -- they're on; they're off; this person kissed my ass so they're off for them; this person made me mad so they're on again -- companies cannot plan for the future.  This is why this kind of thing, outside of punishing a nation for bad behavior, is monetary policy that needs to be set by Congress.

Trump would be a better president if his power were kept in check.  His policies would be more sustainable and supported and sensible.  What we have now is chaos and grift.

But, people are dumb and vote against their own interests, so I imagine that people will continue to do that.

Republicans only believe in separation of powers (or reducing the deficit) when a Democrat is in the White House.  You never heard any of that Tea Party nonsense from 2017-2021, and you won't for the next 4 years.

The President doesn't propose bills. Thanks Schoolhouse Rock.

Depends on what you mean by "propose."

As far as authoring a bill in Congress, no, the President can't do that.  But the President can "propose" that Congress pass a bill for him to sign into law, in the same sense that Sean Hannity can "propose" a bill to stop the invasion of our country or whatever.  Trump has not been asking Congress to pass a bill to achieve his goals; he has simply been doing whatever he wants and daring someone to stop him.

The president doesn’t write a bill but they absolutely steer congress using the bully pulpit.  It’s a core part of the job.

Not this President guys. You are thinking of this as a traditional Presidency. Trump doesn't feel that he has to follow the traditional model.

Change is not always for the better. It's not enough to want change, you got to expect better.

(http://viperbeam.com/forum/problems-solutions.jpg)

Agreeing on problems is meaningless if you don't also agree on the solutions.

But we don't agree on the problem.  Some of us believe the problem is that the wealthiest 1% get too much from the government.  Maga and the OP believes the problem is the poorest 1% get too much from the government.

They don't always do what the president wants and each of his executive orders are his wishes. He doesn't need additional pressure to move them. 

Even here in Florida the extremely "Republican" legislature is fighting against DeSantis and he goes public with his wishes every day. They are literally reversing what Republicans have seen as many as his achievements. DeSantis has been screaming for them to lower property taxes, address the condo issues, and pass open carry as the other red states have done. Not only are they not doing that, they raised his budget even after he vetoed it, and they are now cutting a lot of the funding and jobs at the FHP. They are also removing the raises for officers that he had added. DeSantis is a conservative Republican and has been cutting the budget and deficit every year, but there are many RINOs who want to spend on their pet projects and threaten every other legislative rep that their bills wil obe dropped unless they support them.

This is true although not so simple. Conservatives want to lead people to help themselves. In Florida we have Hope Florida which directs people in need to charities that can help them. Today they have helped over 30,000 people get off the Florida welfare system and it's only been around for a few years. 

I can't understand how the same people which think tariffs raise prices but think taking money away from the rich people who own the companies won't result in higher prices. Same with forcing them to pay much higher wages. Republicans have no issue with understanding tariffs will raise price on imported items we just think it will improve everything else. Buy American and there is no concern for tariffs.

Cutting people off of welfare is NOT the same as helping people. 


Raising wages will result in very minor price increases as has been demonstrated by the very small difference in price between a Big Mac in states with a high minimum wage and states with a low minimum wage. 

There is absolutely no reason to believe that raising income tax, capital gains tax, corporate taxes, or estate taxes will raise prices.  There is a ton of evidence that giving $100 to a poor person will result in a multiple of times more economic activity than giving it to a wealthy person. 


Targeted tariffs can be used as tool.  But tariffs on coffee will not result in a domestic coffee production. 

But keeping with the same theme the tariffs are predicated on the idea that the people of Lesotho and Cambodia have been unfairly victimizing the USA.   

So we should be against taxes on rich people - taxes which fund services for our society - because those rich people might raise some prices, in an attempt to increase profits and try get that money back.  In this case, higher prices are bad.

However, we should be in favor of tariffs that directly raise prices, For Reasons.  In this case, higher prices are great!

Why would I want to pay higher prices on clothing while living in a country with 4% unemployment?  We shouldn't want low-paying textile manufacturing jobs back in America; we should just want the cheap clothes they produce.

The idea of "bringing jobs back to America" holds very little promise when the people who claim to want this are the same people fighting against raising minimum wage, fighting against overtime compensation law, fighting against unions, fighting against workplace safety regulations.  They want a return to factory workers toiling 60 hours a week for pennies.

I'm a DeSantis Republican. I believe we should cuts taxes on residents, give raises to police and teachers, and yet still lower budgets each year as he has done. There is so much wasted money by government today.

I saw a women who moved here (Florida) from California. She said she just renewed her auto in the Sate of florida and it cost her $48 and it blew her away. She said the same car in California cost her over $700 to renew. There is absolutely no reason for that kind of discrepancy.

i renewed my registration in CT, (a high tax state) i think it was 100 for 2 years, I'd take that claim with a bit of skepticism

When I visited Orlando a couple of years ago, it blew me away that you get charged a toll to drive on normal public roads.  I've never seen that in California.

All "tax savings" is a) more taxation for someone else or b) fewer services for the people.

While I am not familiar with the specifics of the states mentioned, I do know that some states use a regressive tax method of taxing all cars the exact same amount regardless of the value of the car other states tax based on the value of the car

So in state A both a 1997 Escort and a 2025 Lamborghini both pay $50 and in State B the Escort only pats $10 and the Lamborghini pays $700.

Which tax system is fairer is a value judgement, but I prefer state B.  Iirc that system is used in NY at the state level.  In MA there is flat per car rate that goes to the state and a value based tax that goes to town/city.

Interesting. I've lived in WV, VA & FL and all have toll roads as normal public roads. I seem to remember it in MD also.i wonder if it's an East versus West thing?

no tolls in CT, tons of tolls in NJ, NY, MA, a couple in RI, none in VT, some in PA

Orlando is a horrible example tho, everything there is tolled, it's a nightmare to go from oviedo to disney if you don't want to pay extra

Nope. Got them help and has saved over 100 million doing so. They has a long line of people giving testimony the other day about how they went from having next to nothing to now doing well in the new program. Big Gov doesn't have to do everything for people if the people are motivated to do something.  

Fewer unnecessary services for people ... yes, I agree.

It's kind of funny because LA traffic is notorious the worst in the country  so its not a good thing. Orlando has toll roads around both sides and through the middle which makes life bearable for the people who live here. It also collects money from out of state people like yourselves.  No one is forced to use toll roads so I'm not really sure of the issue. You pay much more to park at Disney or Universal.

We also have a toll road (Turnpike) from Wildwood to Miami which allows me to be at the stadium in just under 3 hours. If I went I-95 it would take me over 4 hours to get there. I'll gladly pay some tolls for that convenience rather than pay thousands more in taxes.

Our gas is also about $2 less than California as well as other items being cheaper for no other reason than additional taxes. If you are ok with that then fine but most people tend to want to spend as little for necessities as possible.

Traffic is worse in California because more people want to live here than any other state.  You're a capitalist, so you should know what that means.

I know residents of less desirable states like Florida are really proud of the fact that recently FL has had more people moving there and CA has had more people leaving.  If that same trend continues for another twenty years then maybe you'll be in the position to talk about FL being the most desirable state to live in!

Until then, I am happy to compare whether CA's or FL's style of governance is more popular.

Let's not discount that California also is over twice the size of Florida in land. Just pointing that out.

If we are going to use population density as the measure of how desirable a state is then DC blows all 50 states out of the water.  Among actual states NJ is the most desirable state to live in.

California has far more uninhabited (or barely inhabited) land than Florida, so it's a wash.

Ummm ... that isn't uncommon. Most of middle Florida is pretty lean too outside of the Orlando area.  The major portion of population is up and down the coasts of Florida but the middle of the state is mostly farms or uninhabited land.

The population of greater LA + the Bay Area is more than the entire state of Florida, so I'm not sure why we're talking about state sizes in the first place.

No we get it. There really isn't very many blue counties in the country. There are only big blue cities which coincidentally has the most illegals.

(http://www.educationnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/ednext-blog-nov16-petrilli-trump-charter-map.jpg)

The only thing that conservatives love more than bragging about how their less desirable states are Growing Very Bigly in population is... bragging about how much empty land is colored red on a map of the US.  Most mountains, deserts, and swamps are strongly conservative!

Huh.  I guess the stock market is also overwhelmingly Republican:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GpFh_8jWsAAqJ0-?format=jpg&name=medium)

Part of me is glad that the referendum vote for a Republic in this country failed back in 1999, even though the model of it was quite sound and not a huge difference to what we already have in Australia. A President then would be just that in name, the equivalent of the UK King/Queen and their representative the Governors General who have largely no interference with how my Country is actually governed. The radicals wanted a US style of elected President with similar executive powers, and thankfully that didn't get past the discussion stage.

Your country is proving right now why so much power should not be invested in one person - who typically is pale, male and stale, and completely out of touch with the majority of the people he is supposed to represent. Usually they have absolutely no interest to do so either. When they can dictate the judicial system, the police and the media, you run the risk of the whole foundations of Democracy being stripped away. Especially if that person happens to be batshit crazy and/or pure evil.

The US actually has a system of checks and balances to prevent any one person from having too much power.  The problem is that congress isn't doing its job. 

Less desirable? I wish people would move out of Florida. California is finally making a small rebound but Florida growth is much higher. Big California went up by about 250,000 last year but little Florida continues to grow at about 350 - 380,000 a year. Oh yes ... and florida didn't experience the mass migration that left the state of Cali.

You spin it any way you want but it's pretty obvious that with all that California has to offer, you libs are killing it like it doesn't even matter.

Yes, less desirable.
More people prefer to live in California than Florida; many millions more.

And yet LA + the Bay Area still has a larger population than your entire state.

I don't really care whether Florida or North Dakota or Wyoming are growing very bigly.  More people choose to live in California than all of those states combined.  As I already said, at the current rates Florida would need to continue to add more people than California for twenty consecutive years to pass California in population.

California's economy dwarfs Florida's.  Y'all have oranges on your license plates like you're some sort of leader in orange production, yet California easily outproduces Florida's orange crops.  Florida's crown jewel is supposedly tourism, yet we still had more tourists in 2023 (https://www.loveexploring.com/gallerylist/262455/ranked-americas-most-visited-states) than you did.  And your state continues to suck at the teat of the feds, as productive blue states keep you afloat (https://www.axios.com/2025/02/12/states-money-federal-government).

Whatever ... I'm not going to get into a big penis contest with you about which state is better. Besides ... everyone already knows our castle is much bigger than yours!  :D

(https://eartotheretravel.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Disneyland-Castle-vs-Disney-World-Castle-e1647897179222.png)

That's true, I ate breakfast with princesses inside there once. It was pretty big.

Florida has a more desirable football team than California, I'll give you that!

And more desirable high school football talent.