You guys who are criticizing this meme are too smart for it. The average voter is not. Trump wins re-election in 2020 by a landslide!!! Impeached or not! (probably a bigger landslide, with the impeachment)

I wish, but that’s exaggerated. He could win a little more or less in the electoral college, and he’s definitely not a shoo-in for re-election.

Border Security- lmao the solution to illegal immigrants flying over to the united states is... a friggin wall.

Boom Economy- the economy is on a growth pattern that it was on under obama's administration. the president can't control the economy

Infrastructure- eyyy trump hasn't done anything to improve infrastructure in these past four years.

Even if it's BS a good politician has to know the right BS. The meme said "platform" and having one in politics is much better than not having one. When the platform is "hate my opponent" it makes every argument sound like just that.... said only because you don't have your own ideas.

"The meme said "platform" and having one in politics is much better than not having one."

i like how it excludes important candidates such as bernie sanders and tulsi gabbard, whose platforms revolve around something other than orange man bad, particularly attacking wall street and the establishment or getting us out of the middle east.

"Border Security- lmao the solution to illegal immigrants flying over to the united states is... a friggin wall."

No, the solution to Mexican gang members and other illegal aliens such as drug traffickers, rapists, murderers, and any other illegal alien that sneaks over the boarder (or pretty much just walks across where there is no wall or a shitty representation of a wall) is a strong border wall. It has nothing to do with someone flying over. But a wall will do more than its fair share of stopping the vast majority if illegal crossings.

"Boom Economy- the economy is on a growth pattern that it was on under obama's administration. the president can't control the economy"

Barack Obama didn't have record low unemployment among black people (his "own people") and women. Not to mention the lowest unemployment since 1969. Barack Obama had the highest participation rate for people on government benefits of all time. I mean, unless you believe there's nothing wrong with that ....

"nfrastructure- eyyy trump hasn't done anything to improve infrastructure in these past four years."

There has always been a problem with government doing much of anything with infrastructure in the past 60 years. But it isn't any worse under Trump as you and others claim. Not really Trump's fault, more of a collective.

"No, the solution to Mexican gang members and other illegal aliens such as drug traffickers, rapists, murderers, and any other illegal alien that sneaks over the boarder (or pretty much just walks across where there is no wall or a shitty representation of a wall) is a strong border wall. It has nothing to do with someone flying over. But a wall will do more than its fair share of stopping the vast majority if illegal crossings"

the drugs will still be flying over or going under. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38986804

"Barack Obama didn't have record low unemployment among black people (his "own people") and women."

no president can control black unemployment. that's just businesses either being progressive or hiring tokens just to be trendy.

"But it isn't any worse under Trump as you and others claim"

i don't blame trump for our bad infrastructure. however, when he says he's going to do something, i expect him to do something. the most he's done is tax cuts. the wall hasn't been built, the muslim ban was repealed in courts, our trains still go "chug chug chug", and swamp is still friggin wet.

"the drugs will still be flying over or going under."

But will make it much more difficult than say.... having no wall at all. Something I don't understand how anyone can claim is a bad thing. A wall will have a much greater success rate of keeping drugs and people who don't belong here, out.

Two houses, side-by-side on a street. One has its door wide open and one has its door shut and locked. Both occupants are gone. Which house has is more likely to be robbed? There's a correct answer for this but you'll probably spin it enough to make it seem like this situation doesn't have anything to do with a border wall.

"no president can control black unemployment. that's just businesses either being progressive or hiring tokens just to be trendy."

How disingenuous of you. Businesses only hiring to be trendy or progressive, huh? And you think that lowers the unemployment rate among black people by several percent? So why wouldn't it be as good as when Obama was president? Your answer makes absolutely no sense.

" the most he's done is tax cuts."

That's a bad thing? Only in a progressive's mind would tax cuts be a bad thing.

" the wall hasn't been built,"

Uh, yes it has and is being built as we speak. Try to keep up.

"the muslim ban was repealed in courts,"

That's Trump's fault?

"our trains still go "chug chug chug", and swamp is still friggin wet."

Not sure what you mean in the first half of that statement, but as for the second half ... The "swamp" has been more revealed than it has ever, but when the "swamp" has minions still voting them into office, the "swamp" is bigger than just the elected officials being voted in. It's the people who support the swamp and the lying mainstream media (which have been outed as a lying, fake news organization with an agenda). They are not credible any more and dare I say they are hemorrhaging severely.

"There's a correct answer for this but you'll probably spin it enough to make it seem like this situation doesn't have anything to do with a border wall."

eyy "ur jus' gone spin dis" argument

"Two houses, side-by-side on a street. One has its door wide open and one has its door shut and locked. Both occupants are gone. Which house has is more likely to be robbed?"

the open door, really, but it doesn't cost a lot of taxpayer money to close a door. if both doors are close, the one that's hidden behind a bunch of trees will be robbed. an unmarked van could park in the driveway, break down the door/windows, and take a massive tv into said van, while the neighbors wouldn't be able to see it happen due to said trees. what america needs is **actual** border security, not a hunk of cement.

"Businesses only hiring to be trendy or progressive, huh? And you think that lowers the unemployment rate among black people by several percent?"

i'm ready to accept that i'm wrong about the businesses being trendy and hiring tokens, but when i say "progressive" side, i mean businesses are more open to hire anyone regardless of race, etc. in order to move society forward.

"So why wouldn't it be as good as when Obama was president? Your answer makes absolutely no sense."
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000006
because of the recession in 2008. many people lost their jobs, including america's black population. it reaches a record low now because before the recession, not many businesses were looking to hire black people as they are now, which is why i say progressivism has motivated businesses.

"That's a bad thing? Only in a progressive's mind would tax cuts be a bad thing."

I never said tax cuts were a bad thing, though i'd argue trump was pushed by lobbyists to do it.

"Uh, yes it has and is being built as we speak. Try to keep up."

oh yeah, the glorified jail bars. it'll still take years to build. if trump doesn't win 2020, that'll be a lot of progress on said wall that'll be depleted. because our federal government is so wasteful, that project couldn't completely commence in 2017.

"That's Trump's fault?"

no, but it shows he's not willing to pursue on policy.

"Not sure what you mean in the first half of that statement,"

in one of his campaign speeches, trump expressed jealousy over countries like china for having trains that go speeds in excess of 350 km/h, talking about how america's infrastructure needed rebuilding.

This is why we don't worry about trains. We have the world's largest air transportation network. It's significantly faster to cross the continent by plane than it is by train and our air travel prices are quite cheap. As far as freight goes we've had no issues keeping up in logistical efficiency with nations that are heavily rail-dependent. Truck and air freight has kept us within decimal points of nations with some of the most advanced rail networks in the world. It's simply not worth the investment.

"We have the world's largest air transportation network."

Air transport is inefficient and hardly economical compared to the rail network we once had. Trains can access a city center, planes can't. Rail transport is much more compact and much less space-consuming than road and air transport. One railway line is enough for 500 passengers traveling fast, which would need a full-on freeway with road or a full-on airport with a runway for air travel. Air travel between cities only one state apart, or even within the same state, is also inefficient. Airplane companies will often go out and convince the public that train travel isn't profitable, but the way airplane companies took down the United States' rail companies wasn't through competition, but government subsidies and lobbying; making sure people in the 70s didn't have the knowledge that Japan was having a successful, modern, rail network.

"It's significantly faster to cross the continent by plane than it is by train"

That is true, but trains still can go from city center to city center faster than a plane, which is convenient for the majority of Americans (keep in mind that a third of the US population lives in New York). Heck, it's even faster to go from New York to DC on the Acela Express.

"our air travel prices are quite cheap. "
Passenger rail travel in Japan is much, much cheaper than traveling by air. The reason our air travel is cheap is because it is government subsidized. Even then, it's still hard to afford air travel, and in many cases, it's cheaper to take /friggin Amtrak/, which is subsidized with far less money than what air and car companies receive.
https://skift.com/2015/04/09/wikileaks-disclosure-shows-u-s-airlines-received-billions-in-subsidies/

"As far as freight goes we've had no issues keeping up in logistical efficiency with nations that are heavily rail-dependent."

Actually, you'll find that a large percentage of our freight is done by rail. You know those long trains ran by union pacific in the west coast? Imagine trucks carrying the same amount; it would be extremely inefficient due to the amount of diesel used in the trucks and the amount of said trucks occupying the freeway. As with air freight, it's got a greater capacity than a truck, but it can't beat the train, no matter how fast. Trains can transport many a good in one journey, with a small amount of fuel compared to the amount of fuel planes need to fly back and fourth carrying the same thing again.

"Actually, you'll find that a large percentage of our freight is done by rail. You know those long trains ran by union pacific in the west coast? Imagine trucks carrying the same amount; it would be extremely inefficient due to the amount of diesel used in the trucks and the amount of said trucks occupying the freeway. As with air freight, it's got a greater capacity than a truck, but it can't beat the train, no matter how fast. Trains can transport many a good in one journey, with a small amount of fuel compared to the amount of fuel planes need to fly back and fourth carrying the same thing again."

Yes, but the majority of your arguments in favor of trains is relating to the movement of people as opposed to freight. You already admit that we have an extensive freight rail system but complain about the movement of people despite the fact that air is much more efficient for moving people from one place to another across the nation, and ignore the fact that rail systems extending into city centers would be EXTREMELY difficult and expensive to do after city development has already happened. How exactly do you propose you manage it? Level buildings in the way? Tunnels under cities which never had any planning done to accommodate sub-surface transport? Or do your trains magically teleport from station to station?

despite the fact that air is much more efficient for moving people from one place to another across the nation, and ignore the fact that rail systems extending into city centers would be EXTREMELY difficult and expensive to do after city development has already happened."

"despite the fact that air is much more efficient for moving people from one place to another across the nation"

Even from Miami to Orlando? Washington DC to Richmond? Chicago to Minneapolis? places too close to each other for an airplane?

If we're talking time efficient, let's see....

Plane travel:
1. Travel to the airport. This takes a bit of time due to the airport being far out of the city center.
2. Arrive there 3 hours early to go through customs and get your constitutional rights violated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_privacy#The_Fourth_Amendment
3. After that, you go through a tedious boarding process where you are cramped inside the aircraft. In worse case scenario, you're on an aircraft with cheap seating because airplane companies do their best to cut costs. god united airlines gives me such terrible memories.
4. Airplane taxis out of the gate to the runway. Let's hope you aren't taking off from Newark liberty airport, otherwise take-off will take friggin 30 minutes!
5. Finally, in the air. flight is about an hour.
6. You land. Taxiing doesn't take so long, but exiting the plane sure as hell does if you're not in First class.
7. You figure out how to leave the airport.
Congratulations! You've wasted at least 4 hours of your life on a 1 hour flight. We hope you enjoyed!

Train travel:
1. Travel to the train station. This has a mixed bag of options, but if your city's well-planned, this should be a breeze. probably 15 mins.
2. Arrive 30 minutes early to look at timetable.
3. Your train arrives. If the system is well ran, it should be punctual. Boarding is easy.
4. Trip takes 2 hours. bUt PlAne WoUlD bE fAsTer
5. You arrive at your destination. Near 3h!

"...EXTREMELY difficult and expensive to do after city development has already happened."

If you look on google maps, you'll find that there are often railroads in the center of big cities; small towns in the case of Ohio. The infrastructure already exists. all we need to do is upgrade it for higher standard. Airports take up way more space than train stations. The airplane has a role in long distances, but is it really necessary to clog up Newark Liberty airport with traffic bound for Syracuse or Buffalo?

Regarding the plane travel and train travel comparisons, Americans deserve better. Wouldn't you agree?

that is true. even europe's freight rail pails in comparison to ours.

"It's simply not worth the investment."

What I really want is for private companies to operate rail networks throughout the United States. That was how the rail network was built decades ago, and all it took to demolish it was government lobbying and trendy consumer culture. Private rail companies such as Thalys and JRCentral do operate some forces to be reckoned with in the travel industry. I'm confident we can bring that back here.

eyyy we're not building modern railroads for an lbscr class e2 with a face, unfortunately.

"The "swamp" has been more revealed than it has ever, but when the "swamp" has minions still voting them into office, the "swamp" is bigger than just the elected officials being voted in."

the swamp has been revealed because of the internet and sites like wikileaks. t

rump's mission was to drain the swamp, but he recently announced (on twitter, take that with a grain of salt) spending 2 trillion on military. keep in mind that our defense budget is already overblown (we could be defending two countries with that, oh wait we are) and that congress has been lobbied for a while now into going to endless wars with other nations. not to mention that trump hasn't really kept his infrastructural policies... to be trusted with the amount of lobbying airline and auto industries do in congress.. his legacy on railroads in the united states, as far as i know, is making texas central a priority project, which is a good thing. certainly better than obama's legacy, which is giving money to the california hsr project... **don't get me started on that**

"They are not credible any more and dare I say they are hemorrhaging severely."

no thanks to the boomers, though. i'm not calling you a boomer. just reminding everyone that it is thanks to the boomers that the swamp exists.

I mean, if the illegal immigrant can afford a plane, let them in. I still can't afford a plane of my own and I make really good money in the US. I think the wall will affect the 99.9% who can't afford the plane ride.

Grow patter, undeu a president, but president cant control the economy? WTF did you just contradicted yourself there? Yes you did! Clearly the president has an impact in the economy, like Trump you see an increase in stock market, more people getting jobs, and people being able to spend more. Obama had record high unemployment while Trump had the opposite.

If you only watch media that diminish your president, then that is what your perspective will be. Media works conditioning your process of thinking and beliefs, also called brainwashing. When you reach a point, no matter how much truth you have in front you won't accept it, if media keeps telling you that a butterfly is a fish, you will only see a pond filled with butterflies. How are the butterflies tasting?

"Clearly the president has an impact in the economy,"

what? The federal government controls the stock market, business growth, employment rates? that's socialism

"If you only watch media"

I don't. trump said he would improve infrastructure. guess what, the feds are still wasting money on roads instead of improving railroads.

They don't control the economy, but decisions they make have a huge influence on investors' willingness to invest or take risks. The average citizens' willingness to spend money is also influenced by how they believe the nation's economy is doing and will be doing in the future - people tend to want to save money when they feel like hard times are coming. Taxation also has a direct impact on both financial markets and the job market.

https://www.investopedia.com/presidents-and-their-impact-on-the-stock-market-4587369 (the first paragraph seems to be the only one really useful from this link, unfortunately. The rest of it seems to mostly be talking about presidents visiting the stock exchange, etc.)

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/heres-how-presidents-and-elections-affect-stock-market-2016-07-21 (Here's one from the last election showing how just talking about policy had a real effect on the market even without the candidate being elected yet)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2019/09/20/continued-strong-job-growth-in-low-tax-states-since-the-trump-tax-cut/#2dc630e7986b

PS. Your obsession with railroads being the only infrastructure that matters and that roads are a waste is kind of silly. You should probably get over it, because what you want is never going to happen.

not sure why you're responding to a deleted comment, but ok

Because it wasn't deleted when I replied to it.

ah

"PS. Your obsession with railroads being the only infrastructure that matters and that roads are a waste is kind of silly. You should probably get over it, because what you want is never going to happen"

it's what americans want and should be prioritized as we have no space for pointless toll roads and rail focus would stimulate our staggering economy. what we need is affordable transportation, not more car crashes that cause 40,000 deaths a year.

“It’s what Americans wants”

What universe do you live in? Americans will never, nor should they even consider, abandoning their personal vehicles

I like driving to, particularly on rural roads (and the freeway when it isn't packed, I will admit).

the majority of americans, especially young americans, want an alternative to being stuck in traffic.

"abandoning their personal vehicles"

the argument i'm proposing here isn't to get rid of cars, but rather to rid car dependancy. the car has a role in everyone's life.

quite surprised you're advocating for highways, considering that they're government-owned, auto & oil companies are government-subsidized, while passenger rail can be privately owned.

Maybe you are surprised because you know absolutely nothing about me, what I believe in, where I made my money, and where I live.

Young people don’t want to sit in traffic, but that does not mean they want to sit on trains that can’t get them door to door.

"Young people don’t want to sit in traffic, but that does not mean they want to sit on trains that can’t get them door to door."

a lot of young people don't like driving. other effective solutions are biking, walking, and other forms of public transportation. door to door transportation is what makes many older americans feel entitled to ultra-convenient, point-to-point, inefficient transportation

And yet that ultra convenient mode of transportation you hate so much is exactly why it will never be replaced with the ultra expensive, mega inconvenient mode you are pushing.

eyyy war on cars moment. I'm not saying we should get rid of cars. I'm saying we should provide an alternative because americans are enslaved to automobile culture by the government for the sake of convenience. Here's some examples on how we're forced to abide by the government's forced car culture:

1. What happens if your transport breaks down? Train companies will pay compensation if their train breaks down. Does Chevy (or any auto company) pay you compensation each time your car malfunctions? Hell no. And you're late for your interview in the next city over... pity... and it's taken as your fault for owning the car. When your late for an interview due to (the rare) train delay, at least your potential employer will accept your apology. In fact, if your car malfunctions, you have to pay a mechanic to fix it. That's more money out of your pocket.

2. Cars are a horrible burden for city dwellers. The city is where most traffic is, where the most soul-destroying rush hour is. Why so surprised that the majority of Americans want an alternative? A third of America's population live in New York, so imagine the amount of Americans that live in Dallas, Houston, Miami, Tampa, Chicago, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, etc... contributing to a majority.

3. "For 2016 specifically, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) data shows 37,461 people were killed in 34,436 motor vehicle crashes, an average of 102 per day."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year
Yikes. Imagine if the government said before building interstates, "highways will only kill less than 40,000 people a year! Just less!" Everyone would rally against it.

4. Imagine what it's like like living in Indiana unable to get a driver's license and a paying job because you're blind... or have autism... or anything; just being unable to get a driver's license. what's he gonna do to go to work? take the thrice-weekly cardinal? or greyhound?

5. Road safety. Everyone fears that the government will control us with a massive police force one day, but the government already has the upper hand with friggin yellow diamonds and orange cones... as well as the yellow-coated lights that go from red to green. This is respectable to have, obviously, but by god we're forced to share the road with people who may ignore the signs (see no. 3) because we don't have an alternative.

but at least it's right at our doorstep!

"ultra expensive"

Ultra profitable. There's a reason Virgin group purchased the Brightline project, let alone that Brightline was pretty cheap to construct by railway standards. for frigg's sake: the government spends billions on roads each year and subsidizes american car industries. Obama friggin bailed out to GM a few years ago.

The infrastructure for city centers already exist because, surprise surprise, they were served by passenger trains. All we need to do is upgrade them, which is a lot less expensive than a completely new one.

"mega inconvenient"

only because Amtrak pails in comparison to a company like JR Central. Every american city had rail service just a few decades before the interstate highway was built. Or in lament's terms, the U.S. government used railroad taxpayer money and built a massive stack of roads that plagued landscapes and peoples' land while killing one of America's strongest industries and no one complained!

Another thing about inconvenience? Cars are slower than trains. Only in Germany are cars able to reach 200 miles per hour **safely** (which is what makes watching videos of the autobahn quite fun). In America, however, the fastest-allowing highway is a toll road in Texas... with a top permitted speed of 85 mph. Trains can top 200 mph for an actual long distance in Europe and Japan. Also they can reach city center with massive ease. With a profitable transportation model called the hub and spokes model, people can travel quickly with public transportation.

I consider myself a fiscal conservative on this particular issue because of my opposition on the taxpayer paying for roads to nowhere, and my particular stance is based upon the profit motive that a private company has to provide a service, which is why I stand behind private rail transportation.

that is NOT socialism. any gov. controls the economy, but that is not socialism.
like what jeffery ryan said, if you ounly watch the media diminish trump, then you don't open your mind.

"then you don't open your mind."

lmao. i said i don't watch media that diminishes trump. i also don't think opening my mind will fix the country's infrastructure

think wider, dumbass!
you're so narrowminded.

gee i didn't know that thinking wider would be able to change facts. maybe i should try it and be protected by my little echo chamber shell that is my head

hypocrite

You’re right about the economy part, it grew because he left. 😆

They could run Martin Bormann and win those three. :/

You left out IMPEACHED trump