# If Donald Trump is so awful, then... **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [February 27, 2017, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966 "2017-02-27T19:05:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 9:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/141 "2017-03-08T09:28:31Z")
And Trump is certainly a trainwreck. Glad you’re getting your money’s worth. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/142 "2017-03-08T11:49:10Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > Amirites: yes. Amarites: NO. What about the Amorites? [QUOTE=Yahweh, as recorded in the First Book of Moses, Chapter 15] And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and, lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him. Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not their’s, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years; … But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Sanchez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19adc/32.png) [@Rick\_Sanchez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Sanchez)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/143 "2017-03-08T12:59:18Z")
> [@Quicksilver](#): > > The person Bricker quoted (Asra Q. Nomani) is a self described democrat who voted for Trump because she thinks liberals are too soft on Islamic fundamentalists and too critical of Trump supporters. > > I think she’s taking this position because it gets her attention on the talking head media circuit where she plays a sympathy troll. Why don’t you think she’s being sincere? Many voters consider terrorism to be a priority as high as or higher than the economy. I’m sure plenty of them share her views. ---
**Author:** ![Crane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crane/32/3495_2.png) [@Crane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crane)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/144 "2017-03-08T14:57:47Z")
Well yeah, that stuff about globul warming hurricanes floods Mexicans terrists gangs bomacare no guns no jobs an all like that. Real bummer man. Why did Trump get lected. Well duh - cause hes gonna fix everything. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/145 "2017-03-08T15:13:48Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > “I’m with her” didn’t do it for you either, huh? “I’m with her” isn’t a policy. ---
**Author:** ![dasmoocher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dbc845/32.png) [@dasmoocher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dasmoocher)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/146 "2017-03-08T15:58:05Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > You can imagine whatever you like, but you’d be well-served to keep in mind that it’s just your imagination, and not based on reality. The psychological projection is strong with this one. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/147 "2017-03-08T16:12:41Z")
> [@Rick\_Sanchez](#): > > Why don’t you think she’s being sincere? Many voters consider terrorism to be a priority as high as or higher than the economy. I’m sure plenty of them share her views. I’m skeptical of anyone who is a single issue voter. Especially of those whose fears are exaggerated and unfounded. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/148 "2017-03-08T16:19:29Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > It’s an “oh shit, we’ve got to spend this money NOW” mentality. And you think that NOAA could cobble together a weather satellite with the sums you’re talking about? ---
**Author:** ![Fubaya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@Fubaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fubaya)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/149 "2017-03-08T16:34:42Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > FWIW, it looks like the figure being tossed around is actually 17% of NOAA’s budget (at least that’s what WaPo and USA Today said), but I wouldn’t mind a 30% cut. And not just to the NOAA either. I’ve worked with enough governmental agencies to see how they absolutely piss money away like it was their job. Have you ever worked with / been in meetings with government agencies as the end of their budget year approaches? It’s an “oh shit, we’ve got to spend this money NOW” mentality. Please explain to us what you know about NOAA and where you’d like to see cuts, because I’m not buying your simple assertions that you’re right just because you said so. I’d really like to hear your take on weather satellite programs, what they do and how you’d mitigate the dangerous effects of cutting them. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/150 "2017-03-08T17:04:42Z")
> [@Fubaya](#): > > Please explain to us what you know about NOAA and where you’d like to see cuts, because I’m not buying your simple assertions that you’re right just because you said so. I’d really like to hear your take on weather satellite programs, what they do and how you’d mitigate the dangerous effects of cutting them. Hey, HurricaneDitka stood in line once at the DMV. That makes him an authority of government waste. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/151 "2017-03-08T17:47:45Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > FWIW, it looks like the figure being tossed around is actually 17% of NOAA’s budget (at least that’s what WaPo and USA Today said), but I wouldn’t mind a 30% cut. And not just to the NOAA either. I’ve worked with enough governmental agencies to see how they absolutely piss money away like it was their job. Have you ever worked with / been in meetings with government agencies as the end of their budget year approaches? It’s an “oh shit, we’ve got to spend this money NOW” mentality. I have actually. Two bigly ones. NIH and DoC. I think what you’re describing is how budgeting is done at the department level. Which has nothing to do with how budgeting is done at the large agency level. We can certainly find agreement on how various department funding can be improved but it’ll have precious little to do with your suggestion that major agencies like NOAA could stand a 30% budget cut ‘because waste donchaknow!’ ---
**Author:** ![squidfood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a87d85/32.png) [@squidfood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squidfood)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/152 "2017-03-08T17:51:20Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > FWIW, it looks like the figure being tossed around is actually 17% of NOAA’s budget (at least that’s what WaPo and USA Today said), but I wouldn’t mind a 30% cut. And not just to the NOAA either. I’ve worked with enough governmental agencies to see how they absolutely piss money away like it was their job. Have you ever worked with / been in meetings with government agencies as the end of their budget year approaches? It’s an “oh shit, we’ve got to spend this money NOW” mentality. No, but I’ve worked with government agencies that scrimp and save for 11 months of the year on inadequate budgets (because running out of money early is far worse than having 10% left at the end, so err on the side of caution). Then in month 12, ask “how can we use our final 10% savings to get through the next 11 months of penury and still do our jobs?” And of course in month 12, you have timing limits with things like procurement, so you spend sub-optimally. And all this is amplified, of course, because you don’t even know your inadequate budget until month 7 due to congressional malfunction. Much more cost-effective in the long run to fund adequately and smoothly from the beginning! It’s also a mistake to summarize a top-line agency budget by the final drop amount (17%) and say “hey, everyone can take a haircut, no biggie.” Because there are substantial fixed costs, so this really is “keep program A 100%, but cut program B 100%”. In the NOAA case, you need to look at the specifics: are you happy cutting the next generation weather satellite? How about university funding for the next generation of weather models (we’re already way behind the Europeans). Etc. Some detailed facts are in the article: which of those programs are you happy to lose entirely? (genuine not rhetorical question here). Now, whenever a new Secretary/administration comes around, it’s a good and healthy process to take a deep dive and ask questions from the top. Some, I would agree with. For example, NOAA maintaining its own high-performance computing maybe made sense 20 years ago when these were highly specialized machines, but perhaps now commercial cloud services are more cost effective. But these decisions have to be made on that detail level - saying “I don’t mind a broad haircut” as if it’s just trimming everyone’s fat a bit is misguided and loses capabilities that people care about, while at the same time hobbling the remaining funded mission. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/153 "2017-03-08T19:06:13Z")
> [@Fubaya](#): > > Please explain to us what you know about NOAA and where you’d like to see cuts, because I’m not buying your simple assertions that you’re right just because you said so. I’m not sure what you had in mind when you asked me to explain to the board “what \* know about NOAA”. Do you have a quiz you’d like me to take? Write a report? It seems like an absurd request, but if you’d like to provide some additional details, I’ll see if it’s reasonable to fulfill. > [@Fubaya](#): > > I’d really like to hear your take on weather satellite programs, what they do and how you’d mitigate the dangerous effects of cutting them. I’m probably not going to give you a lengthy write-up on my NOAA knowledge. It’d be a waste of everyone’s time and I suspect I’d just be accused of copy-pasting anyways, so I’m not seeing the point. As for budget-cutting, rather than me, or Trump, giving them specifics, my preference would be to allow NOAA to prioritize (at least significant portions of) their own budget. For example, when the GOES-R program went significantly over-budget, NOAA cut the planned number of satellites, dropped some instrumentation and data “products”, and slid the launch schedule to the right. Was anyone howling about the “dangerous effects” back then? Or was that just the sort of normal cost-benefit analysis and decision-making government bureaucracies make routinely? BTW, GOES-R (now GOES-16) just sent back the [first images from its lightning mapper a couple of days ago](https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/flashy-first-images-arrive-from-noaa-s-goes-16-lightning-mapper). ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/154 "2017-03-08T19:18:02Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > For example, when the GOES-R program went significantly over-budget, NOAA cut the planned number of satellites, dropped some instrumentation and data “products”, and slid the launch schedule to the right. Was anyone howling about the “dangerous effects” back then? Yes, people were complaining about risk to GOES, including the main government watchdog agency. > **[GAO Report Urges Action On Weather Satellite Gap](https://spacenews.com/33705gao-report-urges-action-on-weather-satellite-gap/)** > > GAO Report Urges Action On Weather Satellite Gap > [@](#): > > For the first time, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has listed the task of mitigating anticipated gaps in weather satellite data as one of the top priorities requiring the attention of Congress and the executive branch. > > “Potential gaps in weather satellite data beginning as early as 2014 and lasting as long as 53 months have led to concerns that future weather forecasts and warnings — including warnings of extreme events such as hurricanes, storm surges and floods — will be less accurate and timely,” according to GAO’s High Risk Series update released Feb. 14. “A number of decisions are needed to ensure contingency and continuity plans can be implemented effectively.” Feel the burn. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/155 "2017-03-08T19:21:59Z")
> [@squidfood](#): > > which of those programs are you happy to lose entirely? (genuine not rhetorical question here). Like I said, my preference would be to let the NOAA decide where it can’t afford to cut and where it can. Let them rank their programs from most-critical to least, and cut the last one on the list. If you’re still above your budget, cut the next one. Keep going until you’ve met your new budget. Since it’s become a topic of interest, and I find the original sources to be significantly more valuable than news articles on the subject, here is NOAA’s latest budget proposal: [http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/nbo/fy17\_bluebook/FY17\_BB\_Final\_508.pdf](http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/nbo/fy17_bluebook/FY17_BB_Final_508.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/156 "2017-03-08T19:22:30Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > FWIW, it looks like the figure being tossed around is actually 17% of NOAA’s budget (at least that’s what WaPo and USA Today said), but I wouldn’t mind a 30% cut. And not just to the NOAA either. I’ve worked with enough governmental agencies to see how they absolutely piss money away like it was their job. Have you ever worked with / been in meetings with government agencies as the end of their budget year approaches? It’s an “oh shit, we’ve got to spend this money NOW” mentality. Come now. I have worked for three different government agencies and have worked closely with several others. Not once have I seen the slightest hint of what you’re talking about. Myths do not become facts by virtue of repetition. ---
**Author:** ![squidfood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a87d85/32.png) [@squidfood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squidfood)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/157 "2017-03-08T19:26:16Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’m probably not going to give you a lengthy write-up on my NOAA knowledge. It’d be a waste of everyone’s time and I suspect I’d just be accused of copy-pasting anyways, so I’m not seeing the point. As for budget-cutting, rather than me, or Trump, giving them specifics, my preference would be to allow NOAA to prioritize (at least significant portions of) their own budget. It’s worth pointing out that this leaked internal memo is - as pointed out by WaPo - in fact part of that process; the leak (whomever did it) and the climate change issues NOAA deals with has made it more political and public than most, but it’s a normal part of aligning an agency’s priorities with administration priorities. But, you said that you yourself would approve of a 30% cut in NOAA. We’ve noted that the standard talking line of “every agency can take a haircut because waste, fraud, and abuse” is pretty much a myth, so you are in fact advocating some kind of capacity reduction - hence it would be interesting to hear what you would do without. And if you think NOAA should take the cut “just because”, then why NOAA? (and if it’s because of general fiscal responsibility throughout the government, it’s clear from the memo reporting that this is to get funds to the Military or the Wall, no net fiscal responsibility is implied by the administration). ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/158 "2017-03-08T19:30:25Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Yes, people were complaining about risk to GOES, including the main government watchdog agency. > > [http://spacenews.com/33705gao-report-urges-action-on-weather-satellite-gap/](http://spacenews.com/33705gao-report-urges-action-on-weather-satellite-gap/) > > Feel the burn. I’m not sure if you’re aware of this, but the portion of the article you quoted is in reference to NOAA’s polar-orbiting satellites, not the geostationary GEOS-R program that I was talking about. ---
**Author:** ![squidfood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a87d85/32.png) [@squidfood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squidfood)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/159 "2017-03-08T19:31:57Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Since it’s become a topic of interest, and I find the original sources to be significantly more valuable than news articles on the subject, here is NOAA’s latest budget proposal: [http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/nbo/fy17\_bluebook/FY17\_BB\_Final\_508.pdf](http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/nbo/fy17_bluebook/FY17_BB_Final_508.pdf) Useful starting point, though this is fiscal year 17 (Oct 2016-Sep 2017 and likely to be a continuing resolution throughout the government without programmatic cuts) rather than FY18 beginning Oct 1 2017, which is where the cuts are proposed. And I agree with you, the news articles are lacking for a truly good discussion - as mentioned, because all sides’ negotiations are currently internal other than the leaked memo. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2017, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966/160 "2017-03-08T19:33:57Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Come now. I have worked for three different government agencies and have worked closely with several others. Not once have I seen the slightest hint of what you’re talking about. Myths do not become facts by virtue of repetition. I’m not ready to call his assertion a myth. For example, my office had some funds at the end of the year that were in the “use or lose” category. We bought new computers for the first time in probably like six years (bye bye, Windows Vista!), and replaced monitors that were much older. Meanwhile, we all know how lean and mean all private business spending is. Those golf club memberships are very important for senior executives. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-donald-trump-is-so-awful-then/780966.md?page=9)