Is President Trump suddenly Getting Worse?

[ThelmaLou]

@asahi

Not to defend Clothahump, while I think his characterization of the facts is inaccurate, he’s not entirely wrong in pointing out that there are some troubling questions about the book (I assume he’s talking about Wolff) that won’t go away. Like how he got access, and what kind of access did he really have, and is he really sure that 100% of the people around Trump feel he’s too stupid to do the job. It’s clear he got much of it right, but as I said on another thread, if he gets 5-10% of wrong, then it calls into question even the things he got right. I reject the modern view among many new-age journalists that it’s okay to get most of it right. What’s worse about Wolff is that he’s not the kind of guy who’s necessarily going to admit that some of his facts are wrong; it’ll be left to other sources to gradually come to these conclusions over time. Once the initial impact of the book settles, we’re going to be left to assess the accuracy of these claims and the concern is that Wolff will become one of the new faces of American journalism - and that’s bad.

I thought that credible Doper who have read it (and others) say that virtually everything in the book is stuff we’ve been reading in the news for the last year. It’s just collected in one place. Why the skepticism and controversy now?

[HurricaneDitka]

@ThelmaLou

… Why the skepticism and controversy now?

From Wikipedia:

In a 2004 cover story for The New Republic, Michelle Cottle wrote that Wolff was “uninterested in the working press,” preferring to focus on “the power players—the moguls” and was “fixated on culture, style, buzz, and money, money, money.” She also noted that “the scenes in his columns aren’t recreated so much as created—springing from Wolff’s imagination rather than from actual knowledge of events.” Calling his writing “a whirlwind of flourishes and tangents and asides that often stray so far from the central point that you begin to wonder whether there is a central point.”

If you don’t have at least some skepticism, you’re probably doing it wrong.

[Johnny_Ace]

@Shodan

Prove it.

“No”.

Regards,
Shodan

Henry Hill to Tommy DeVito: “You’re a funny guy!”

Unfortunately that does nothing to salve your lack of credibility.

[Bone]

@Johnny_Ace

Unfortunately that does nothing to salve your lack of credibility.

Knock it off. Do not personalize your arguments in this fashion. If you feel you must, the BBQ Pit is right around the corner.

[/moderating]

[Sherrerd]

@HurricaneDitka

From Wikipedia:

You quote a paragraph citing a 2004 opinion piece by Michelle Cottle (as it was pasted into Wikipedia).

My confidence in Wolff’s work has grown, the more I’ve seen how heavily–and sometimes solely–dependent on the 2004 opinion piece by Michelle Cottle, have been critical ‘take-downs’ of Wolff.

[Ravenman]

@HurricaneDitka

If you don’t have at least some skepticism, you’re probably doing it wrong.

If I wasn’t fairly certain that your skepticism on this is based on your support for the subject of the book, I wouldn’t be doing the Straight Dope right.

I’m not arguing that the author is 100% accurate in writing everything that he did. I frankly don’t think it is possible. When I read news articles about areas of my expertise, there are virtually always things I don’t believe are accurate.

And what is actually being challenged in terms of accuracy? That Trump is laughed at for his intellect? Jesus H. Christ, that isn’t even news. That Trump is lazy? He’s played more golf as President in one year than I, a golf nut, have managed to string together in four years. That Trump eats like shit? Perhaps you haven’t noticed that Trump is fat and tweets pictures of himself eating crap.

If the White House hadn’t made a big deal of the book, attempting to scare a publisher into not printing it - which is probably the biggest deal of the story that nobody is talking about - I bet you that this book wouldn’t be popular, period.

To say it another way, if you read three months of the Washington Post you get a more damning picture of Trump than you’d get from what has been publicized about the book.

[HelenGawn]

@Beckdawrek

There are shitholes in every country. That doesn’t make the whole continent a shithole. Mr.Trump should go see the reservations in Oklahoma. Or the poor areas in any town. Or the main streets of small cities where Wal-Mart has knocked out the local businesses.

And seeing as how “shithole countries” get that way by being governed by corrupt tyrants…

[Johnny_Ace]

@Ravenman

If I wasn’t fairly certain that your skepticism on this is based on your support for the subject of the book, I wouldn’t be doing the Straight Dope right.

I’m not arguing that the author is 100% accurate in writing everything that he did. I frankly don’t think it is possible. When I read news articles about areas of my expertise, there are virtually always things I don’t believe are accurate.

And what is actually being challenged in terms of accuracy? That Trump is laughed at for his intellect? Jesus H. Christ, that isn’t even news. That Trump is lazy? He’s played more golf as President in one year than I, a golf nut, have managed to string together in four years. That Trump eats like shit? Perhaps you haven’t noticed that Trump is fat and tweets pictures of himself eating crap.

If the White House hadn’t made a big deal of the book, attempting to scare a publisher into not printing it - which is probably the biggest deal of the story that nobody is talking about - I bet you that this book wouldn’t be popular, period.

To say it another way, if you read three months of the Washington Post you get a more damning picture of Trump than you’d get from what has been publicized about the book.

No, it’d be popular anyway. It crystallizes what we all believed and had evidence for before.

[madmonk28]

@HelenGawn

And seeing as how “shithole countries” get that way by being governed by corrupt tyrants…

And that Trump supporters tend to live in the shithole parts of the US…

[HurricaneDitka]

@madmonk28

And that Trump supporters tend to live in the shithole parts of the US…

Detroit voted for Hillary.

[BobLibDem]

@HurricaneDitka

Detroit voted for Hillary.

Detroit’s a great city. I never feel unsafe there and I would ten thousand times rather live in Detroit than in any part of the old Confederacy.

[HurricaneDitka]

@BobLibDem

Detroit’s a great city. …

LOL! No it’s not.

US News: Detroit Is the Worst Big City to Live In

The Motor City ended up bringing up the rear in terms of economics – a category that drew on local unemployment rates, poverty statistics and debt per median earnings, among other data points. …

Detroit also ranked second-worst in terms of safety, with violent crime and property crime rates as well as fatalities and law enforcement employees per capita the factors considered. …

[madmonk28]

@HurricaneDitka

Detroit voted for Hillary.

I was thinking more of shitholes like West Virginia, Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama, places that have a in common with the places that Trump calls shitholes. Hey, I’m just being honest like Trump, right?

[HurricaneDitka]

And while we’re on the subject of the shithole parts of the US: Why is liberal California the poverty capital of America?

Guess which state has the highest poverty rate in the country? Not Mississippi, New Mexico, or West Virginia, but California, where nearly one out of five residents is poor. … California, with 12% of the American population, is home today to about one in three of the nation’s welfare recipients.

[GIGObuster]

@HurricaneDitka

And while we’re on the subject of the shithole parts of the US: Why is liberal California the poverty capital of America?

Meh.

California is doing fine, thank you very much

California Is Doing Fine, Thank You Very Much

…

Ah. The SPM. There’s an obvious reason that California performs poorly on the SPM, but Jackson instead blames it on his usual tired litany of bugaboos: generous welfare policies, lack of pro-work welfare reform, self-interested bureaucracies that want to keep the welfare rolls high,¹ restrictive land-use regulations, out-of-control environmental rules, high minimum wage, and high-speed rail.

I’m not sure why the LA Times bothers printing this dreck, but let’s take a look at some basic measures of how California is doing. Jackson is careful not to use the standard poverty rate, and it’s pretty obvious why that is:

California ranks 21st. Nothing out of the ordinary there. But what about our lack of welfare reform? Does that mean we have lots of people idling away on the public dime? Not really. We do have an unemployment rate a smidge worse than it should be, but our labor force participation rate is dead average:

California ranks 20th. West Virginia, Mississippi, and New Mexico are way behind us. How about our massive state bureacracy?

California is the fifth lowest. So if absolute poverty is average; labor force participation is average; and the state bureaucracy is under control; then whatever could put California at the top of the SPM poverty ranking?

Oh, right: housing. California has the fourth-highest housing prices in the nation, and the SPM incorporates housing prices in its estimates. Are California’s high housing prices due to restrictive land-use regulation? Sure, that’s some of it.

…

We rank 8th in GDP per capita—and that’s without an oil boom but with a high level of illegal immigration. What’s more, California’s GDP per capita has grown faster than national GDP over the past two decades:

…

God knows California has its problems, and obviously our location and weather allow us to attract high-value workers despite those problems. Nonetheless, the plain fact is that California has high taxes, good services, vigorous environmental regulations, and still has a strong economy. All the cherry picking in the world won’t change that.

[China_Guy]

Regarding Wolf’s book. While there is heresay and probably source embellishment, it is also not a work of fiction but pretty much covers what we hear from other sources over the past year.

One key question: how the hell was Wolf able to just park his ass in the White House corridor of power Monday thru Friday everyday of the week? This would not be possible in corporate America (maybe for a few days, not for weeks on end and certainly not for months on end). What a goat rodeo the White House must be if this sensationalist journalistic hack gets what amounts to a top level security clearance in the freaking White House.

[HurricaneDitka]

@China_Guy

Regarding Wolf’s book. While there is heresay and probably source embellishment, it is also not a work of fiction but pretty much covers what we hear from other sources over the past year.

One key question: how the hell was Wolf able to just park his ass in the White House corridor of power Monday thru Friday everyday of the week? This would not be possible in corporate America (maybe for a few days, not for weeks on end and certainly not for months on end). What a goat rodeo the White House must be if this sensationalist journalistic hack gets what amounts to a top level security clearance in the freaking White House.

There was a line that stood out from the aforementioned New Republic story:

“His great gift is the appearance of intimate access,” says an editor who has worked with Wolff. “He is adroit at making the reader think that he has spent hours and days with his subject, when in fact he may have spent no time at all.”

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

@China_Guy

One key question: how the hell was Wolf able to just park his ass in the White House corridor of power Monday thru Friday everyday of the week? This would not be possible in corporate America (maybe for a few days, not for weeks on end and certainly not for months on end). What a goat rodeo the White House must be if this sensationalist journalistic hack gets what amounts to a top level security clearance in the freaking White House.

Which raises a question I haven’t seen much if any discussion of: Who else has been able to mingle and linger in this maladministered White House, unremarked and gathering information, to what ends?

[DrDeth]

@HurricaneDitka

And while we’re on the subject of the shithole parts of the US: Why is liberal California the poverty capital of America?

Doubtful:

US Poverty Level By State

Many of the states with the highest rates of poverty in the USA are located in the country´s deep south, and these include West Virginia, Kentucky, and Louisiana.

By that one measure, CA has the highest rate, but by most other measures it doesn’t, not even close.

[madmonk28]

@EddyTeddyFreddy

Which raises a question I haven’t seen much if any discussion of: Who else has been able to mingle and linger in this maladministered White House, unremarked and gathering information, to what ends?

Putin