So, the numbers from this February are all due to what Trump accomplished during his first weeks in office, but better numbers after six years of Obama don’t reflect on him or his policies at all.
Seriously?
More than that, my point was that Cameron’s repeated attempts to equivocate a resignation with a termination are ridiculous: they are not the same thing.
Do you really believe that Trump would’ve kept Flynn on if he refused to resign? Come, now.
My belief is immaterial to your continued refusal to acknowledge that resigning and being fired are two different things and that you were wrong to claim that they are the same.
Fine. Forced to resign. How’s that?
I have literally no idea what you’re trying to prove, Bo. “It’s not cream, it’s taupe!” Who the fuck cares?
How was he forced, exactly?
Well why don’t you just stay out of the discussion, then.
No, seriously - what does this matter?
I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone who doesn’t recognize that “asked to resign” means “fired with a wee sliver of dignity.”
Being asked for your resignation is exactly the same thing as being fired. Flynn was fired.
Trump approved of Flynn’s illegal activity until it was exposed and then threw him under the bus to deflect blame from Pence, who had already lied on national television about it.
He only fired Flynn when information that he and Pence had both known about for weeks was leaked to the media and forced their hand.
Ah, fucking thank you, man! That’s the point I was trying to get across to Snowboarder.
However, I have to of course disagree with your assertion that Trump approved of Flynn’s “illegal” activity during the campaign–there’s no evidence his lobbying for Turkey was illegal, or that Trump knew about it–and that Pence lied on national television. No, Flynn lied to Pence about not having contacts with Russians, but Flynn trusted him with his good faith and went on TV saying what Flynn told him, resulting in an embarrassment for the administration. So, Trump fired him.
It may be that Flynn broke some disclosure law about foreign lobbying, but I’m not sure.
What is beyond explaination is why an incoming Administration didn’t bat an eyelash about (a) not initially knowing that a senior foreign policy adviser was acting as a foreign agent, and (b) appointing that person to the President’s top foreign policy adviser, either not knowing he was a foreign agent (meaning poor vetting or failing to pass a major issue to Trump) or dismissing the relevance of having a foreign agent in the revolving door, or © why Trump and his other advisers were so trusting in a person with such poor personal integrity that could have been exposed had they asked anyone in the defense business about how Flynn ran the DIA before being fired.
Flynn was a shitty pick for any senior adviser role because it was inevitable that his poor judgement would explode in someone’s face. How Trump and his team didn’t see this as a problem speaks to total incompetence. It is like appointing a known alcoholic to a big job and being surprised when he starts missing work or stealing from the till. What did you expect to happen?
Heh this is the administration of poor personal integrity. And that’s saying a lot in a cesspool like DC.
You seem exceptionally concerned about coal miners in the era of Trump. Accordingly, I wondered what you thought about this:
Maybe not so supportive as you thought?
Trump made no secret of the fact that he would make more budget cuts in order to help pay for his $1 trillion spending program on infrastructure and other materials including roads, rails, bridges and so on to get the economy spinning again which will, on net, help those coal miners because their supply will be in demand by the government and the private sector.
Oh, and yes, Trump has been as supportive of the coal industry as I thought he’d be.
Why do you think he won West Virginia by a whopping 42 points, the largest margin ever for a presidential candidate. Because coal miners weren’t fooled by Clinton’s “green energy” nonsense and knew which candidate represented their interestests the most. 
Right. And clearly, a program meant to move people away from the dangerous, dead-end coal sector is the perfect place to make cuts. No sign of that spending program yet, but he sure has promised military spending!
I note that this article is high on lavishing praise and anecdotes, but notably low on actual statistics or figures. Okay, coal production is up? By how much? How are employment figures? How’s productivity? How are wages? Is there any actual data which points to this recovery? If so, this piece doesn’t actually cite any of it. That’s a red flag.
I also notice, when looking for corroborating evidence (because if the only citation you have is FOX News, your claim is probably bullshit) I happened upon this FOX Business piece, which predicts a good year for coal based on… well, various economic factors, most of which have fuck-all to do with Donald Trump or any of his policies. The primary factor seems to be the rising price of natural gas. Which is entirely reasonable, because the main reason coal is dying is not “it’s being strangled by regulations”, but rather because it’s being pushed out of the market by cheaper alternatives. Specifically: natural gas. Yeah, regulations play a part, but… I’ll get back to that.
Because people are desperate and stupid, and Trump was offering them easy solutions to complex problems. Sure, those solutions were bullshit, and in the long run, nothing is going to save the coal industry as green energy gets cheaper and more reliable, but there has been a long-term attempt by republicans to push the narrative that the only reason coal is dying is because it’s being choked out by regulations.
A quick aside. These regulations usually come down to “You can’t dump your shit in streams” or “You can’t pump toxic smog into the air”. Basic, common-sense regulation which exists to ensure that the industry doesn’t keep getting to hide its costs. See, if your industry is able to produce a product cheaper by shifting those costs onto others, we have what we call an “externality”. For example, let’s say you run a coal plant, and you can maximize your profits by dumping your toxic runoff into the local stream. Then, the people who use that stream for drinking water downstream end up paying more for water when they realize they have to start importing bottles because their water source is toxic. You’re essentially shifting one of the costs of doing business onto other people, who want nothing to do with you. This is econ 101. These regulations exist to ensure that coal companies can’t just pass on all the costs for damages they incur onto other people. If coal can’t survive without passing massive costs onto others, then coal doesn’t deserve to survive, and we have to find better industries. That’s a harsh truth. It turns out that harsh truths don’t sell as well as happy-go-lucky “No really we can turn the clock back 20 years” bullshit.
But the point is, sooner or later, the coal industry is going to die. It’s expensive, dirty, and really bad for everyone. We can either just sit here propping it up until it becomes obvious that there’s no there there any more and the whole thing collapses, or we can put money towards furthering other industries and training for other jobs. Trump has placed his feet firmly in the former camp. It’s not going to work for long.
Um, no. Read your cites. Use your brain. The only thing Trump has done that is “supportive” is repeal a rule regarding dumping of mining debris into rivers that was only in effect for less than a month:
If you think that the implementation of that rule had any meaningful effect on the coal industry, you’re an idiot, and if you think the repeal of that rule somehow enabled trucks to start rolling again, you’re doubly so.
Any uptick in business that may or may not be in effect is only, at this point, the result of what the industry thinks the Trump administration will do for it, and not based on any actual support as of yet.
I feel like we are set to experience a great number of news stories of this form over the next four years. “Lots of Trump staffers knew $ILLEGAL_THING was happening but none of them told Trump”.
Probably a bit off topic (I haven’t finished the whole thread)…
But, I am curious as to what it is that conservatives think Obama “did” to the coal industry. ckalli1998 beat that drum pretty hard, and Tomi “I want a job at Fox News” Lahren was also vapidly repeating things about coal and coal miners in her relatively recent appearance on Real Time with Bill Maher.
ETA: and I see that we are still on about the coal industry today, so I was obviously not off-topic.
Agreed, and very well put.
On a slightly larger scope, success has always gone to the people and places that welcomed the future, not to those who tried to keep it at bay. The U.S. embraced new technologies, like automobiles and airplanes, and enjoyed (and still enjoys) a lot of economic benefits because of that. But you can’t rest on those laurels. U.S. automakers kept building big gas-guzzlers, and when they didn’t see the market shifting to more fuel-efficient vehicles other countries were more than happy to build them for us. Boeing can’t just build 747s forever. Renewable energy is coming. We have to recognize that and prepare for it, or all the benefits will go someplace else.
Which doesn’t mean I’m not sympathetic to the difficulties facing coal miners today. They broke their backs and polluted their lungs doing a dirty, dangerous job that was needed at the time. But the writing has been on the wall for a while. We won’t stop mining coal tomorrow, and any miner who is preparing his sons to follow in his footsteps is blind. And there’s nothing Donald Trump can do about it.