Do you really believe that she would have done this?
Trump Administration Announces Historic Price Transparency Requirements to Increase Competition and Lower Healthcare Costs for All Americans | HHS.gov
No, she would have done something that actually made a difference.
When was this actually implemented?
Two weeks from now.
Trump and Pence had absolutely nothing to do with the development of the vaccine, which is why the CEO of Pfizer refused to attend Trump’s self-glorifying “vaccine summit”. Trump’s direct contribution to vaccine development was to suggest injecting Clorox bleach.
Hitler, by contrast, was responsible for funding the development what became the beloved and iconic Volkswagen Beetle, and was even directly involved in setting some of the design goals aimed at simplicity and reliability.
Since I can’t think of any further positive things to say about either of them, I put the score of positive accomplishments at: Hitler 1, Trump 0.
I’m not going to block-quote the entire “Provisions” section of the JCPOA Wiki page because it’s so big. But the link indicates that the restrictions start to phase out after 10 years, and are completely gone by 15. As I’m not a nuclear physicist, I do not know precisely which restriction relaxations are essential to nuclear bomb-making, so rather than argue my original post too strenuously, I’ll correct myself to say 15 years rather than 10. The extra five years really doesn’t make the argument significantly different.
In so doing, he made democracy both stronger and weaker at the same time. It’s stronger in that democratically-minded people who might have been complacent before now know they have to be active. At the same time, he has not only caused others to lose confidence in democracy but to give up on the idea altogether and conspire against it.
He proved that is actually possible to lose the popular vote twice. Hopefully, he doesn’t try to make it thrice.
Cervaise nailed it. What we are seeing with the remaining, silent elected Republicans is not a fear of losing Trump’s base, while not actually agreeing with them. It is actually agreeing with them and not having the balls to say so out loud. They are too embarrassed by their own beliefs to admit to them. Better to be thought a racist/classist/science denialist than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt.
Fell in love with Korean little rocket man
Here is a five-minute piece where Jake Tapper thanks Trump, starting out with the more or less deliberate attempts to do good, then winds up with the stress-testing US democracy part.
I know someone who is pretty high up in one of the major drug companies that have developed vaccines. He is involved in overseeing the testing required. I’m not clear on the details, but essentially they were able to use test protocols from previous vaccines that took years (5+) to reach approval, and somehow extrapolate from them to show that the Covid vaccines would be safe also. I know that isn’t very clear, but I didn’t ask for details. So, was the admin involved in this? I would say so, and to that extent they should get credit. Or the reverse, if the testing proves to inaccurate!
ETA: Just for the record, he used the phrase “many corners were cut”. 
For as long as I can remember, the Republican Party has been blindly pro-war, even to the point of smearing dissenters as “anti-American.”
Trump’s own stance on military intervention has hardly been consistent or principled. However, I give Trump credit for broadening Republican thinking on this issue. During the 2016 campaign, he criticized the Iraq War in ways that no other candidate would have dared to. As president, he shattered the Republican taboo on pulling US troops out of conflict-ridden areas. Whether he realizes it or not, he has made it safe for anti-interventionists in his own party.
That’s a definite step in the right direction.
Oh, not to worry. Republicans will flip back to being blindly pro-war in the blink of an eye. They have no problem with this.
Just like they will suddenly realize on Jan 21 that deficits are so very, very important.
David Frum is a Canadian Conservative and vocal never Trumper. In this article he states what he considers 13 positive things Trump did.
They include:
- stricter vaping regulation
- dramatic reductions in burning coal
- some normalization in the Middle East
- safeguarding 5G networks from China
- appointing Jerome Powell to Fed Chair
- hurting ISIS in Iraq and East Syria
- speeding generic drug approval
- tightening asylum rules
- almost doubling standard tax deductions
- space force
- restoring due process on campus
- prison reform (First Step)
- increasing civic participation
I disagree with a lot of these. Some are not objectives Trump intentionally caused or even desired. Some are mixed bags. Some need to be viewed in larger context. Frum is reaching a great deal here.
His stated goal during his (first) campaign was to save coal mining jobs and re-open mines… Couldn’t even do that right.
The article admits this was not Trump’s goal. But states that due to “laziness” and external factors, dramatic reductions in coal burning occurred in every year of Trump’s presidency.
So essentially, a reduction in coal burning was going to happen no matter what, so a lump of cat shit sitting in the oval office would have had exactly the same result on this file as Trump.
I’m not going to count that as a “positive thing Trump got right”
Mussolini certainly “increased civic participation”, especially when he got the crowds to all get together and string him up on a lamp post. Not sure if this actually counts as a “positive thing Trump got right” either. More like a by-product of his stupidity got more people to vote this once.
About that first one - “stricter vaping regulations”
People should not confuse the initial announcement with the actual eventual results. It seems that the initial stricter regulations were watered down, because there was fear that it would not go over well politically with Trump supporters. So that’s a fail as well.