Not nearly high enough. And the rest of the world is watching a good chunk of that disapproving half sit on their thumbs while he tears the country apart.
Oh, look! More blanket generalizations that ignore the very much discussed discourse around Biden's faculties, the democratic party's tactics during their campaign and shift towards Harris, and the many nuances behind why people chose to vote for Harris as opposed to Trump.
I've made no generalizations. I simply used OP's con artist phrase to highlight the fact that not all voters did what OP intimated. I'm sure that there are those who voted for Trump that did feel he was a con artist, to use one example.
Perhaps slapping some quotes over "recognize a con artist" in my first comment would've helped clarify things.
Oh knock it off. As an American this mentality is so dumb. It's not a gotcha. It just shows how many Americans either voted for him or didn't vote at all, which is a vote for trump.
So really, the vast majority of Americans, in practicality, voted for trump.
The honest truth is that americans voted against democrats, not for republicans. Your mentality shows how ignorant people are willfully being. Many people sat out the election because all candidates were garbage, and democrats made it worse.
Democrats put up a BLACK WOMAN as their candidate and then acted surprised that a majority of americans said "no thanks". Then democrats like to act like "Oh we would have won if more people just voted", which ignores the reality of what happened.
I suspect a little of both. Plus some people were turned off by the forced democratic “primary”. I remember similar sentiments when Hillary ran. I just realized Trump has only won when running against a woman. I think we’re just not quite ready for a female president, for whatever reason.
For what it's worth, I don't disagree with some of what you're saying. I just don't feel like it's productive to engage with someone who starts off a conversation by telling someone to "Knock it off" and then proceeds to call their perspective dumb. I'm happy to chat, but your attitude and tone suggest that your heels are firmly dug in and you aren't actually interested in a constructive dialogue. I could be wrong, but your doubling down by attacking my politeness suggests that maybe I'm not. At any rate, I'll pass.
You can't maintain that if the primary "consumers" of those exports are not actual allies.
Yes, all the more reason why attacking our allies is pure insanity.
A lot of the countries we just attacked in the "trade war" are the same ones who buy our Treasury bonds.
"Tariff Man" failed to make this obvious connection until after it was demonstrated to him. T-Bill yields jumped half a percent in a week after he made a complete fool of himself with "Liberation Day" in the WH rose garden. With one act of utter stupidity, "Tariff Man" cost the country more than DOGE has saved.
Oh for sure, they're not doing a good job. My point is only that I don't believe the status quo was maintainable, so "they could've just maintained the status quo" isn't a good position either.
My point is that something demonstrably worse than the "status quo" is actually regression --- the opposite of progress --- one of the dumbest possible positions.
In other words, unforced economic suicide is certainly an option to end the status quo --- but not a very good/desirable one.
America has 2 major exports --- stability and debt. And these are interconnected. When stability declines, financing debt becomes more expensive.
The current administration is struggling to figure this out.