Trump's Promises

[nanana]

Not meant to be a rhetorical question, but what metrics do you think we could hold Trump accountable for, in terms of keeping his promises (whether you think they are hideous promises or not)?  And then, also adding whether the promises are good?  Here are some thoughts: 

1) Trump has often said he's against war and nation-building and in favor of letting other countries be successful on their own without US money and firearms.  Has he said this consistently enough (without at the same time saying the opposite of this) to consider it a "promise"? If so, was it a good promise that will move the country in a better direction? 

2) Trump has been pretty clear about illegal immigration.  Is this a campaign "promise" that can be measured?  A good promise?

3) Trump has been pretty clear that military standards are very low and that improving performance is more important than female and trans participation in the military.  Is this a "promise"?  A good "promise"?

4) Trump has said he wants to cut spending.  Is this a "promise"? A good "promise"?

5) Trump has said he's strongly in favor of free speech? "Promise"? "Good" promise?

6) Make America Healthy Again, promise? good? 

If not these, are there any other discernible "promises" he has made that can be used to determine success measures?  

[viking8x6]

This is a great question. I'm going to contribute to it with a condensed version of an issue of the Tangle newsletter (a news source well worth checking out, if you're not aware of it) from January 17.

Promises:

• Wars in Gaza & Ukraine: Trump explicitly promised to play a part in ending both of these, ASAP after his election. 
• Federal income tax on social security benefits: Trump promised to end this.
• Tariffs: Trump promised to institute tariffs to address the balance of trade (along with some other issues).
• Government efficiency: Trump promised to reduce government inefficiency and waste [my note: this is significantly different from spending, but spending is a reasonable metric]
• Affordable Care Act: Trump promised to repeal and replace this (but did not say with what). [per capita health spending would be a reasonable metric]
• Deportations: Trump promised to carry out the "largest mass deportation in US history". [note that he did not promise to reform immigration policy, though there is an obvious need to do so]
• No Tax on Tips: Trump promised to end taxes on tipped wages, and his platform included a broader call to cut workers' taxes.

There are several other line items under "promises" in the article, as well as sections with other metrics upon which to assess Trump's presidency (but that don't have to do with explicit promises he made during his campaign). I'm not linking the article (because it is members only content), but here's a link to their site, and the issue date is 1/17/2025. https://www.readtangle.com/t

 

[hntnhole]

On 6/11/2025 at 11:22 AM, viking8x6 said:

[think before following links] https://www.readtangle.com/t

Thanks for sharing that excellent resource.  I hadn't known of it.  

[tobetrained]

It's a tough thing to determine, even with metrics. Take immigration:

• he is trying to do something at a scale other Presidents have not -- your personal politics will determine if that's a good or bad thing
• he can say more would be done if Democratic mayors and governors would help -- your politics will determine if you support their effort or not

What's true is that the number of people trying to get here has absolutely plummeted, work done in concert with countries across Latin America to slow such traffic through the southern border as well as a the threat of simply being returned to country of origin. It was widely reported illegal crossing across that border hit a 50+ year low just two days ago (10/7).

But again, your personal politics will determine if that's a good or bad thing -- and they will influence what you think is an acceptable metric/norm/result. I assume his supporters are mostly content with the effort to-date, given options available.

But his baggage is just so high, and he's an oligarch.

I gave him credit, as said elsewhere, for taking (most) Europeans countries and Canada to task for not living up their NATO commitments. Many don't realize, over recent decades, this amounts to hundreds of billions (if not trillions) of Euros of funds not spent on their own defense, per said agreement. Ukraine would be not just better defended but actually well defended if Europe had lived up to those commitments. I'll add here, I give Biden credit for holding the alliance together in the first place in 2022 -- and it should be well remembered.

To continue on Biden as a tangential point to original question: Consider his Build Back Better program (or whatever that turned into, I forget the lingo). It was a campaign promise and economic stimulus bill. By the time it was enacted such stimulus was not needed. No one truly anticipated the economy would bounce back so quickly... it normally does not. By the time if was passed -- a campaign promise -- it only added to other factors which drove massive inflation. So was meeting that campaign promise good? Probably not in the end.

My point, it's really about is the President doing something to help people? With Trump, that will always be a question. He's transactional and he's his own ideology.

[Rillion]

All his promises to lower prices are ringing hollow at this point, we are well past day one and prices keep going up.

[tallslenderguy]

On 6/10/2025 at 9:13 PM, nanana said:

Not meant to be a rhetorical question, but what metrics do you think we could hold Trump accountable for, in terms of keeping his promises (whether you think they are hideous promises or not)?  And then, also adding whether the promises are good?  Here are some thoughts: 

1) Trump has often said he's against war and nation-building and in favor of letting other countries be successful on their own without US money and firearms.  Has he said this consistently enough (without at the same time saying the opposite of this) to consider it a "promise"? If so, was it a good promise that will move the country in a better direction? 

2) Trump has been pretty clear about illegal immigration.  Is this a campaign "promise" that can be measured?  A good promise?

3) Trump has been pretty clear that military standards are very low and that improving performance is more important than female and trans participation in the military.  Is this a "promise"?  A good "promise"?

4) Trump has said he wants to cut spending.  Is this a "promise"? A good "promise"?

5) Trump has said he's strongly in favor of free speech? "Promise"? "Good" promise?

6) Make America Healthy Again, promise? good? 

If not these, are there any other discernible "promises" he has made that can be used to determine success measures?  

i think this is a generally great question that we should be asking all of those who (supposedly) represent us. But therein is the challenge, eh?  No one can represent all individuals in a diverse population. 

It seems the only way we can hold any politician "accountable" is through the vote, unless they violate their oath of office or do something that allows for their removal from office. Otherwise, we are pretty much stuck with the elected person for their term.  

Our system of government does have built in checks and balances that are supposed to keep any one person from having too much power, but those checks and balances can change and evolve depending on those responsible for them. At the end of the day, laws, policies, are all subject to interpretation. 

1). From  what i have seen, Trump is not true to his word on this one. He speaks of wanting Greenland and Canada. That sounds a lot like "nation building" to me. He stated frequently that he'd end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours.  i honestly cannot tell what he wants to do.  To me, he continually contradicts himself on this question, and at the very least, over estimates his ability to keep his word.

2). Yes and no. i think many took Trumps stand as being against a violent criminal element, but that is not the case. All illegal immigration is "criminal" and i think many  of even his supporters have been surprised and not in favor of his treatment of all illegal immigrants. 

3) Re the military, Tump has been clear that he "hates" democrats and wants to use the military against Americans he personally hates calling them "the enemy within."  i do not trust Trumps benevolence when he uses words like "hate" and "enemy" to describe those who disagree with him.  There is argument against the notion that our military has "low standards," and what constitutes "standards."  

4) The "big beautiful bill" increases spending.  Trump does want to cut spending to programs and agencies he does not like or want, but he clearly does not want to simply cut spending, but has increased spending and reallocated. 

5). Weaponizing the FCC contradicts this as i see it.

6)  i'm a trained and licensed healthcare professional..  RFK Jr is not qualified to dictate health policy. While i an agree with addressing highly processed food as a health hazard,i believe we need to allocate more funds to the NIH, not less.  One simple example of where government could reduce healthcare cost would be if the US hired scientists to research new drugs instead of giving tax money to private industry to research and develop drugs. Half of the cost of drug development in our country is profit. We could offer a raise to the scientists working in private research, remove the profit investment motivation for healthcare. The people who do the actual work of science and care are not the shareholders who do nothing. i'd rather see my tax dollars allocated to healthcare than to building  walls or rounding up non violent, productive neighbors. 

[hntnhole]

On 10/9/2025 at 2:03 PM, tobetrained said:

My point, it's really about is the President doing something to help people?

Well said, tobetrained.  First, welcome to BZ. 

Secondly, thanks for that well-developed response to the subject.  While you may need "training" in certain arts,  well-constructed, well-reasoned composition is obviously not one of them.  

[tobetrained]

@tallslenderguy wrote, in part:

"1). From  what i have seen, Trump is not true to his word on this one. He speaks of wanting Greenland and Canada. That sounds a lot like "nation building" to me. He stated frequently that he'd end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours.  i honestly cannot tell what he wants to do.  To me, he continually contradicts himself on this question, and at the very least, over estimates his ability to keep his word."

This is an issue which I can go on FAR too long (SORRY!). And I fully support our involvement.

Yes, he said that and thought too much of his "relationship" with Putin. but while Biden played the carrot-card, Trump is playing the stick. Initially with Ukraine but more with the Europeans.

Here's a Newsweek article which sums up the spending by the EU on Russian energy, and this is beyond their below-NATO spending commitments to self-defense. [think before following links] https://www.newsweek.com/russia-trump-oil-europe-2039731

He first negotiated -- in his bloviated way -- with Europe to start spending on defense. Even after more than 3 years of war in Ukraine, most European countries in NATO are not at 2% of GDP spend on defense, which was their commitment -- some of that could have been sent over to Ukraine. He's got commitments for 5% (by 2030, i think).

Now, he's working on them to stop buying Russian energy. The EU, as noted in the article above -- with reputable sources, has spent over 200 billion Euros on Russian energy since the start of the war, more than sent in aide to Ukraine. They are literally helping to fund Russia's war effort. Trump is playing hardball with them now to stop that.

Ukraine has actually had to maintain some Russian energy pipelines (to Europe) through their territory to placate the Europeans while being bombed continuously by Russia.

Again, ultimately, this is hardball negotiations with Europe, not Ukraine, to get it's act together. The EU + UK is collectively strong enough to defend itself and neighbors from aggressors. But they've chosen to be weak. We can support them but should not be expected to do it all. And we have allies in east Asia to help too -- who do well in their own self-defense, namely Japan and South Korea -- where are the Europeans on that! China is much more formidable than Russia.

I give Trump and "passing+" grade. I want us to do more but I get the bigger picture with the Europeans.