Dayton3's first day as President

How is this not a NotDayton post?????

Chup was busy.

For what its worth, if I ever did run for and win the presidency, it would probably be in 20 years (2036) when I would be pushing 70 years old. It is much more difficult to demonize an old man (and one probably with young grandkids) than you think. Just ask Jimmy Carter how well that works.

Yeah, how did that work out for Reagan?

You won't have grandchildren. Your daughter will end up a single lesbian.

I'm not, but I think I know who NotDayton is and if it's who I think it is it's not really a coincidence the humour is similar. But if I was NotDayton I would've posted that via the NotDayton account.

Carter was the one who tried to demonize Reagan as a "warmonger". It didn't work and Reagan won two landslides

Of course part of that was a deliberate makeover of Reagan by his campaign team to promote the image of the "doddering old grandfather" which was actually rather different than the real Reagan.

They made a documentary about Dayton as President.

I've never heard of that. I'll have to check it out!

I love this. Not for what it says, but that you actually put that much thought into this detailed response. Dude you are heads and toes above @Goldstein the Space Jew in depth. That was awesome.

Jesus. You're getting fucking obsessed with me. You've name checked or tagged me in, what, a least ten or so posts over the past few days? Dear oh dear.

So much for this supposedly being people talking about you all the time.

Didn't we go over this already? I think I remember clearly stating my interest in you. You are not very good at this.

Trump is 69 years old.

Whatever "this" is, I think it's all in your head....

Not that big a deal. I actually cut and pasted ideas I had written down a couple of years ago. Thanks anyway though.

Note in regard to taxes I envision two major changes.

1) Elimination of corporate income taxes and implementing a flat income tax on individuals. Haven't determined the final rate at this point. Probably would raise the individual and child deduction substantially which would help poorer individuals and families.

2) Reducing the overall Social Security tax rates while applying those rates to ALL income. This would have the net effect of shifting tax burden from poorer workers to wealthier ones.

So you plan to increase spending, cut taxes, balance the budget and make the economy grow at 5%/year. If only those silly politicians had thought of that!

Who said anything about cutting taxes? I would like to keep overall taxes coming into the government relatively the same but shift somewhat from lower income to higher income individuals. Especially via Social Security taxes which lower income Americans pay more in than income taxes anyway.

Likewise I plan to keep overall spending about the same.

You do realise that what you propose on taxation would have the opposite effect, i.e. you want to scrap progressive taxation and move to a flat tax system. Eliminating the social security cap is a good idea, though.

You also want to take money away from productive things, like education, to put more into unproductive things, like the military and propaganda.

Federal education spending is only a small percentage of American education spending. And there is little evidence that is increases productivity in the United States. In fact you can make a strong argument that at least it drives up the costs of secondary education for everyone.

Bisexual interracial protest orgy on the White House lawn.

Dayton tries to chase them off with the garden hose to no success.

Trevor Noah and Larry Wilmore say nothing, just play the clip, and smirk.

Why would they bother? I would have no intention of living in the White House aside from the bare minimum number of photo ops.

Where would you live and why not live in the White House?

It's hard to imagine a situation in which spending on the military would be more beneficial than spending on education. In any case, most of your cuts are on things with obvious economic benefits, and most of your increases tare for things without any such benefits.

Most presidents spend as much time as possible in their actual homes. Protected by the Secret Service of course and outfitted with all necessary communications gear.

The White House is not known for being very comfortable or a pleasant place to live. A substantial part of it is basically a museum

You haven't explained how FEDERAL spending on education is beneficial in the first place. I've outlined a relatively small increase in defense spending anyway.

So the Kitchens administration would be run from a rent house in Arkansas?

You've not explained how a single thing you propose will achieve the goals you have set.

No, it will be run from straight out of the chicken coop.

I've never been to the White House and I appreciate it's historical significance and the office of the President, so me personally, I'd spend as much time as possible there.