Today is the New York Primary. If Trump does anything less than spectacular, as he has been bragging lately, it will be a pretty bad sign for his campaign.
New York City Comptroller To Audit Board Of Election Due To Hundreds Of Thousands Of Polling Problems
I bet Trump did a HECK of a lot better today than the Board of Election, in NY. But I do agree that he needs to keep on winning, as he is wont to do. #MuriKaFirst
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." Elie Wiesel
I have to ask all the anti-Trump participators here that identify as Democrats: How do you feel about the fact that the Republican National Committee does not support Trump and is actively working to keep him from being their nominee? Hell, they're so devoted to his downfall that they've established a whole "Never Trump" movement. If the RNC is so against him, doesn't that align with your interests?
By that logic, you could ask the Republicans who are against Trump if the Democrats align with their interests.
Just because two people dislike Trump doesn't mean they agree on anything else. Remember, pretty much the entire world dislikes Trump.
I have to ask all the anti-Trump participators here that identify as Democrats: How do you feel about the fact that the Republican National Committee does not support Trump and is actively working to keep him from being their nominee? Hell, they're so devoted to his downfall that they've established a whole "Never Trump" movement. If the RNC is so against him, doesn't that align with your interests?
Personally, I don't identify with either party too strongly. I am extremely fed up with how polarized our politics are right now. Like one party blocking anything the other wants to do just because the other side is...the other side? Come on people. Grow up. There are bigger problems in the country/world than defending your party allegiance.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vorthos Cartography - Check out my completed maps of Zendikar and Innistrad!
"You say 'learn from history,' but that does not mean 'learn the same bull***** the people in history learned alongside phrenology and alchemy.'" - The Blinking Spirit
I've got more issues with the Republicans than whether they support Trump or not. tbh I'm only identifying as Democrat here because they're the USA's least-bad option from where I'm standing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Tell me who you walk with, and I'll tell you who you are.” Esmeralda Santiago Art is life itself.
I don't know what you're saying here. Who are the "two people" that dislike him?
The abstract anti-Trump Republican and the abstract anti-Trump Democrat. It's a rhetorical device.
It's really simple: the Republicans are also recognizing that Trump is an existential threat to nation and party. Trump is the only candidate where I'd seriously consider dropping everything I've worked towards here and fleeing the country if he somehow got elected.
I don't know what you're saying here. Who are the "two people" that dislike him?
Any two people who dislike him.
In other words, if you find someone who dislikes Trump, and another person who dislikes Trump, they won't necessarily agree on any other political issue. You're asking if the Republican political interests would align with Democratic ones. The answer is no. Just because someone is against Trump doesn't make them a Democrat.
Trump is the only candidate where I'd seriously consider dropping everything I've worked towards here and fleeing the country if he somehow got elected.
And I know people in nearly a dozen countries across three continents who are close enough to be family that I could flee to. Participating in foreign exchange programs has apparently done wonders for me.
You're asking if the Republican political interests would align with Democratic ones. The answer is no. Just because someone is against Trump doesn't make them a Democrat.
I'm asking the opposite; if the RNC is against Trump, why wouldn't the Democrats want Trump to be their nominee?
Because the Democratic platform isn't "we want everything the Republicans don't". It is in fact possible for Republicans and Democrats to agree on things, and "we don't want Trump in the White House" is one of them.
You're asking if the Republican political interests would align with Democratic ones. The answer is no. Just because someone is against Trump doesn't make them a Democrat.
I'm asking the opposite; if the RNC is against Trump, why wouldn't the Democrats want Trump to be their nominee?
Because the Democratic platform isn't "we want everything the Republicans don't". It is in fact possible for Republicans and Democrats to agree on things, and "we don't want Trump in the White House" is one of them.
The person is asking why Democrats would not support Trump so that more republicans may vote against him in the general election, I believe. The answer to which is I don't even want Trump to have the slightest possibility of becoming president which getting the nomination gives him.
And it had nothing to do with liberal or conservative bias. It has to do with the media pushing whatever establishment agenda it wants. Whether it'f Fox News trying to sabotage Trump in that first debate, the media refusing to do their jobs in the run-up to the IRAQ WAR, or deliberately trying to minimize and ignore Bernie Sanders, they're dishonest and untrustworthy and at the end of the day the MSM are just tools of the establishment.
Trump has been right to tell people to ignore the MSM narrative.
"Hardly anyone trusts the media."
And yet, the article itself is from, wait for it, the media! If we can't trust the media, then how can we trust that the media is actually telling the truth when it says we can't trust the media? The reasoning of this whole "the media has it out for Trump" is delightfully circular, and hence discussing it doesn't actually get us anywhere.
Perhaps you should read my post again. 2/3 of the examples I gave have nothing to do with Trump, so I think you shouldn't be trying to spin it as a "oh woe is me people are being mean to Trump" post.
Although I will apologize for being unclear on the aspect of the media. I meant to emphasize the MSM vs media in general. There's a difference between "The Young Turks" and Bill O'Reilly. There's a difference between PBS and CNN.
Donald Trump outperforms expectations in New York. Ted Cruz looks like an idiot for slamming Donald Trump for his "New York Values". Trump is the only person to win big in their own home state. Furthermore Cruz doesn't expand the electoral college. I may dislike Kasich but I recognize the value he brings in the general elections as a VP while Cruz brings nothing to the table. He's actually the weaker general candidate than Trump or Kasich.
You're asking if the Republican political interests would align with Democratic ones. The answer is no. Just because someone is against Trump doesn't make them a Democrat.
I'm asking the opposite; if the RNC is against Trump, why wouldn't the Democrats want Trump to be their nominee?
Because the Democratic platform isn't "we want everything the Republicans don't". It is in fact possible for Republicans and Democrats to agree on things, and "we don't want Trump in the White House" is one of them.
So Democrats would rather have Cruz or Kasich? These are people who would have the support of their Republican constituents; this would allow their bills to get passed. Wouldn't the Democrats rather want a lame duck with no high-tier political connections and the contempt of both parties? Trump wouldn't be able to get anything done, similar to how the Republican party shut out Obama from accomplishing his loftier, liberal goals.
The most power that a president wields is not in domestic policy. Its in foreign affairs, particularly the commander in chief power, that a president has almost unilateral power. The President could send troops anywhere in the world and there's very little Congress can do about it; the only options being a joint resolution saying he's overstepped his bounds, cutting off funds, and/or impeachment. Each option is time consuming and if the President makes a mistake that leads to war, Congress cannot put the brakes on in time, in which case we as a nation will be stuck with the President's foolhardy decision.
Of course, most Presidents are smart enough to realize they need not only Congress, but the support of the American people to successfully wage a war. However, Trump's extremely narcissistic personality leads me to question whether he would consult with Congress or voters before doing something that could provoke or lead to war. I'm not eager to find out.
So the voice of the people only matter, in your opinion, at what percentile?
You're not "the voice of the people" if the majority of the people disagree with you.
I thought minorities mattered?
Really? Trump doesn't.
I am my own voice. DJT is his own voice. U are your own voice.
Only one of those three has received nearly 9 MILLION votes during this election cycle. Certainly u don't believe that 9 million American citizens should be without political representation. Certainly u don't believe Trump will receive anything less than millions MORE votes by American citizens during the next few months. Do those people count, or should they be disenfranchised because u want your way on everything political? Why do they matter less to you than other similar sized groups of citizens? It sure seems like u are saying some minorities are more important than other minorities. Please clarify why it is ok to "write off" this group.
Trump has been clear on the "tribes" he sees. Americans and non-Americans. He is equally comfortable with supporters that are black women, or Asian men, or poor white guys, or young Latinos, or middle aged white females, or famous athletes, or football coaches, or billionaires, or even other politicians. On the Right, we don't try to invent thousands of victimized groups. Two is enough; Americans and non-Americans. Come on over, the water is equally bubbling and hot for all regardless of superficial differences like skin color, or gender, or wealth, or age, or college degree.
The voice of the people of NY was loud and proud for HRC and DJT tonight.
I am my own voice. DJT is his own voice. U are your own voice.
Only one of those three has received nearly 9 MILLION votes during this election cycle. Certainly u don't believe that 9 million American citizens should be without political representation. Certainly u don't believe Trump will receive anything less than millions MORE votes by American citizens during the next few months. Do those people count, or should they be disenfranchised because u want your way on everything political? Why do they matter less to you than other similar sized groups of citizens? It sure seems like u are saying some minorities are more important than other minorities. Please clarify why it is ok to "write off" this group.
Trump has been clear on the "tribes" he sees. Americans and non-Americans. He is equally comfortable with supporters that are black women, or Asian men, or poor white guys, or young Latinos, or middle aged white females, or famous athletes, or football coaches, or billionaires, or even other politicians. On the Right, we don't try to invent thousands of victimized groups. Two is enough; Americans and non-Americans. Come on over, the water is equally bubbling and hot for all regardless of superficial differences like skin color, or gender, or wealth, or age, or college degree.
I think you missed the point Highroller was trying to make. First of all, each voice is important. However, this country is a democracy, which means the majority opinion is generally the one that is practiced. That's only about 3 percent of the national population. Even with 'many millions more' that are likely out there who support Trump, that's still not a clear cut majority. We won't know of course, until Election Day, exactly how big this number is.
Second, Highroller wasn't saying the "Trump Minority" doesn't matter. He was saying Trump doesn't care about minorities. Big difference there.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vorthos Cartography - Check out my completed maps of Zendikar and Innistrad!
"You say 'learn from history,' but that does not mean 'learn the same bull***** the people in history learned alongside phrenology and alchemy.'" - The Blinking Spirit
The most power that a president wields is not in domestic policy. Its in foreign affairs, particularly the commander in chief power, that a president has almost unilateral power. The President could send troops anywhere in the world and there's very little Congress can do about it; the only options being a joint resolution saying he's overstepped his bounds, cutting off funds, and/or impeachment. Each option is time consuming and if the President makes a mistake that leads to war, Congress cannot put the brakes on in time, in which case we as a nation will be stuck with the President's foolhardy decision.
Of course, most Presidents are smart enough to realize they need not only Congress, but the support of the American people to successfully wage a war. However, Trump's extremely narcissistic personality leads me to question whether he would consult with Congress or voters before doing something that could provoke or lead to war. I'm not eager to find out.
Most Americans are against arming moderate rebels radical terrorists but Obama does it anyway even though it's repeatedly proven to be a stupid move. I don't know where the hatred is coming from re: Trump's foreign policy.
A ton of adult American citizens do NOT vote in elections. Many supporters of each candidate will NOT bother to vote. Thus each has more supporters than one can measure.
How can someone be a supporter if they aren't actually supporting the candidate? Maybe they say they like said candidate, but it doesn't really matter if they aren't doing anything about it.
So one must attend a Denver Bronco's game to be a supporter? If one of my children is hospitalized on Election Day, am I suddenly not a Trump supporter if I cannot vote? What about an elderly woman that did a bunch of phone calls for DJT, but then missed out on voting because she got a DVT in her right lower extremity? Or a poor family living in the sticks that had their only car break down the night before the election? Or a young person that is severely depressed from mounting student debt and no good jobs even though she/he has a legit degree? Life happens. I believe everyone matters.
So one must attend a Denver Bronco's game to be a supporter? If one of my children is hospitalized on Election Day, am I suddenly not a Trump supporter if I cannot vote? What about an elderly woman that did a bunch of phone calls for DJT, but then missed out on voting because she got a DVT in her right lower extremity? Or a poor family living in the sticks that had their only car break down the night before the election? Or a young person that is severely depressed from mounting student debt and no good jobs even though she/he has a legit degree? Life happens. I believe everyone matters. Don't you?
Trump haters have gone on to denigrate his supporters in just about every way possible. Of course the lives of his supporters don't matter; such is the irrational hatred show towards Trump and his supporters.
The most power that a president wields is not in domestic policy. Its in foreign affairs, particularly the commander in chief power, that a president has almost unilateral power. The President could send troops anywhere in the world and there's very little Congress can do about it; the only options being a joint resolution saying he's overstepped his bounds, cutting off funds, and/or impeachment. Each option is time consuming and if the President makes a mistake that leads to war, Congress cannot put the brakes on in time, in which case we as a nation will be stuck with the President's foolhardy decision.
Of course, most Presidents are smart enough to realize they need not only Congress, but the support of the American people to successfully wage a war. However, Trump's extremely narcissistic personality leads me to question whether he would consult with Congress or voters before doing something that could provoke or lead to war. I'm not eager to find out.
Most Americans are against arming moderate rebels radical terrorists but Obama does it anyway even though it's repeatedly proven to be a stupid move. I don't know where the hatred is coming from re: Trump's foreign policy.
About one million human beings killed under Obama's orders to date, but it is ok because he has a Nobel Peace Prize. HRC voted for the invasion of Iraq, plus lots of death in several other countries, but it is ok because she cares a lot about all the 1000s of victimized groups in America.
Trump will be worse than them because... well... he says meaner things to and about corrupt folks that are filthy rich... and... ummm... he has yucky hair. Yep. Nailed it! #LogicFTW
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." Elie Wiesel
About one million human beings killed under Obama's orders to date, but it is ok because he has a Nobel Peace Prize. HRC voted for the invasion of Iraq, plus lots of death in several other countries, but it is ok because she cares a lot about all the 1000s of victimized groups in America.
Trump will be worse than them because... well... he says meaner things to and about corrupt folks that are filthy rich... and... ummm... he has yucky hair. Yep. Nailed it! #LogicFTW
Trump speaks proudly about the people he is going to order killed. And the people he is going to order tortured. I have no idea why you expect Trump to be less lethal than Obama or Clinton. (Actually, that's not true -- I have pretty good idea why you expect that, but it necessarily involves a disconnect from objective reality.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I am my own voice. DJT is his own voice. U are your own voice.
Only one of those three has received nearly 9 MILLION votes during this election cycle. Certainly u don't believe that 9 million American citizens should be without political representation. Certainly u don't believe Trump will receive anything less than millions MORE votes by American citizens during the next few months. Do those people count, or should they be disenfranchised because u want your way on everything political? Why do they matter less to you than other similar sized groups of citizens? It sure seems like u are saying some minorities are more important than other minorities. Please clarify why it is ok to "write off" this group.
Trump has been clear on the "tribes" he sees. Americans and non-Americans. He is equally comfortable with supporters that are black women, or Asian men, or poor white guys, or young Latinos, or middle aged white females, or famous athletes, or football coaches, or billionaires, or even other politicians. On the Right, we don't try to invent thousands of victimized groups. Two is enough; Americans and non-Americans. Come on over, the water is equally bubbling and hot for all regardless of superficial differences like skin color, or gender, or wealth, or age, or college degree.
I think you missed the point Highroller was trying to make. First of all, each voice is important. However, this country is a democracy, which means the majority opinion is generally the one that is practiced. That's only about 3 percent of the national population. Even with 'many millions more' that are likely out there who support Trump, that's still not a clear cut majority. We won't know of course, until Election Day, exactly how big this number is.
Second, Highroller wasn't saying the "Trump Minority" doesn't matter. He was saying Trump doesn't care about minorities. Big difference there.
1). Children cannot vote. Felons are not supposed to vote. Nor those deemed incompetent by a judge. Illegals should not vote. A BIG chunk of those that can legally vote choose not to do so. Thus, the VAST majority cannot or do not vote. Saying Trump only has "3%" of the vote is diabolically inaccurate. DJT has a YUGE lead over Cruz, and has lapped Kasich a few times.
2). I am very worried by your inference that only the majority matters. That is some scary stuff man. Is democracy really just two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner? I am a libertarian myself, and I love me some 2nd A self defense.
3). Trump does care about American citizens. There is ZERO need to keep people in a thousand different little groups, and then try to convince them that they MUST use gvt as a weapon on other citizens before gvt is used as a weapon against them. The status quo is maintained by exactly that type of Balkanization. It is regressive and sad to see.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." Elie Wiesel
About one million human beings killed under Obama's orders to date, but it is ok because he has a Nobel Peace Prize. HRC voted for the invasion of Iraq, plus lots of death in several other countries, but it is ok because she cares a lot about all the 1000s of victimized groups in America.
Trump will be worse than them because... well... he says meaner things to and about corrupt folks that are filthy rich... and... ummm... he has yucky hair. Yep. Nailed it! #LogicFTW
Trump speaks proudly about the people he is going to order killed. And the people he is going to order tortured. I have no idea why you expect Trump to be less lethal than Obama or Clinton. (Actually, that's not true -- I have pretty good idea why you expect that, but it necessarily involves a disconnect from objective reality.)
I smell fear mongering.
Trump has been very clear that he intends to "knock the hell out of ISIS", instead of refusing to say radical Islamic terrorism or refusing to capture the oil revenue stream or refusing to take care of our vets better than we take care of the illegals.
Trump will be lethal to terrorists and their accomplices. Legit.
U keep insisting HRC will easily win, so not at all sure why u are worried even .000001% about Trump.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." Elie Wiesel
The most power that a president wields is not in domestic policy. Its in foreign affairs, particularly the commander in chief power, that a president has almost unilateral power. The President could send troops anywhere in the world and there's very little Congress can do about it; the only options being a joint resolution saying he's overstepped his bounds, cutting off funds, and/or impeachment. Each option is time consuming and if the President makes a mistake that leads to war, Congress cannot put the brakes on in time, in which case we as a nation will be stuck with the President's foolhardy decision.
Of course, most Presidents are smart enough to realize they need not only Congress, but the support of the American people to successfully wage a war. However, Trump's extremely narcissistic personality leads me to question whether he would consult with Congress or voters before doing something that could provoke or lead to war. I'm not eager to find out.
Most Americans are against arming moderate rebels radical terrorists but Obama does it anyway even though it's repeatedly proven to be a stupid move. I don't know where the hatred is coming from re: Trump's foreign policy.
About one million human beings killed under Obama's orders to date, but it is ok because he has a Nobel Peace Prize. HRC voted for the invasion of Iraq, plus lots of death in several other countries, but it is ok because she cares a lot about all the 1000s of victimized groups in America.
Trump will be worse than them because... well... he says meaner things to and about corrupt folks that are filthy rich... and... ummm... he has yucky hair. Yep. Nailed it! #LogicFTW
I was replying to the question, "what's the worse Trump can do as President if both parties hate him and with the checks and balances of the Constitution?" (paraphrased). My answer is that the President has almost no checks, or very weak checks, when commanding the world's strongest military.
In fact, President Obama's use of drones proves my point: despite a Republican majority in Congress opposing everything he stands for, Obama is able to carry out a program that many in both parties oppose.
Like I said, it's not his "mean words" or his "yucky hair" that concerns me. It's the personality traits that he alone has exhibited which makes me question his judgment with not only our military, but with the political power the White House itself holds and represents.
1. Ignorance In Foreign Policy
Trump shows a staggering lack of knowledge about foreign affairs, and he seems less knowledgeable as the election continues. Examples:
Trump claims we get nothing in exchange for $150 billion in the Iranian nuclear deal. This is wrong because 1. the $150 billion was Iran's to begin with, so its not like we gave them our own money, and 2. Iran agrees to give up 97% of it's stockpiled uranium and 3. international inspectors are allowed to monitor its remaining stockpiles.
Of course, its possible Trump does know what he's talking about and is merely lying. But he would never lie right?
2. Inability to Admit When He Is Wrong
He seems unable to criticize himself and reflect on his actions. Even if you don't like Presidents Bush and Obama or their policies, both men were able to publicly admit when they were wrong (not enough troops in Iraq and Obamacare website rollout) and took steps to correct those mistakes (troop and tech surge). In contrast, Trump has never apologized or admitted he has made a mistake. Trump's campaign is very badly organized, with the campaign at one point sending emails to the wrong people after the deadline is over. Instead of taking steps to correct those mistakes though, Trump blames the GOP for having unfair rules.
Another example: Trump took out an ad in 1989 demanding the death penalty for five men who were accused of rape. The trial hadn't been held yet, but Trump demanded that the death penalty be restored to punish them for a crime they hadn't been convicted of yet. Years later, evidence revealed that the men did not in fact commit the crime, but Trump never apologized and instead doubled down, casting New York as the victim for compensating the men for their wrongful sentences.
If Trump makes a mistake in foreign policy, which I think is very likely given the sheer ignorance he has displayed about any policy, he will likely double down on his mistakes instead of changing course and cost the nation, if not the world, a lot of money and lives.
2). I am very worried by your inference that only the majority matters. That is some scary stuff man. Is democracy really just two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner? I am a libertarian myself, and I love me some 2nd A self defense.
So, what, you think the whoever-wins-the-election-becomes-president system we've used for the past 228 years is "scary stuff"? If Donald Trump gets 40% of the total vote, should he get 40% of the Oval Office? And if so, which 40%? Do you think he'll opt for the wall with the Great Seal, or fight Clinton for the windows overlooking the Rose Garden? For convenience's sake they might have to come to some sort of time-share agreement on the door to the restroom... I hope Trump's bladder is at least 20% bigger than Clinton's. (And if he were here, I have a foreboding feeling he'd actually feel compelled to brag about the size of his bladder at this point.)
Words have meanings. You can't get Trump off the charge of being a "fearmonger" just by nonsensically slapping the label on everybody else. That's just the schoolyard "No you are!", and although I'll grant that it's right at the standard maturity level for Trumpian discourse, it doesn't actually work. Trump is a fearmonger because he says that Mexicans are coming over the border to take our jobs, spread drugs, and rape us, while Muslim refugees are terrorists who will blow us up, and the Chinese are out to get us, and the European Union is out to get us, and on and on and on. I am not a fearmonger because I am not saying anything like that.
Trump will be lethal to terrorists and their accomplices. Legit.
So what's not "legit" about Obama or Clinton being lethal to terrorists and their accomplices? News flash: if Trump truly intends to "knock the hell out of ISIS", it's going to look an awful lot like the Iraq War, because it will be the Iraq War. If Trump has a magical method of fighting in the Middle East that will only kill the bad guys, he sure as hell hasn't given us any clue as to what it is.
Donald Trump outperforms expectations in New York. Ted Cruz looks like an idiot for slamming Donald Trump for his "New York Values". Trump is the only person to win big in their own home state. Furthermore Cruz doesn't expand the electoral college. I may dislike Kasich but I recognize the value he brings in the general elections as a VP while Cruz brings nothing to the table. He's actually the weaker general candidate than Trump or Kasich.
I actually think Cruz INTENTIONALLY alienated himself from NY. Knowing Trump was going to win NY regardless, he decided to completely punt that state in the hopes of drawing more of the midwest and swing votes. The fact that he was unable to really gain an advantage in those states was his true downfall, but I don't think he was competing in NY regardless.
The most power that a president wields is not in domestic policy. Its in foreign affairs, particularly the commander in chief power, that a president has almost unilateral power. The President could send troops anywhere in the world and there's very little Congress can do about it; the only options being a joint resolution saying he's overstepped his bounds, cutting off funds, and/or impeachment. Each option is time consuming and if the President makes a mistake that leads to war, Congress cannot put the brakes on in time, in which case we as a nation will be stuck with the President's foolhardy decision.
Of course, most Presidents are smart enough to realize they need not only Congress, but the support of the American people to successfully wage a war. However, Trump's extremely narcissistic personality leads me to question whether he would consult with Congress or voters before doing something that could provoke or lead to war. I'm not eager to find out.
Most Americans are against arming moderate rebels radical terrorists but Obama does it anyway even though it's repeatedly proven to be a stupid move. I don't know where the hatred is coming from re: Trump's foreign policy.
About one million human beings killed under Obama's orders to date, but it is ok because he has a Nobel Peace Prize. HRC voted for the invasion of Iraq, plus lots of death in several other countries, but it is ok because she cares a lot about all the 1000s of victimized groups in America.
Trump will be worse than them because... well... he says meaner things to and about corrupt folks that are filthy rich... and... ummm... he has yucky hair. Yep. Nailed it! #LogicFTW
I was replying to the question, "what's the worse Trump can do as President if both parties hate him and with the checks and balances of the Constitution?" (paraphrased). My answer is that the President has almost no checks, or very weak checks, when commanding the world's strongest military.
In fact, President Obama's use of drones proves my point: despite a Republican majority in Congress opposing everything he stands for, Obama is able to carry out a program that many in both parties oppose.
Like I said, it's not his "mean words" or his "yucky hair" that concerns me. It's the personality traits that he alone has exhibited which makes me question his judgment with not only our military, but with the political power the White House itself holds and represents.
1. Ignorance In Foreign Policy
Trump shows a staggering lack of knowledge about foreign affairs, and he seems less knowledgeable as the election continues. Examples:
Trump claims we get nothing in exchange for $150 billion in the Iranian nuclear deal. This is wrong because 1. the $150 billion was Iran's to begin with, so its not like we gave them our own money, and 2. Iran agrees to give up 97% of it's stockpiled uranium and 3. international inspectors are allowed to monitor its remaining stockpiles.
Of course, its possible Trump does know what he's talking about and is merely lying. But he would never lie right?
2. Inability to Admit When He Is Wrong
He seems unable to criticize himself and reflect on his actions. Even if you don't like Presidents Bush and Obama or their policies, both men were able to publicly admit when they were wrong (not enough troops in Iraq and Obamacare website rollout) and took steps to correct those mistakes (troop and tech surge). In contrast, Trump has never apologized or admitted he has made a mistake. Trump's campaign is very badly organized, with the campaign at one point sending emails to the wrong people after the deadline is over. Instead of taking steps to correct those mistakes though, Trump blames the GOP for having unfair rules.
Another example: Trump took out an ad in 1989 demanding the death penalty for five men who were accused of rape. The trial hadn't been held yet, but Trump demanded that the death penalty be restored to punish them for a crime they hadn't been convicted of yet. Years later, evidence revealed that the men did not in fact commit the crime, but Trump never apologized and instead doubled down, casting New York as the victim for compensating the men for their wrongful sentences.
If Trump makes a mistake in foreign policy, which I think is very likely given the sheer ignorance he has displayed about any policy, he will likely double down on his mistakes instead of changing course and cost the nation, if not the world, a lot of money and lives.
This. Most people don't realize how limited the President's power is when it comes to the budget, or things such as education and welfare which are MOSTLY handled/paid for at the state level for welfare and the county level for education. Issues such as gay rights and abortion deal with the legislative branch and the President has almost no control over these issues. So I really don't care what the President's stance is on these issues.
However, the ONE area where he has control is over the military. Granted, he cannot "declare war". However, we don't really do that anymore. We send troops over under the auspice of humanitarian intervention, as a state of emergency, etc. which justifies not declaring war. Also, it can be argued that terrorism groups are not a sovereign state and as you can only declare war sovereign state v. sovereign state our conflicts against them is not actual war.
Therefore, the ONLY issue I care about is how I think the President will fare as commander-in-chief. I think both Cruz and Trump are trigger happy, particularly Cruz. I would never vote for Cruz because of his religious ideology. Trump isn't as bad as Cruz because while Trump is apparently motivated by power and greed, I don't find that to be as scary as a religious fundamentalist because ultimately Trump will do what he thinks is best for the nation, even if his views are warped. Cruz is going to do what he thinks is best for his GOD/RELIGION, nation be damned because in his eyes we should all be fundies like him anyway. That scares me. Clinton is more or less a wall street shill so I think she will intervene if it serves the national elite. Although I do think she is rational and more experienced than the other candidates. That leaves Bernie or a third party candidate who I would feel safe under. As it appears Clinton will win the democratic party nomination, she is the lesser of the evils. I like what Mark Cuban said, "ABC ("Anybody But Cruz"). I don't think even Trump will be as bad as Cruz.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
New York City Comptroller To Audit Board Of Election Due To Hundreds Of Thousands Of Polling Problems
April 19, 2016
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/04/19/primary-day-voting-problems/
I bet Trump did a HECK of a lot better today than the Board of Election, in NY. But I do agree that he needs to keep on winning, as he is wont to do. #MuriKaFirst
By that logic, you could ask the Republicans who are against Trump if the Democrats align with their interests.
Just because two people dislike Trump doesn't mean they agree on anything else. Remember, pretty much the entire world dislikes Trump.
Personally, I don't identify with either party too strongly. I am extremely fed up with how polarized our politics are right now. Like one party blocking anything the other wants to do just because the other side is...the other side? Come on people. Grow up. There are bigger problems in the country/world than defending your party allegiance.
"You say 'learn from history,' but that does not mean 'learn the same bull***** the people in history learned alongside phrenology and alchemy.'" - The Blinking Spirit
Art is life itself.
The abstract anti-Trump Republican and the abstract anti-Trump Democrat. It's a rhetorical device.
It's really simple: the Republicans are also recognizing that Trump is an existential threat to nation and party. Trump is the only candidate where I'd seriously consider dropping everything I've worked towards here and fleeing the country if he somehow got elected.
Twitch channel
In other words, if you find someone who dislikes Trump, and another person who dislikes Trump, they won't necessarily agree on any other political issue. You're asking if the Republican political interests would align with Democratic ones. The answer is no. Just because someone is against Trump doesn't make them a Democrat.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Perhaps you should read my post again. 2/3 of the examples I gave have nothing to do with Trump, so I think you shouldn't be trying to spin it as a "oh woe is me people are being mean to Trump" post.
Although I will apologize for being unclear on the aspect of the media. I meant to emphasize the MSM vs media in general. There's a difference between "The Young Turks" and Bill O'Reilly. There's a difference between PBS and CNN.
The most power that a president wields is not in domestic policy. Its in foreign affairs, particularly the commander in chief power, that a president has almost unilateral power. The President could send troops anywhere in the world and there's very little Congress can do about it; the only options being a joint resolution saying he's overstepped his bounds, cutting off funds, and/or impeachment. Each option is time consuming and if the President makes a mistake that leads to war, Congress cannot put the brakes on in time, in which case we as a nation will be stuck with the President's foolhardy decision.
Of course, most Presidents are smart enough to realize they need not only Congress, but the support of the American people to successfully wage a war. However, Trump's extremely narcissistic personality leads me to question whether he would consult with Congress or voters before doing something that could provoke or lead to war. I'm not eager to find out.
Only one of those three has received nearly 9 MILLION votes during this election cycle. Certainly u don't believe that 9 million American citizens should be without political representation. Certainly u don't believe Trump will receive anything less than millions MORE votes by American citizens during the next few months. Do those people count, or should they be disenfranchised because u want your way on everything political? Why do they matter less to you than other similar sized groups of citizens? It sure seems like u are saying some minorities are more important than other minorities. Please clarify why it is ok to "write off" this group.
Trump has been clear on the "tribes" he sees. Americans and non-Americans. He is equally comfortable with supporters that are black women, or Asian men, or poor white guys, or young Latinos, or middle aged white females, or famous athletes, or football coaches, or billionaires, or even other politicians. On the Right, we don't try to invent thousands of victimized groups. Two is enough; Americans and non-Americans. Come on over, the water is equally bubbling and hot for all regardless of superficial differences like skin color, or gender, or wealth, or age, or college degree.
The voice of the people of NY was loud and proud for HRC and DJT tonight.
Here be Trump's victory speech:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DFnYPHCTmLI
They both did VERY well, especially The Don with his 35 percentage points of victory over Kasich. Cruz ate dust.
Also, Trump has received about 2,350,000 MORE votes than Cruz. Ted needs a miracle. He best get to prayin.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2016/primary-caucus/new-york
I think you missed the point Highroller was trying to make. First of all, each voice is important. However, this country is a democracy, which means the majority opinion is generally the one that is practiced. That's only about 3 percent of the national population. Even with 'many millions more' that are likely out there who support Trump, that's still not a clear cut majority. We won't know of course, until Election Day, exactly how big this number is.
Second, Highroller wasn't saying the "Trump Minority" doesn't matter. He was saying Trump doesn't care about minorities. Big difference there.
"You say 'learn from history,' but that does not mean 'learn the same bull***** the people in history learned alongside phrenology and alchemy.'" - The Blinking Spirit
Most Americans are against arming
moderate rebelsradical terrorists but Obama does it anyway even though it's repeatedly proven to be a stupid move. I don't know where the hatred is coming from re: Trump's foreign policy.Trump haters have gone on to denigrate his supporters in just about every way possible. Of course the lives of his supporters don't matter; such is the irrational hatred show towards Trump and his supporters.
Trump will be worse than them because... well... he says meaner things to and about corrupt folks that are filthy rich... and... ummm... he has yucky hair. Yep. Nailed it! #LogicFTW
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
2). I am very worried by your inference that only the majority matters. That is some scary stuff man. Is democracy really just two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner? I am a libertarian myself, and I love me some 2nd A self defense.
3). Trump does care about American citizens. There is ZERO need to keep people in a thousand different little groups, and then try to convince them that they MUST use gvt as a weapon on other citizens before gvt is used as a weapon against them. The status quo is maintained by exactly that type of Balkanization. It is regressive and sad to see.
Trump has been very clear that he intends to "knock the hell out of ISIS", instead of refusing to say radical Islamic terrorism or refusing to capture the oil revenue stream or refusing to take care of our vets better than we take care of the illegals.
Trump will be lethal to terrorists and their accomplices. Legit.
U keep insisting HRC will easily win, so not at all sure why u are worried even .000001% about Trump.
I was replying to the question, "what's the worse Trump can do as President if both parties hate him and with the checks and balances of the Constitution?" (paraphrased). My answer is that the President has almost no checks, or very weak checks, when commanding the world's strongest military.
In fact, President Obama's use of drones proves my point: despite a Republican majority in Congress opposing everything he stands for, Obama is able to carry out a program that many in both parties oppose.
Like I said, it's not his "mean words" or his "yucky hair" that concerns me. It's the personality traits that he alone has exhibited which makes me question his judgment with not only our military, but with the political power the White House itself holds and represents.
1. Ignorance In Foreign Policy
Trump shows a staggering lack of knowledge about foreign affairs, and he seems less knowledgeable as the election continues. Examples:
Trump claims we get next to nothing for protecting South Korea when in fact SK has paid us almost $800 million annually.
Trump claims we get nothing in exchange for $150 billion in the Iranian nuclear deal. This is wrong because 1. the $150 billion was Iran's to begin with, so its not like we gave them our own money, and 2. Iran agrees to give up 97% of it's stockpiled uranium and 3. international inspectors are allowed to monitor its remaining stockpiles.
Trump claims he never discussed Libya during a debate when in 2011 he called for armed intervention of said country.
Of course, its possible Trump does know what he's talking about and is merely lying. But he would never lie right?
2. Inability to Admit When He Is Wrong
He seems unable to criticize himself and reflect on his actions. Even if you don't like Presidents Bush and Obama or their policies, both men were able to publicly admit when they were wrong (not enough troops in Iraq and Obamacare website rollout) and took steps to correct those mistakes (troop and tech surge). In contrast, Trump has never apologized or admitted he has made a mistake. Trump's campaign is very badly organized, with the campaign at one point sending emails to the wrong people after the deadline is over. Instead of taking steps to correct those mistakes though, Trump blames the GOP for having unfair rules.
Another example: Trump took out an ad in 1989 demanding the death penalty for five men who were accused of rape. The trial hadn't been held yet, but Trump demanded that the death penalty be restored to punish them for a crime they hadn't been convicted of yet. Years later, evidence revealed that the men did not in fact commit the crime, but Trump never apologized and instead doubled down, casting New York as the victim for compensating the men for their wrongful sentences.
If Trump makes a mistake in foreign policy, which I think is very likely given the sheer ignorance he has displayed about any policy, he will likely double down on his mistakes instead of changing course and cost the nation, if not the world, a lot of money and lives.
Words have meanings. You can't get Trump off the charge of being a "fearmonger" just by nonsensically slapping the label on everybody else. That's just the schoolyard "No you are!", and although I'll grant that it's right at the standard maturity level for Trumpian discourse, it doesn't actually work. Trump is a fearmonger because he says that Mexicans are coming over the border to take our jobs, spread drugs, and rape us, while Muslim refugees are terrorists who will blow us up, and the Chinese are out to get us, and the European Union is out to get us, and on and on and on. I am not a fearmonger because I am not saying anything like that.
So what's not "legit" about Obama or Clinton being lethal to terrorists and their accomplices? News flash: if Trump truly intends to "knock the hell out of ISIS", it's going to look an awful lot like the Iraq War, because it will be the Iraq War. If Trump has a magical method of fighting in the Middle East that will only kill the bad guys, he sure as hell hasn't given us any clue as to what it is.
Where did this come from? My post had nothing to do with Clinton easily winning. Are you just pulling out stock comebacks at random?
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I actually think Cruz INTENTIONALLY alienated himself from NY. Knowing Trump was going to win NY regardless, he decided to completely punt that state in the hopes of drawing more of the midwest and swing votes. The fact that he was unable to really gain an advantage in those states was his true downfall, but I don't think he was competing in NY regardless.
This. Most people don't realize how limited the President's power is when it comes to the budget, or things such as education and welfare which are MOSTLY handled/paid for at the state level for welfare and the county level for education. Issues such as gay rights and abortion deal with the legislative branch and the President has almost no control over these issues. So I really don't care what the President's stance is on these issues.
However, the ONE area where he has control is over the military. Granted, he cannot "declare war". However, we don't really do that anymore. We send troops over under the auspice of humanitarian intervention, as a state of emergency, etc. which justifies not declaring war. Also, it can be argued that terrorism groups are not a sovereign state and as you can only declare war sovereign state v. sovereign state our conflicts against them is not actual war.
Therefore, the ONLY issue I care about is how I think the President will fare as commander-in-chief. I think both Cruz and Trump are trigger happy, particularly Cruz. I would never vote for Cruz because of his religious ideology. Trump isn't as bad as Cruz because while Trump is apparently motivated by power and greed, I don't find that to be as scary as a religious fundamentalist because ultimately Trump will do what he thinks is best for the nation, even if his views are warped. Cruz is going to do what he thinks is best for his GOD/RELIGION, nation be damned because in his eyes we should all be fundies like him anyway. That scares me. Clinton is more or less a wall street shill so I think she will intervene if it serves the national elite. Although I do think she is rational and more experienced than the other candidates. That leaves Bernie or a third party candidate who I would feel safe under. As it appears Clinton will win the democratic party nomination, she is the lesser of the evils. I like what Mark Cuban said, "ABC ("Anybody But Cruz"). I don't think even Trump will be as bad as Cruz.