do we start worying about trump for president?

[Nameless Range]

Trump is honest

 

[u1299]

I guess one observation is that I disagree about the "best they have to offer." In the past the Rs had good (reasonable) candidates in McCain and Romney. Paul Ryan is a decent fellow. This year they had a big field, but for some reason positions such as banning Muslims, killing their families, the Mexican judge comments, etc resonated for the Republican voters. I blame the voters for that, and it is quite bothersome to me that that element is so strong in the U.S. Now Trump is fanning this element by saying things like the election will be rigged.

You might argue that Hillary was the best the Ds had to offer as a winnable candidate. She's been working towards that goal for a long time and I think everyone else didn't think it was worth challenging her, her stink notwithstanding. Also, in this environment of divisiveness it is hard to believe a D would want the job. (Ironically, this is somehow blamed on Obama when the Hannity's of the media are constantly spewing the most divisive language possible.) In terms of running the government she has a lot of experience. With her you can argue policies, but at least she isn't inciting violence, she is pragmatic, and she understands government politics. The Hannity clowns have been working on generating discontent with her for a decade since they knew she wanted the presidency. The Rs have been trying to pin something on her for 20+ years and they have not done anything but embarrass themselves in the mind of all but the most ardent R voters. Still, she has a stink so they've been successful.

It is telling that the most popular radio shows are dominated by conservative personalities of very dubious informative value: Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Savage, Beck. The left has MSNBC, but it has a relatively small following. You can argue that NPR's Morning Edition (3rd place) is left leaning, but I've never, not once, tuned in and heard programs infused with phrases like "worst president ever" or "socialist dictator" and then having audience members call in saying the most hate filled crap while the host remains silent. One congressman tried to call Limbaugh an entertainer and suffered backlash. WTF is wrong with those people? Every time an R tries to be reasonable (Boehner) he's vilified by these clowns, not to mention big money trying to steal their primary election. With that kind of conservative voter "informational system" no wonder the Rs wound up with a guy who isn't bothered being called a xenophobe because he is confident that his voters don't know what that means.

So at least the Rs had decent candidates step up to the plate, but the Republican "best voters" chose Trump. And they screwed up the chance to beat Obama twice. I can't blame the R party for that.

Best on the mark post I've ever witnessed. Couldn't have said it any better so I won't even try. Others take notice, Rob nailed it.

 

[airlocksniffer]

Trump is honest, Hillary is not.

 

[beginnerhunter]

Ah yes, climate change, the scientific litmus test. What does Sci-Am think about the left's own views on vaccines, GMOs, hunting conservation, and organic food? What about the left's insistance on expensive, unreliable, fossil-fuel backed renewables like wind/solar? Does Sci-Am think zero-carbon, abundant nuclear energy is just too dangerous? Or are they trying to avoid offending the foolish science deniers on the left?

That's my biggest problem popular science, they criticize (correctly) the folks on the right but turn a blind eye when they look to the left.

 

[James Riley]

So lying is okay for Trump but not so for Clinton?

I'd have to say yes. Trump will point his finger at America and say he might very well lie to us. He did it. Clinton, on the other hand, pretends to be better while not trying very hard (well, it may be trying hard for her, but that's not good enough).

Politicians are stuck between a rock and a hard place. People want definitive answers so they get them. Then the politician flexes with the changed circumstances so they are called liars. Then the politician learns to give wish washy answers that don't mean anything. Talking points that are empty. And we give them S for that.

What they need to do is be more like Trump and say "Look, stupid people can love me because they actually believe what I say, or they can hate me because they actually believe what I say. I'm just funnin' with them. The smart people though, I'm talking to them. I'm not funnin. They know what I'm up to. They may hate me for it, or they may love me for it, but at least they aren't taking what I say to some bank."

The military doesn't telegraph the next punch, or bog itself down with some black and white strategy. Neither does a good businessman/woman. You remain nimble, punk the idiots, work with the brains, marshal resources and move forward toward the goal. Trump's goal is to say "I told you so" and leave an enviable legacy. He's not in it for the power or the money or the notoriety. He's got that. He's in it for his kids and to prove people wrong. That's what floats his boat.

However, as is often the case in history, people like him never get the chance. Not because they sabotage themselves. But, rather, because the forces aligned against them are afraid, and evil.

 

[Gr8bawana]

Gr8bawana, You really never get out of Grade School on these discussions do you? John

I'm just using the same exact gradeschool mentality trump uses every time he insults someone or gives them a stupid nickname.

Believe it or not I used to vote republican until I realized they didn't care about us little people. With the idiotic "trickle down" theory, their anti-union positions, giving all the breaks to the wealthy instead of the middle class. Bush and his cronies with their war mangering. Now trump wants to alienate anyone who is not white.

 

[idelkslayer]

Trump and Hillary are essentially the same person. Anyone who believes that either of them cares about anything other than themselves is fooling themselves. Trump doesn't love America, he loves himself, just listen to him talk. He is only interested in taking actions that will benefit himself. Hillary doesn't love America, she would change everything about our once great nation. She is only interested in doing whatever makes her look important. I don't trust either of them any further than I could throw their egos.

It should have been a slam dunk for the Rs to beat Hillary but then they nominated a buffoon and now they'll lose. They could have nominated almost anyone else and it would have been a landslide victory. However, part of me is happy this is happening. Both parties need a wake-up call. The best thing that could happen is for whoever wins to do it with as few votes as possible because the citizens refused to play the 2 party game anymore and either voted 3rd party or exercised the right to protest the options and not vote.

 

[Big Fin]

Looks like this thread is about to derail. Keep it on track. Express your own opinions, but no need to criticize others or make snide personal comments about others when their express their opinions.

 

[RobG]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...8/17/trump-reshuffles-staff-in-his-own-image/

Top that with an advisor who helped the Ukraine rigged elections and another who was just ousted from Fox for sexual harassment... I have to wonder if he wants to throw the race to get even with the Rs for not taking him seriously in the past. Yeah, the extreme wins primaries, but I figured he'd up his class for the general and possibly beat Hillary, but he just brings his game even lower. I watch the news of him like I watched the news of Katrina, the updates to the disaster being painfully slow, but always forthcoming and showing the problem to be worse than originally thought.

I was distracted by Trump's Ruskie Hugger+Workplace Sexual Harasser team so I did not immediately catch that Bannon of the venomous, plain dishonest, scummy "information" source called Breitbart is now running Trump's show. I can only guess Trump's envisions Alex Jones as Secretary of State and Hannity for the White House director of communications. How can anyone charged with running a diverse country legitimize these masters of divisiveness and misinformation?

I have to say something about the people not wanting to vote third party because they think it is a vote for Hillary. That's not true; in terms of affecting the election results it is equivalent to not voting. More importantly it explicitly states that your normal party's candidate is repugnant. It is one thing to have a low voter turnout because of apathy, but quite another to have a good turnout of people who want to make a statement about the type of candidates needed to earn your vote.

 

[James Riley]

It is one thing to have a low voter turnout because of apathy, but quite another to have a good turnout of people who want to make a statement about the type of candidates needed to earn your vote.

This ^^^. That's why it is important that everyone vote. So the politicians don't mistake disgust for apathy.

I was going for Stein until I found these folks today http://www.progressivebullmoose.party/. (Okay, so I'm slow and should have spent more time looking around and found them earlier.) Anyway, my internet sucks so I could not find if they had a candidate. Anyone? If they do, I'll check him/her out and maybe vote that way. If they don't, I'll volunteer. Then you can all hate on me. Talk about "BULLY!"

 

[airlocksniffer]

This ^^^. That's why it is important that everyone vote. So the politicians don't mistake disgust for apathy.

I was going for Stein until I found these folks today http://www.progressivebullmoose.party/. (Okay, so I'm slow and should have spent more time looking around and found them earlier.) Anyway, my internet sucks so I could not find if they had a candidate. Anyone? If they do, I'll check him/her out and maybe vote that way. If they don't, I'll volunteer. Then you can all hate on me. Talk about "BULLY!"

Man if they were fielding a candidate I'd be all over that.

EDIT: I don't think direct elect of SCOTUS is a very good idea though.

 

[Nemont]

How anyone could cast a ballot for either of these two is something I cannot fathom. Trump just isn't the kind of guy I want to have to listen to every night for the next fours years. He isn't anything special and he certainly doesn't represent my brand of conservative politics. Hillary should be indicted and since she is not, every American with a firing brain cell should have already indicted her in their own mind.

The down ticket races is where the real rubber meets the road because control of the Senate is going to be more important than ever. So I will be writing in the candidate of my choice. Not that is matters much because Montana will go to Trump anyway and he will get our whopping 3 electoral college votes. He is trailing badly in Virginia and North Carolina, which is are must win states for him. He has put the solidly Red State of Georgia in play now and is behind Hillary there. In addition he is 6pts down in Florida and there simply is no path to the White House without him winning Florida.


Nemont

 

[Washington Hunter]

I think this sums the situation up pretty well:

 

[James Riley]

EDIT: I don't think direct elect of SCOTUS is a very good idea though.

Yeah, someone commented on that likewise on their site. I agree. It's difficult to explain how I'd like to see it without coming across as an ivory tower, intellectual elitist snob, but the American Bar Association, law school professors, other justices/judges, philosophers and those versed in logical argument should screen every decision ever written and vet with a fine toothed comb looking for a sharp legal mind who can also write. Their collective report should be submitted to and considered by the Senate and the appointing President. We don't need common sense: we need extraordinary sense, kind of like many of our founding fathers: highly educated. None of that is required by the Constitution though.

 

[noharleyyet]

Interesting...numerous comments about established intelligencia's concerted propagandizing for end game divisiveness. We acknowledge the existence while succumbing.

 

[jryoung]

It's not just Donald Trump's view of scientific issues, that's the Republican party's views. Who knows, Trump may not even believe what he says about the climate change issue and other things, but he has to say those things or he couldn't have been the Republican nominee. And I don't care. We don't need a president who is a scientist. We need a president who will keep our country safe and improve our economy.

If he doesn't believe the things he says about one issue, what makes you think he believes anything he says about any issue? I hope he doesn't believe he can utilize Chapter 11...

 

[jryoung]

Interesting...numerous comments about established intelligencia's concerted propagandizing for end game divisiveness. We acknowledge the existence while succumbing.

I'd like to buy you a beer....and it certainly would not be a wasted beer. LOL

 

[James Riley]

We acknowledge the existence while succumbing.

They're smart that way. Don't know how they do it but they do. Probably something like those shrink tests where people go along with the majority, shock people, etc. Doesn't hurt their cause when they down-play critical and analytical thinking in our schools. Better to have good little consumers and worker bees. Except for them, of course. Only the best for them.

 

[airlocksniffer]

If he doesn't believe the things he says about one issue, what makes you think he believes anything he says about any issue? I hope he doesn't believe he can utilize Chapter 11...

+1 Internetz for you good sir.

 

[Washington Hunter]

If he doesn't believe the things he says about one issue, what makes you think he believes anything he says about any issue? I hope he doesn't believe he can utilize Chapter 11...

I don't know whether he actually means what he says regarding the global warming issue, and I don't care, because as I already said, it's a non-issue, at least as far as a presidential candidate is concerned. I do trust him on the issues that matter, number one being immigration. On that one issue alone he has my vote.

He's for enforcing our current immigration laws, while Obama has kept the borders open and Hillary will be even more liberal with the non-enforcement of our immigration laws. She also wants to allow more Syrian refugees into the country, people who will be supported by our tax dollars, while we already have plenty of our own citizens who are homeless and hungry.

I believe in Trump on the issues that matter to ME. Even if I didn't there's NO WAY I could ever vote for Hillary. She's anti-gun and anti-hunter, just that should take her out of consideration for anyone on this site. Soooo many reasons to not vote for Crooked Hillary. It's a joke that she's even allowed to run.