Donald Trump for President?

Tools    





Party loyalty? I'm not a Republican. I am a independent. Both parties piss me off. I hate it when people insist I am one.

And I am not 100% convinced Trump won't try something stupid like that. He is a New York idiot. He is stubborn enough to double down on half the stuff that comes out of his mouth, so maybe he won't. But I am not 100%. Only one I felt would never flip on gun rights was Cruz since he is from Texas. But Hilary and Bernie I KNOW want to push for gun control. So between the New York nitwits are the glorified court jester, the Socialist loon, and the harpy, I am stuck with the jester.



I'm worried about all three getting into power. But Bernie Sanders and Hilary Clinton are far bigger threats in my eyes.

Both have expressed support for gun control in one form or another with Clinton even advocating for full on weapons confiscation. And as a law enforcement officer, they will look to me to enforce any and all gun seizures. I swore an oatr to uphold and protect the US Constitution on two occasions. Once in the Army, and a second time as a cop. I take that oath VERY seriously. I REFUSE to follow a blatantly unconstitutional order. And if Bernie and Hilary get elected not only will they try like hell to do so, but if they get to put in their nominations for the Supreme Court, they probably will succeed. I can't vote for anyone who would do such a thing.

I can't vote third party in this election since that is essentially a vote for the Democrats. So my options are limited to whoever gets the Republican nomination. Either way I am stockpiling extra ammo.
I'm legitimately interested in your answer Slinger, and not trying to pick a fight. Do you think the legislation being pushed by democrats right now: strict wait times, no second hand dealing, and getting rid of assault rifles, is too much? Or do you feel that is just a slippery slope?
__________________
Letterboxd



I understand party loyalty, but if there was ever a time to take a chance on the other side this may be it.
I think the problem here is that you're approaching this from a fundamentally different perspective (at least from me). You talk about these candidates on a very personal level, by imagining them in tough, non-partisan situations and trying to size up their general leadership qualities.

This is a fine thing to do, and I'm not trying to talk you out of doing it, but for me, the ideas matter. Leadership isn't a policy, it's a skillset: it can be used to further bad ideas or good ones. If you have bad ideas, being a good leader makes you worse, because you'll just be better at implementing the wrong things. And bad ideas don't become better if they come out of the right person's mouth.

Most of being President isn't a character test that exists outside of ideology, like the Cuban Missile Crisis or some other gut check, high-stakes moment. Most of it is having the right ideas and being competent enough to enact them, which is why being right on policy should always be the first consideration.

Do you think Trump has the resolve to ignore public pressure to enact gun control? After someone shoots up a school/public place again, do you think he'd say "No, nothings gonna change"?
This, I think is more compelling, for people in Gunslinger's position. I don't think Trump would totally flip on guns, but he's flipped on a lot, and it's a reasonable thing to ask.



I'm legitimately interested in your answer Slinger, and not trying to pick a fight. Do you think the legislation being pushed by democrats right now: strict wait times, no second hand dealing, and getting rid of assault rifles, is too much? Or do you feel that is just a slippery slope?
Both. They all lead up to confiscation. Which Hilary Clinton has said should be considered. A three day wait for a pistol? Fine. I can get around that with a CHL. But getting rid of "assault rifles" did nothing to reduce crime during the last ban. And Chicago has the highest control in the nation, and routinely has among the highest murder rates. "We need less guns to reduce crime" is a cheap and easy slogan by politicians to make it seem like they care about solving a problem.



I think the problem here is that you're approaching this from a fundamentally different perspective (at least from me). You talk about these candidates on a very personal level, by imagining them in tough, non-partisan situations and trying to size up their general leadership qualities.

This is a fine thing to do, and I'm not trying to talk you out of doing it, but for me, the ideas matter. Leadership isn't a policy, it's a skillset: it can be used to further bad ideas or good ones. If you have bad ideas, being a good leader makes you worse, because you'll just be better at implementing the wrong things. And bad ideas don't become better if they come out of the right person's mouth.

Most of being President isn't a character test that exists outside of ideology, like the Cuban Missile Crisis or some other gut check, high-stakes moment. Most of it is having the right ideas and being competent enough to enact them, which is why being right on policy should always be the first consideration.
I believe Sanders has a more sound skillset than Cruz, Tump, and maybe Clinton too. I believe he will really try to make things better, but not at the expense of our economy collapsing. The character test that you speak of, which as voters we should assume will come, I do trust his competency under pressure over the others.

So when people have put their platform out for the last 20 years, and are unable to deliver, why pay attention to the platform at all to begin with? Its either a bait n switch, or incompetency. I dont feel either from Sanders. Thats why I decide the way I do. Assume catastrophe will occur, and who do you want at the helm if it does. When that happens, then all policies are compromised, and its their leadership forefront.



I really would love for us to get some legitimate policy talk in this thread. I am in no way a hard person to talk policy with. My understanding is on a very elementary level and I tend to want to see things on a very basic level. I just haven't heard anything from Trump supporters resembling policy talk. Even if you support his more outrageous claims, say so. Most of his supporters seem to be blowing that stuff off. I really want to know. I'm not looking for a Trump fight. I have been in enough of those in real life.



Why are you so against him? In a nutshell.
His views on foreign policy is nonexistent. He wants to fix our issues with China and Iran with better deals. When pressed on this he always doubles back. His bigger idea for fighting Isis is to take away their internet. His view on immigration is to ship everyone out of the country and then let them in little by little. His big idea to slow illegal immigration is to finish a wall that has not worked at all. He put forth killing terrorist family members as a legitimate deterent.

I am going into the movies, so I will stop there and let you respond. If you think all of that is just nonsense he has spoutedd, please tell me what his poisotions on these will really be and tell me if anyone running for president should be talking in this manner just to get votes.



None of that really matters much to me because I still like him more than Cruz and Hillary.



I'm against him because he's lied repeatedly, changed positions constantly, talked at length about topics he clearly has no understanding of, has shown a multi-decade habit of over promising and under delivering, has conned ordinary people and investors alike out of money, has insulted or demeaned anyone who's gotten in his way, and has demonstrated a staggering insecurity that is incompatible with the sensible use of power.

Examples of each available on request. None of these are exaggerations.



You forgot the "Well he can't be worse then Hilary or Bernie" Trump supporter.
Hillary is great. She is a professional politician who knows how things work and works with pragmatism without any ideological commitment: she is only interested in maximizing her personal wealth and power. That's a politician I can trust.



None of that really matters much to me because I still like him more than Cruz and Hillary.
What about him appeals to you more than them? Is it just a personality thing? What about his personality appeals to you?



I'm against him because he's an eejit. I would list examples, but really, there's a whole internet full of them. Some are listed in this thread and they're not even the most mental ones, IMO.
__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.