Donald Trump for President?

Tools    





Thanks for posting that Gunslinger

If we're talking about our politics now. I'm not a moderate or liberal or conservative. I'm a conundrum. I'm both extremely liberal and extremely right wing at the same time. I'm serious about that. There's no way any one candidate suits my views.

SlappyDavis, sorry I wasn't trying to be dismissive. I thought you were dismissing what I said when you went to the example of the American Indians. Just a miscommunication I guess...As I thought we were both talking about more modern immigration policy, I.E. the influx of Irish into the USA. BTW I agree with you that the Native Americans really got screwed.



Unfortunately we can't go back in time and undo what has already occurred. The only reality we have to work with is now and the idea of reparations to all those peoples victimized by Manifest Destiny is not realistic since neither the victims nor the perpetrators are alive.
I'll agree that the idea of reparations is murky in execution (at best). At least in a direct sense such as "X disenfranchised group gets Y amount of money", though trying to assist X in a general sense does make sense (if it's not done in a way that unjustly injures another group, though what is just in this case has a wide window of interpretation).

With that said, a checkered past is not a justification to throw security out the window, disregard systems of governance, ignore active laws, or reward people who break the law.
I agree, I don't think the history necessarily means that we can't have strong immigration policies (I think it should be decided fairly separately from that, although there should be some considerations for the harm done during those bad times; but that is indeed something separate). So while it probably shouldn't be used as a way to say that there should be open borders, I also don't think that the specific historical context we're talking about should be used as an argument for closed borders either (other historical facts can certainly matter). I just believe it's important to recognize that even compared to other subjective feeling laws, the first-come-first-legal idea can be especially superficial, and IMO not strong enough to fully plant a strong idea of what immigration should be (in either direction, open or closed borders).

SlappyDavis, sorry I wasn't trying to be dismissive. I thought you were dismissing what I said when you went to the example of the American Indians. Just a miscommunication I guess...As I thought we were both talking about more modern immigration policy, I.E. the influx of Irish into the USA. BTW I agree with you that the Native Americans really got screwed.
Understandable, I had the feeling there must have been a misunderstanding between us because you've (and most of the others I've disagreed with) been consistently equitable to me during my interactions on this board.



Epiphany's Avatar
BANNED
Comparing Trump to Hitler is just plain silly. Any one that has read Mein Kampf understands that. Sure, let's eliminate borders like the European Union did and what a mess we would have on our hands. Australia has the tightest immigration laws in the world.
They have 20 million people on a continent the size of North America and it's 500 million. To get into Australia either you have to have lots of money or an occupation that is of benefit to the country. Great idea and it works.
I listened to Obama's speeches for hours and was dumbfounded that he could speak for hours and not say any thing. He promised change and unity and all we got was division and insecurity. Our national debt went up the roof and we became the laughing stock of the world in terms of failed foreign policy.
Now, Hillary Clinton threatens to occupy the White House and continue those same failed policies. What, eight years was not enough?
This is a person that has been caught in lie after lie and not just as a Secretary Of State. And this is the person who will win the Democratic nomination.
So, who is the alternative to Hillary. Ted Cruz? He clearly does not have the public support outside the Republican party and probably does not even have the Republican majority. How can he beat Hillary?
Whatever outlandish stuff Trump says, he is a successful businessman with contacts all over the world. He could form an outstanding Cabinet and would have a tough policy against illegal immigration and Isis and no, that does not make him a racist.
What happened in France is just a prelude to what will happen in USA if national security is not beefed up.
Trump will win the Republican nomination and if he selects the right running mate, he would beat Hillary. Someone like Ben Carson, who would steal some of Hillary's democratic votes and lock in the undecideds).
We could talk what if all day but the reality as it is unfolding will be Hillary vs. Trump and I, for one, will take Trump any day.
This country needs an urgent sense of identity, otherwise it will collapse like the Soviet Union did. The thing is, Russia found a Putin to restore it's power and who do we have?



Supported your position well you have, Master Yoda

Respect your reasoning I do

Finding out who you support, the last step is
It'll depend on who ends up running. If some third-party conservative option runs, probably them. If not, probably Gary Johnson.

Elections are not just about the candidates in front of us: they're about the long-term future of the nation and the respective parties, as well. You don't burn every bridge to win the next one.

Easier to destroy someone, than support someone it is
I suppose there's some truth to this, but let's be honest: Trump doesn't look bad because people are unfairly focusing on his fault, if that's the implication. He looks bad because he keeps saying and doing indefensible, inconsistent things. I'm merely listing them.

And I think the fact that his supporters seem to really not want to talk about these things indicates that they're trying to turn him into something he isn't. They're desperate for a champion and want to believe they've found one, no matter how much evidence we amass that shows him to be a terrible standard-bearer for their amorphous cause.



They have 20 million people on a continent the size of North America and it's 500 million. To get into Australia either you have to have lots of money or an occupation that is of benefit to the country. Great idea and it works.
I think the fact that they're basically a giant island might have something to do with that.

I listened to Obama's speeches for hours and was dumbfounded that he could speak for hours and not say any thing. He promised change and unity and all we got was division and insecurity. Our national debt went up the roof and we became the laughing stock of the world in terms of failed foreign policy.
See, this is where I get really confused: how could someone say this about Obama...and then vote for the guy who says the same five phrases over and over? Trump routinely gives long, rambling answers that contain virtually no content. His answer to everything is that we have to "make better deals."

And since you mentioned national debt, Trump refuses to touch entitlements and can't go into any detail about how the actual numbers in his plans (and I use that word very loosely) will work. He's proposed savings in departments that are literally mathematically impossible. When this was finally shown to him during one of the debates, he rambled some more and said we'd cut elsewhere with (and this is a direct quote) "various things."

If you're tired of empty talk and huge, unrealistic promises, this is the last dude you would vote for.

Trump will win the Republican nomination and if he selects the right running mate, he would beat Hillary. Someone like Ben Carson, who would steal some of Hillary's democratic votes and lock in the undecideds).
It will definitely not "lock in the undecideds" and I'll bet it would win over very few black voters (black Republicans in statewide races don't generally make huge inroads into black vote). Even the phrase "lock in" seems weird here, because every poll we have among independents in advance of the general shows Trump getting absolutely killed, so it's not as if he's successfully wooing them and just needs to close the deal.

This country needs an urgent sense of identity, otherwise it will collapse like the Soviet Union did. The thing is, Russia found a Putin to restore it's power and who do we have?
They collapsed because they didn't have a "sense of identity"? And here I thought it was, you know, Communism.



Epiphany's Avatar
BANNED
Yoda, if there is no viable alternative to Trump that can realistically defeat Hillary, does that mean that you would not vote? It's admirable to have idealistic and ethical standards but how pragmatic are they for the cards we are dealt?



Epiphany's Avatar
BANNED
Communism is alive and well in China precisely because they have a sense of identity. You might want to call it something else.
Soviet Union collapsed because of separatism spurned on by the West and it's support of Gorbachev. So now, because Trump is not specific enough on some issues, you are comparing him to some one that was vague about every thing? Trump is very specific about the major problems we are faced with. You may not agree with him and you may not like him, but you for sure know where he stands.



I have a few responses to that.

First, you may not have been suggesting this, but I'm not an idealist about this stuff, and you don't have to be to draw the line here. The question he loses me on is not "does this candidate live up to my most idealistic standards?" but "does this candidate blatantly violate my most basic ones?"

Second, I keep hearing this argument from Trump supporters, that we need to vote for him to stop Hillary, and I keep thinking: where was this two months ago? Trump has routinely polled the worst among her in hypothetical general election matchups. So they push a candidate that gives us perhaps the worst chance to win, then say we have to vote for them to make sure we don't lose? Sounds like it's not about stopping Hillary, but just about whatever argument happens to benefit Trump at that particular stage in the process.

Third, this:

Elections are not just about the candidates in front of us: they're about the long-term future of the nation and the respective parties, as well. You don't burn every bridge to win the next one.
Losing elections is bad. Losing the argument is worse.

I don't trust anybody who doesn't have a line, who doesn't have a point at which they will refuse to vote for their "side." If you don't have something a Republican or Democrat could say or do to cause you not to vote for them, then you don't have a belief system or an ideology: you just have a tribe.



So now, because Trump is not specific enough on some issues, you are comparing him to some one that was vague about every thing?
"Some issues"? Shall I list them? He is way, way less specific on policy than Obama was. It's not close.

Trump is very specific about the major problems we are faced with.
Well, first, notice you say he's specific about the problems. Not the solutions.

Second: he's not even specific about those. He's unbelievably vague about them: he criticizes things as "bad deals." This is pretty much the extent of his critique. He then repeats this over and over, but he's almost never specific about any of it. I can show you literally dozens of examples.

You may not agree with him and you may not like him, but you for sure know where he stands.
We do?

On healthcare, he's been all over the place: first he's for single-payer, then he's for the mandate, then he's NOT for the mandate but he IS for covering preexisting conditions.

On immigration, he adopts the Sessions plan. Then he says he's changing his mind on work visas in the middle of a debate (direct quote: "I'm changing. I'm changing."). Then immediately after that same debate his campaign says he's not actually changing.

On the budget, he says he'll save $300 billion by cutting drug costs. The entire section he's talking about costs less than a third of that, so this is quite literally impossible. When confronted with this, he says he'll make non-specific cuts elsewhere to "various things."

Meanwhile, we have multiple sources telling us that he's saying, behind closed doors, that he doesn't really mean everything he's saying.

In what universe is this a guy you "for sure know where he stands"?



Epiphany's Avatar
BANNED
But that's exactly what you have in the US now, a bunch of tribes and that call for unity was deceptively all ready used.
I don't trust polls so my vote is not swayed by them. Trump has all ready proved a lot of early polls wrong. And the media is still spreading lies and marching to the tune of self interests.
His belief system is making money and making deals and I believe he is a good at both. He is also a fast learner and capable enough to stand up to any one and that is precisely what we as a country need at this point in time.
Threats like North Korea and Isis could very soon turn us into a nuclear wasteland and competing global markets could very soon create a financial collapse of USA. When faced with that, I'd rather go kicking and screaming for some one that just might save us from that, rather then quietly going into the night with a whimper and a belief that good always triumphs.



But that's exactly what you have in the US now, a bunch of tribes and that call for unity was deceptively all ready used.
I'm not asking what "the US" has. I'm asking what you have. You, and each individual Trump supporter. Do you have a belief system he can even theoretically violate? Can he say or do anything that'll cause you not to vote for him, or does anyone from the right party get a vote just because?

I don't trust polls so my vote is not swayed by them. Trump has all ready proved a lot of early polls wrong.
Actually, the opposite is true: the early polls showed him doing fairly well, and a lot of us were skeptical of them.

Also, primary polling is notoriously much harder than general election polling. There's certainly a lot of uncertainty about polls this far out, but the favorable/unfavorable numbers are very stark, and we're talking about historically bad numbers.

His belief system is making money and making deals and I believe he is a good at both.
There's actually a pretty good reason to doubt even that: he inherited a lot of money, and it looks like he'd be even richer if he'd just invested it in boring old index funds. He's also conspicuously refused to release his financial details (and offered completely silly/implausible reasons why he can't). He's even admitted, under oath, that his descriptions of his net worth fluctuate with his mood. So there's ample evidence to suggest his fortune is wildly exaggerated and/or not the byproduct of an exceptional business acumen.

It's also not clear what part of this alleged skillset is supposed to be transferable to governance, either. On numerous occasions he's simply left other investors holding the bag. Who's that going to be if he's President?

He is also a fast learner and capable enough to stand up to any one and that is precisely what we as a country need at this point in time.
He has four high-profile bankruptcies, all based on the same mistakes. Far from being a fast learner, his business history suggests he's ridiculously stubborn.

It also shows he's prone to racking up debt on huge promises that never materialize. Does that sound familiar?

Threats like North Korea and Isis could very soon turn us into a nuclear wasteland and competing global markets could very soon create a financial collapse of USA. When faced with that, I'd rather go kicking and screaming for some one that just might save us from that, rather then quietly going into the night with a whimper and a belief that good always triumphs.
I have no idea what any of this means, but I can't help but notice how vague and unfalsifiable it is.



Epiphany's Avatar
BANNED
It's like you have a set idea of what a political candidate should be and the answers he should have ready and obviously Trump does not fit your mold. He is not a politician. He is add libing as he goes along.
So you would ignore the global doom and gloom because it's not utopia?
North Korean nuclear tests don't mean any thing? Isis expansion in the Middle East and Africa and the radicalization of Europeans and westerners does not pose a global threat? The collapse of the banking system a few years ago was irrelevant? Chinese maneuvers in the South China Sea and it's posturing against Japan and the Philippines not a problem?
I know that Trump would not have a problem sitting with Putin and forming an alliance if necessary. I trust that what Trump does not know and can not tell you now, he will figure out and assemble the best minds to deal with it. Yes, he has failed many times, but time and time again he has risen. He is a survivor and not just on a small scale. I expect him to rise to the challenge and better America and restore it's place in the world as a respected leader. Any thing else and I will fail miserably in my expectation. You apparently don't even have a candidate so all your lofty aspirations are just confined to your mind.
In my mind I don't see any one out there except Trump capable of restoring America and keeping it safer and that's why he has my vote.



-KhaN-'s Avatar
I work for Keyser Soze. He feels you owe him.
North Korean nuclear tests don't mean any thing? Isis expansion in the Middle East and Africa
More than few countries performed different kinds of nuclear tests and what do you want to do about NK? Invasion? You think they wouldn't launch what they have then? Just watch your economy and way of life crumble under a war that can't be won. What would Trump do about them? Talk them into giving away their nukes? I doubt he is that good of a negotiator, even if by some miracle that could be done, Iran is close to building nukes (if they didn't do it already), Russia has lots and lots of them and so on.

Isis is in decline if anything, Assad and Putin made great progress lately and most of Isis controlled areas are now just deserts with small populations, they have been crippled by Russian bombing.


and the radicalization of Europeans and westerners does not pose a global threat?
European radicalization? How many wars did USA fight in modern history? And how many of those were defensive? One? Maybe two? You go to war all over the world, under all kinds of excuses. Your country is known as biggest terrorist organization...


Chinese maneuvers in the South China Sea and it's posturing against Japan and the Philippines not a problem?
Again, everything Russia, China and India do combined is not even close to how much of similar actions USA performs.

Don't get me wrong, every power has it's interests, it's just that USA did and still dose a lot more than other 3 combined and you really can't do much about Chinese, it's their sphere of influence, only way would be war, and nobody would go to that kind of war for a third country.
__________________
“By definition, you have to live until you die. Better to make that life as complete and enjoyable an experience as possible, in case death is shite, which I suspect it will be.”



It's like you have a set idea of what a political candidate should be and the answers he should have ready and obviously Trump does not fit your mold.
Look at my posts, dude: where do I make the argument that he can't be President because he doesn't fit the typical mold? Nowhere. Nothing about being nice, or sounding slick, or any of the other things you'd expect a prototypical politician to be. Instead, you see arguments about simple coherence and basic decency. Those are the lines he crosses, not the superficial ones you're talking about.

He is not a politician. He is add libing as he goes along.
And yet two posts ago you were telling me you knew "for sure" where he stands. So which is it?

So you would ignore the global doom and gloom because it's not utopia?
North Korean nuclear tests don't mean any thing? Isis expansion in the Middle East and Africa and the radicalization of Europeans and westerners does not pose a global threat? The collapse of the banking system a few years ago was irrelevant? Chinese maneuvers in the South China Sea and it's posturing against Japan and the Philippines not a problem?
"Here's a bunch of stuff wrong with the world" is in no way a defense of the implicit assumption that Trump is the solution to it.

I trust that what Trump does not know and can not tell you now, he will figure out and assemble the best minds to deal with it.
In other words, you can't tell us how or why, he just will, because he's so great? We have a name for that sort of thing.

Yes, he has failed many times, but time and time again he has risen. He is a survivor and not just on a small scale.
"Survivor" isn't the word I'd used to describe someone who inherited $200 million. And I wouldn't say someone "survived" a business failure when it was of their own making, they repeated the mistake several times afterwards, and ultimately left their partners holding the bag.

You apparently don't even have a candidate so all your lofty aspirations are just confined to your mind.
Lofty aspirations like "world leaders should not mock disabled people" or "politicians shouldn't propose mathematically impossible budget solutions." Darn me and my pie-in-the-sky idealism!

In my mind I don't see any one out there except Trump capable of restoring America and keeping it safer and that's why he has my vote.
Nobody can stop you from believing whatever you want, but I can point out that the belief has no basis in evidence.

You seem to have an elaborate construction of what this man is that isn't actually based on his words, deeds, or personal history.



...
I know that Trump would not have a problem sitting with Putin and forming an alliance if necessary.
jeez just as I thought Trump on his own would be scary enough, the thought of Trump and Putin together makes my blood run cold!



Epiphany's Avatar
BANNED
Just curious. I was looking at your profile trying to figure out who you are and what you stand for and I see that you've been on here almost 16 years and you are 31? Typo?



Communism is alive and well in China precisely because they have a sense of identity. You might want to call it something else.
That's not Communism in China. That's a pragmatic acceptance by the populace that to have any other governance of their country at this stage would lead to chaos. Their time will come within the next 30-50 years where none of the population will have lived under the closed China, then they will turn over their leadership.



-KhaN-'s Avatar
I work for Keyser Soze. He feels you owe him.
jeez just as I thought Trump on his own would be scary enough, the thought of Trump and Putin together makes my blood run cold!
Never understood why people in the West connect Trump with Putin so much. One is capable politician that has as much pre-knowledge as one can get (KGB) and has greatly improved his country, other one is Trump.



Epiphany's Avatar
BANNED

You seem to have an elaborate construction of what this man is that isn't actually based on his words, deeds, or personal history.
Yes, I'm just one of the majority voters in this country that is utterly clueless about Donald Trump, the very man you apparently know so much about!
I am still interested in your specific solutions to some of the problems we discussed and perhaps you can name some individual that you feel confident can get it done. I would have thought you on the conservative side but liberally conflicted.