Will Trump win again???

[Apollyon]

"Fear: Trump in the White House" by Bob Woodward is $2.99 on Kindle today:

Amazon product

Woodward was the keynote speaker at ACEP 3 years ago. In one word - horrible. The dude was just dreadful. Boring as hell, not fun, mean - just hitting on zero cylinders.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted171991]

Woodward was the keynote speaker at ACEP 3 years ago. In one word - horrible. The dude was just dreadful. Boring as hell, not fun, mean - just hitting on zero cylinders.

He's a serious guy, though not considered too bright. I haven't been impressed either whenever I saw him live on TV. This book seems not to be meant to entertain, just to present (scary) facts. What I appreciate is that most of it is based on first-hand recorded interviews.

 

[nitroglycerine]

Watching the democratic debates and can't help but thinking: this is working great so far for Donald!
Regardless of one's political persuasion, is it good for the country to have 4 more years of Trump?

I hope he wins. The USA is the only western country which still has the hope not to become a stalinist dictatorship.

 

[sevenup]

UBI is a fine idea in theory, especially if it replaces all or most the other welfare programs, but isn’t UBI incompatible with massive illegal immigration? You also have to wonder where it will stop. Once people get a taste of UBI they’ll be voting in people promising higher and higher UBI. Ultimately it is wealth transfer program, which is not so bad at it’s starting point, but would almost certainly get out of control over time.

Andrew Yang's Freedom Dividend will be $1000 per month for citizens over the age of 18. Illegal immigrants and other non citizens would not be eligible. Moreover, illegal immigrants would not qualify for citizenship for at least 18 years under Yang's plan.

The deep red state of Alaska has already had universal basic income since 1982 using oil money-- they have not had the slippery slope problem that you are describing.

It’s UBI + VAT, so it’s only a extra grand a month if your VAT payments are less than 12k/yr. For people spending over 120k per year on items subject to VAT, it’s just a tax increase.
It’s similar to instituting the ‘pre-bate’ of the fair tax plan but without the fair tax advantage of making the tax code simple and fair.

The 10% VAT will be weighted towards luxury goods versus consumer goods. For a two person household, you would need to spend $240k a year on items subject to VAT in order to cancel out the Freedom Dividend. Frankly, if you are spending $240k a year on mostly luxury goods, you are probably doing pretty darn well. Believe it or not, some of the wealthiest people on the planet support universal basic income including Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Mark Zuckerberg, and Elon Musk, who recently endorsed Andrew Yang for president.


FAQ's regarding Yang's Freedom Dividend: What is the Freedom Dividend? - Andrew Yang for President

 

[deleted50478]

Andrew Yang's Freedom Dividend will be $1000 per month for citizens over the age of 18. Illegal immigrants and other non citizens would not be eligible. Moreover, illegal immigrants would not qualify for citizenship for at least 18 years under Yang's plan.

The deep red state of Alaska has already had universal basic income since 1982 using oil money-- they have not had the slippery slope problem that you are describing.



The 10% VAT will be weighted towards luxury goods versus consumer goods. For a two person household, you would need to spend $240k a year on items subject to VAT in order to cancel out the Freedom Dividend. Frankly, if you are spending $240k a year on mostly luxury goods, you are probably doing pretty darn well. Believe it or not, some of the wealthiest people on the planet support universal basic income including Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Mark Zuckerberg, and Elon Musk, who recently endorsed Andrew Yang for president.


FAQ's regarding Yang's Freedom Dividend: What is the Freedom Dividend? - Andrew Yang for President

Do away with birthright citizenship or illegal immigrants would get UBI because of their ‘American’ children.

Alaska’s fund is different in several ways. The most important difference off the top of my head is that Alaska isn’t capable of running unlimited deficits or of printing money, so their permanent fund actually has to be paid for. UBI would not have that limitation.

 

[Mikkel]

Andrew Yang's Freedom Dividend will be $1000 per month for citizens over the age of 18. Illegal immigrants and other non citizens would not be eligible. Moreover, illegal immigrants would not qualify for citizenship for at least 18 years under Yang's plan.

The deep red state of Alaska has already had universal basic income since 1982 using oil money-- they have not had the slippery slope problem that you are describing.



The 10% VAT will be weighted towards luxury goods versus consumer goods. For a two person household, you would need to spend $240k a year on items subject to VAT in order to cancel out the Freedom Dividend. Frankly, if you are spending $240k a year on mostly luxury goods, you are probably doing pretty darn well. Believe it or not, some of the wealthiest people on the planet support universal basic income including Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Mark Zuckerberg, and Elon Musk, who recently endorsed Andrew Yang for president.


FAQ's regarding Yang's Freedom Dividend: What is the Freedom Dividend? - Andrew Yang for President

Andrew Yang sounds like a white supremacist.

Are you seriously in agreement with his policy proposal of denying illegal immigrants their right to a $1000 monthly check?

 

[d9sccr]

Andrew Yang's Freedom Dividend will be $1000 per month for citizens over the age of 18. Illegal immigrants and other non citizens would not be eligible. Moreover, illegal immigrants would not qualify for citizenship for at least 18 years under Yang's plan.

The deep red state of Alaska has already had universal basic income since 1982 using oil money-- they have not had the slippery slope problem that you are describing.



The 10% VAT will be weighted towards luxury goods versus consumer goods. For a two person household, you would need to spend $240k a year on items subject to VAT in order to cancel out the Freedom Dividend. Frankly, if you are spending $240k a year on mostly luxury goods, you are probably doing pretty darn well. Believe it or not, some of the wealthiest people on the planet support universal basic income including Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Mark Zuckerberg, and Elon Musk, who recently endorsed Andrew Yang for president.


FAQ's regarding Yang's Freedom Dividend: What is the Freedom Dividend? - Andrew Yang for President

In principal I don't really disagree with what Yang's proposing, assuming automation really is the great destroyer of jobs he is predicting. In reality, I'm not sure how anyone can be 100% certain automation is going to kill jobs the way it's being purported to do. In the past, technologic advancement has always killed jobs and created more. Why will automation be any different?

The other issues I take with Yang's proposal is that there's only one direction that dividend is going to go--up, up, and up. His current plan is that anyone taking the dividend is going to be kicked out of other assistance programs, thereby shrinking those programs into nonexistence. So that's $12k/yr, no questions asked, no other assistance. In practice that sounds great, but as the link below shows, people on welfare are receiving much more than $12k/yr in assistance. How's that going to play out? Either they aren't going to lose those welfare benefits or the dividend is going to increase, all of which is just more spending from an ever-growing government.

I do like Yang, in large part because he's willing to talk and listen with people across the political spectrum. I'm not sure that another 4 or 8 years of extreme swings right or left is going to leave much of a country left

The Work versus Welfare Trade-Off: 2013

Welfare benefits continue to outpace the income that most recipients can expect to earn from an entry‐level job, and the balance between welfare and work may actually have grown worse in recent years.

www.cato.org

 

[deleted171991]

You can't make this up:

Trump says he wanted to give himself Medal of Honor

The offhand remark from the president came during his address to the 75th annual national convention of American Veterans.

www.politico.com

Also, this may matter in 2020:

Faithless elector: A court ruling just changed how we pick our president

The decision could give a single elector the power to decide the outcome of a presidential election — if the popular vote results in an apparent Electoral College tie.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[agammaglobulin]

Bernie Sanders’s ‘Green New Deal’: A $16 Trillion Climate Plan (Published 2019)

Mr. Sanders’s climate change proposal calls for the United States to eliminate fossil fuel use by 2050. “We must be extraordinarily aggressive,” he said in an interview.

www.nytimes.com

"$2.3 trillion would be collected from new income tax revenues from new jobs in the renewable energy industry, among other measures." Taking money from jobs that don't exist...

What a joke

 

[chessknt]

Andrew Yang's Freedom Dividend will be $1000 per month for citizens over the age of 18. Illegal immigrants and other non citizens would not be eligible. Moreover, illegal immigrants would not qualify for citizenship for at least 18 years under Yang's plan.

The deep red state of Alaska has already had universal basic income since 1982 using oil money-- they have not had the slippery slope problem that you are describing.



The 10% VAT will be weighted towards luxury goods versus consumer goods. For a two person household, you would need to spend $240k a year on items subject to VAT in order to cancel out the Freedom Dividend. Frankly, if you are spending $240k a year on mostly luxury goods, you are probably doing pretty darn well. Believe it or not, some of the wealthiest people on the planet support universal basic income including Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Mark Zuckerberg, and Elon Musk, who recently endorsed Andrew Yang for president.


FAQ's regarding Yang's Freedom Dividend: What is the Freedom Dividend? - Andrew Yang for President

You might want to read some news on Alaska--that is exactly what just happened. They voted in a clown governor who wanted to triple the annual payment by disbanding their higher education system. They started a recall effort and it has been a huge debacle.

 

[deleted171991]

That's the eternal cycle of human stupidity, because the plebs never learn from history. Human nature is as predictable as day coming after night, and night after day.

 

[sevenup]

In principal I don't really disagree with what Yang's proposing, assuming automation really is the great destroyer of jobs he is predicting. In reality, I'm not sure how anyone can be 100% certain automation is going to kill jobs the way it's being purported to do. In the past, technologic advancement has always killed jobs and created more. Why will automation be any different?

Multiple studies have shown that there is a correlation between regions (MI, WI, PA, etc) with the most automation (i.e. industrial robots) and their likelihood to vote for Trump in the 2016 election. Automation leading to job loss likely contributed at least in part to these purple states turning red. As we all know, Trump spent much of his time campaigning on these economic anxieties.

Yes, new jobs are eventually created but usually not for the blue collar workers who lost their jobs due to automation. Moreover, these new jobs are usually fewer in number, require higher levels of education, and often not located near where the original jobs were lost. Retraining programs, e.g. recent efforts to train coal miners to become computer programmers in Appalachia, have had dismal success rates.

It's unbelievable that none of the current slate of Democratic candidates besides Andrew Yang are addressing these economic issues. I highly recommend reading his book "The War on Normal People."

 

[Mikkel]

It's unbelievable that none of the current slate of Democratic candidates besides Andrew Yang are addressing these economic issues. I highly recommend reading his book "The War on Normal People."

Andrew Yang basically adheres to white supremacist orthodoxy by denying illegal immigrants their right to a $1000 monthly check.

Yang is essentially treating them like second class citizens.

 

[deleted171991]

It's world class dumb to think that one can retrain lifetime manual laborers into (computer) programmers (or any other highly intellectual job). Who was the ***** who thought that out?

The sad part is that those people are being lied to again and again, and they are not smart enough to figure it out until it's too late. Every time.

 

[d9sccr]

Multiple studies have shown that there is a correlation between regions (MI, WI, PA, etc) with the most automation (i.e. industrial robots) and their likelihood to vote for Trump in the 2016 election. Automation leading to job loss likely contributed at least in part to these purple states turning red. As we all know, Trump spent much of his time campaigning on these economic anxieties.

Yes, new jobs are eventually created but usually not for the blue collar workers who lost their jobs due to automation. Moreover, these new jobs are usually fewer in number, require higher levels of education, and often not located near where the original jobs were lost. Retraining programs, e.g. recent efforts to train coal miners to become computer programmers in Appalachia, have had dismal success rates.

It's unbelievable that none of the current slate of Democratic candidates besides Andrew Yang are addressing these economic issues. I highly recommend reading his book "The War on Normal People."

Do you have evidence to back this up? Yang keeps comparing the next wave of automation to the Industrial Revolution, which put a lot of blue collar workers out of business and also made a lot more blue collar jobs. I'm not merely talking about the "learn to code" failure. Like I said, in principal I don't really have an issue with what Yang's preaching, I just have my doubts that anyone can forecast what's going to happen to jobs

 

[pgg]

Andrew Yang basically adheres to white supremacist orthodoxy by denying illegal immigrants their right to a $1000 monthly check.

Yang is essentially treating them like second class citizens.

There's a fine line between posting satire to make a coherent point, and thread****ting one strawman after another. If you need help determining which side of that line you're on, let me know.

 

[Mikkel]

There's a fine line between posting satire to make a coherent point, and thread****ting one strawman after another. If you need help determining which side of that line you're on, let me know.

I think it's plain to everyone here that Yang's proposal will 100% have to cover illegal immigrants, otherwise he will be accused of being a white supremacist. The criteria for being a white supremacist has loosened incredibly, and it's no longer satire. There are literally people who I thought were reasonable before who now say all Trump supporters are white supremacists... Why does Yang get a free pass?

 

[MoMoGesiologist]

I think it's plain to everyone here that Yang's proposal will 100% have to cover illegal immigrants, otherwise he will be accused of being a white supremacist. The criteria for being a white supremacist has loosened incredibly, and it's no longer satire. There are literally people who I thought were reasonable before who now say all Trump supporters are white supremacists... Why does Yang get a free pass?

The appropriate response to PGG would have been either “sorry” or “thank you” or to just not say anything. You are digging yourself further into your hole... your weird anti-Yang is a white supremacist hole...

 

[Mikkel]

The appropriate response to PGG would have been either “sorry” or “thank you” or to just not say anything. You are digging yourself further into your hole... your weird anti-Yang is a white supremacist hole...

I didn't call him a white supremacist at all. I said that he seems to be adhering to its tenets, at least as defined by Democrat National Committee members.

The Democratic party is in serious trouble. It has defined white supremacy as:

Not paying for illegal immigrant welfare benefits
Supporting ICE
Not supporting amnesty for illegal immigrants.


Just you wait. If Yang makes it to any final debate for the DNC nomination, his previous support for excluding illegal immigrants from receiving welfare benefits will be used against him by the other DNC candidate.


Or, you know, the DNC can quit jumping the shark. They should start by disavowing their increasingly heated and inflammatory rhetoric against Trump supporters.

 

[deleted50478]

The appropriate response to PGG would have been either “sorry” or “thank you” or to just not say anything. You are digging yourself further into your hole... your weird anti-Yang is a white supremacist hole...

Why is anyone talking about Yang? The Democrats are an anti-democratic, dictatorship of the super-delegates. The people pulling the strings behind the scenes are not for Yang. Case closed.

 

[deleted941485]

Yang is a side show

The more terrifying prospect is a warren - Bernie ticket.

 

[d9sccr]

I didn't call him a white supremacist at all. I said that he seems to be adhering to its tenets, at least as defined by Democrat National Committee members.

The Democratic party is in serious trouble. It has defined white supremacy as:

Not paying for illegal immigrant welfare benefits
Supporting ICE
Not supporting amnesty for illegal immigrants.


Just you wait. If Yang makes it to any final debate for the DNC nomination, his previous support for excluding illegal immigrants from receiving welfare benefits will be used against him by the other DNC candidate.


Or, you know, the DNC can quit jumping the shark. They should start by disavowing their increasingly heated and inflammatory rhetoric against Trump supporters.

I understand where you're coming from. Anyone opposing the morally correct legislation proposed by the Dems have been labelled as racist for the past several years. No one is buying that rhetoric anymore so now it's "they're a white supremicist." I don't think they'll call him that...probably a "white supremicist sympathizer".

 

[DirtDocMD]

You can love Trump on a personal level, or hate him. However, if some of you folks think a country of 300 million people is going to survive on open borders, “free” everything (healthcare/college/etc), and “punitive” taxation, you’ve got another thing coming.

A few thousand millionaires or billionaires, who essentially got “something for nothing” are not going to damage this country nearly as much as a political party that tries to convince 300 million folks that they can ALL have something for nothing, and that the rest of the world can show up on our doorstep demanding it, too. Greed is one thing. Greed, coupled with jealousy, hatred, and lack of work ethic, will sink this entire country.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, on this forum would admit to raising their children with a lifetime of dependence (free cars, free housing, free college, free healthcare) on Mommy/Daddy. Don’t get me wrong, folks do it, but they won’t ADMIT to doing it. Meanwhile, that’s EXACTLY what Democrats promise voters every day. Dependence, and “free stuff”. It’s an appeal to “children”, not adults who should value freedom and the ability/possibility to thrive on their own hard work and merits.

 

[Gern Blansten]

You can love Trump on a personal level, or hate him. However, if some of you folks think a country of 300 million people is going to survive on open borders, “free” everything (healthcare/college/etc), and “punitive” taxation, you’ve got another thing coming.

A few thousand millionaires or billionaires, who essentially got “something for nothing” are not going to damage this country nearly as much as a political party that tries to convince 300 million folks that they can ALL have something for nothing, and that the rest of the world can show up on our doorstep demanding it, too. Greed is one thing. Greed, coupled with jealousy, hatred, and lack of work ethic, will sink this entire country.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, on this forum would admit to raising their children with a lifetime of dependence (free cars, free housing, free college, free healthcare) on Mommy/Daddy. Don’t get me wrong, folks do it, but they won’t ADMIT to doing it. Meanwhile, that’s EXACTLY what Democrats promise voters every day. Dependence, and “free stuff”. It’s an appeal to “children”, not adults who should value freedom and the ability/possibility to thrive on their own hard work and merits.

That kind of sensible talk will get you called a lot of names.

 

[deleted941485]

That kind of sensible talk will get you called a lot of names.

Have you seen these Dems recently? Utterly insane. We’re still what? 14 months to election time. If we aren’t in a recession by then, the dems will surely have everyone believe they are.

Just put the word Free in front of any good or service you can think off and you’ve pretty much described the Democratic position.

Seriously they’re fishing for votes. I wonder what their meetings are like.

In order to generate more enthusiasm for your campaign Mr(s) you need offer free Chinese Herbal Medicine as part of the Medicare for All plan.

 

[deleted171991]

Have you seen these Dems recently? Utterly insane. We’re still what? 14 months to election time. If we aren’t in a recession by then, the dems will surely have everyone believe they are.

Just put the word Free in front of any good or service you can think off and you’ve pretty much described the Democratic position.

Seriously they’re fishing for votes. I wonder what their meetings are like.

In order to generate more enthusiasm for your campaign Mr(s) you need offer free Chinese Herbal Medicine as part of the Medicare for All plan.

Primaries always cater to their extremes. They are irrelevant for the general elections (the current Democratic primary included). Most primary winners move towards the center for the general elections.

The general election is shaping up to be a Pocahontas vs Deplorable match.

 

[pgg]

Primaries always cater to their extremes. They are irrelevant for the general elections (the current Democratic primary included). Most primary winners move towards the center for the general elections.

Biden's entire campaign is a "look at how moderate I am" so there's probably no need for him to move. I think he's going to be the nominee but I'm not sure he can beat Trump.

If one of the crazy candidates gets nominated, they will make noises and gestures to convince people they're really moderates. But will they be lying then, or are they lying now? Does it matter?

I believe they're sincere about the crazy things they're saying right now. It'd be irrational to not believe them when they repeatedly say they believe these things. (How many times in 2016 did we hear "oh Trump can't really mean that, he's just exaggerating or playing to primary voters and the vocal fringe"?) We have to believe Harris, Warren, Sanders, and the others are sincere. To do otherwise is the height of self deception and wishful thinking.

They really, really DO mean all of the things they're saying.

I'm sure most discussions I have with people a year from now will boil down to "oh, ______ didn't really mean that, that was just a position taken to win the primary" and "______ isn't Trump so it doesn't matter what was said then or what is being said now" ... there's no discussion to be had.

To an extent there's never any discussion to be had with true believers, but it already feels worse than Clinton v Trump. I'm not really a fan of Biden but I hope he's the nominee, if for no other reason than we'll have fewer what-he-says-in-the-primary vs what-he-says-in-the-general lies to sort through. Also, the constant foot-in-mouth phenomenon is entertaining.

 

[d9sccr]

Primaries always cater to their extremes. They are irrelevant for the general elections (the current Democratic primary included). Most primary winners move towards the center for the general elections.

The general election is shaping up to be a Pocahontas vs Deplorable match.

Do you think the flop back to moderate is something that can be done easily? With the advent of actual independent journalism plus all the different internet media outlets, I don't think a flip to moderate, whether real or not, is much of an option. Think this is especially true for Warren. She has approximately 1 million policy proposals, most of which are far from moderate. She all of a sudden "didn't mean" the crazy parts in writing? Kerry had trouble flipping moderate, I don't think whoever emerges is going to be any different honestly

 

[vector2]

Do you think the flop back to moderate is something that can be done easily? With the advent of actual independent journalism plus all the different internet media outlets, I don't think a flip to moderate, whether real or not, is much of an option. Think this is especially true for Warren. She has approximately 1 million policy proposals, most of which are far from moderate. She all of a sudden "didn't mean" the crazy parts in writing? Kerry had trouble flipping moderate, I don't think whoever emerges is going to be any different honestly

If we've learned anything from the past few years, it's that a candidate (or even now an elected official) can pretty much say or do anything they want without losing most of their core support. There is a new paradigm where historical notions of adhering to decorum or reason or facts have become rather quaint. I mean, really, only in 2019 could 'Alabama Hurricane' become a week long story.

Whether or not the dem field pivots to the center is irrelevant because my guess is the true undecided swing vote will make up a very small percentage of the total. The dem nominee can say whatever they want and dems will fall in line solely to defeat trump. As far as catering to the right, even if the nominee is Biden, trump and the rest of his media machine will try to paint him with a socialist AOC brush regardless, and I'm sure the rest of his minions will eat up the narrative.

 

[d9sccr]

If we've learned anything from the past few years, it's that a candidate (or even now an elected official) can pretty much say or do anything they want without losing most of their core support. There is a new paradigm where historical notions of adhering to decorum or reason or facts have become rather quaint. I mean, really, only in 2019 could 'Alabama Hurricane' become a week long story.

Whether or not the dem field pivots to the center is irrelevant because my guess is the true undecided swing vote will make up a very small percentage of the total. The dem nominee can say whatever they want and dems will fall in line solely to defeat trump. As far as catering to the right, even if the nominee is Biden, trump and the rest of his media machine will try to paint him with a socialist AOC brush regardless, and I'm sure the rest of his minions will eat up the narrative.

That may be true...there don't really seem to be that many undecided voters, at least in my personal life. Everyone seems firmly entrenched in their side. That said, there was a semi-interesting article last week alluding to another layer of "secret" Trump voters solely bc of the socialist policies being propagated.

The entire thing really is a sad state of affairs--I just wonder if every generation feels this way

 

[deleted941485]

This upcoming election is definitely as bad if not worse than Clinton v Trump.

I cannot think of a more start contrast or a more polarized electorate.

This will not end well especially if you are in health care .

 

[Mikkel]

This upcoming election is definitely as bad if not worse than Clinton v Trump.

I cannot think of a more start contrast or a more polarized electorate.

This will not end well especially if you are in health care .

Politics is all about division.

Hillary called Trump voters "deplorables".

Clinton called an entire subset of the US population "irredeemable".

The DNC field has largely called Trump supporters "white supremacists" because calling them "racists" didn't have enough zing to it.


Meanwhile, Trump will continue to run against illegal immigration and socialism. Easy to win that battle.

 

[deleted941485]

Meanwhile, Trump will continue to run against illegal immigration and socialism. Easy to win that battle.

Clinton was supposed to have an easy time with trump.

Fighting socialism these days isn’t as easy as you think. People do enjoy their freebies.

 

[vector2]

Politics is all about division.

Hillary called Trump voters "deplorables".

Clinton called an entire subset of the US population "irredeemable".

The DNC field has largely called Trump supporters "white supremacists" because calling them "racists" didn't have enough zing to it.


Meanwhile, Trump will continue to run against illegal immigration and socialism. Easy to win that battle.

Hilarious. You talk as if trump (a guy who in addtn to 10,000 other divisive things said a Hispanic judge couldnt do his job because he was Hispanic) is some kind of unifier, but yet he only has two main groups of people in his coalition:

High school educated, rural, super racist white people who want to build the wall

Rich, older, slightly less racist white people who take advantage of every tax break, every lobbyist backed bill, and every last bit of corporate welfare under the sun... and then complain about government handouts and socialism

 

[Mikkel]

Hilarious. You talk as if trump (a guy who in addtn to 10,000 other divisive things said a Hispanic judge couldnt do his job because he was Hispanic) is some kind of unifier, but yet he only has two main groups of people in his coalition:

High school educated, rural, super racist white people who want to build the wall

Rich, older, slightly less racist white people who take advantage of every tax break, every lobbyist backed bill, and every last bit of corporate welfare under the sun... and then complain about government handouts and socialism

You don't get it, like, at all.

You right now are breaking people down by skin color (racism), and wealth (classism).

Trump divides by US citizen vs non-citizen, US vs Europe/China/North Korea/Iran, law abiding vs law breaking, freedom vs repression (left is now anti free speech, anti 2nd amendment, anti privacy), etc.


While Trump is advocating for a platform that most Americans agree with, you're continuing with your tired trope of "Orange Man bad!"


In other words, deep down in your heart you're hoping for a Democrat to win so you can cave to China and Iran, outsource manufacturing, seize the wealth of Americans, divide everyone by skin color, open borders to anyone and everyone and give US citizenship to everybody.

 

[MoMoGesiologist]

You don't get it, like, at all.

You right now are breaking people down by skin color (racism), and wealth (classism).

Trump divides by US citizen vs non-citizen, US vs Europe/China/North Korea/Iran, law abiding vs law breaking, freedom vs repression (left is now anti free speech, anti 2nd amendment, anti privacy), etc.


While Trump is advocating for a platform that most Americans agree with, you're continuing with your tired trope of "Orange Man bad!"


In other words, deep down in your heart you're hoping for a Democrat to win so you can cave to China and Iran, outsource manufacturing, seize the wealth of Americans, divide everyone by skin color, open borders to anyone and everyone and give US citizenship to everybody.

So when Trump told a couple female minority US congress people they could go back to their countries if they don’t like it here, he was dividing them as US citizen vs non-citizen? You don’t think he’s made comments to make Americans of color or different religions feel like they are any less than their co-Americans?

Nothing and no one is 100% good or bad, black or white. Why be so dramatic and make it seem like Trump can make no mistakes and Democrats want to destroy America? Life is a lot more nuanced, your opinions should be as well.

 

[vector2]

You don't get it, like, at all.

You right now are breaking people down by skin color (racism), and wealth (classism).

Trump divides by US citizen vs non-citizen, US vs Europe/China/North Korea/Iran, law abiding vs law breaking, freedom vs repression (left is now anti free speech, anti 2nd amendment, anti privacy), etc.


While Trump is advocating for a platform that most Americans agree with, you're continuing with your tired trope of "Orange Man bad!"


In other words, deep down in your heart you're hoping for a Democrat to win so you can cave to China and Iran, outsource manufacturing, seize the wealth of Americans, divide everyone by skin color, open borders to anyone and everyone and give US citizenship to everybody.

I am not breaking his demographics down like that. That is literally how it is. Similar to the president, you have a poor grasp of what is actually reality and what is editorialization. It's a fact that his most ardent supporters are whites, particularly the poorly educated.

It is a literal fact that his support is piss-poor among blacks and Hispanics, and it's because he's a racist POS with regressive policies and everyone knows it.

In other words, deep down in your heart you're hoping Trump stays president so we can continue catering to Russia, North Korea and Saudi Arabia. You love that foreign countries can interfere in our elections at will. Perhaps you also wish the Taliban can finally come visit Camp David. Like Stephen Miller, you're hoping to cut off all immigration, both illegal and legal because you're terrified that America ever might become a majority-minority country where people of color outnumber whites. And ultimately, you'd probably sell out your own mother if it meant your marginal tax rate would go down 2%

 

[deleted50478]

I am not breaking his demographics down like that. That is literally how it is. Similar to the president, you have a poor grasp of what is actually reality and what is editorialization. It's a fact that his most ardent supporters are whites, particularly the poorly educated.

It is a literal fact that his support is piss-poor among blacks and Hispanics, and it's because he's a racist POS with regressive policies and everyone knows it.

In other words, deep down in your heart you're hoping Trump stays president so we can continue catering to Russia, North Korea and Saudi Arabia. You love that foreign countries can interfere in our elections at will. Perhaps you also wish the Taliban can finally come visit Camp David. Like Stephen Miller, you're hoping to cut off all immigration, both illegal and legal because you're terrified that America ever might become a majority-minority country where people of color outnumber whites. And ultimately, you'd probably sell out your own mother if it meant your marginal tax rate would go down 2%

So white support for republicans is racist, but the far more disproportionate minority support for democrats is not racist?

 

[Mikkel]

So when Trump told a couple female minority US congress people they could go back to their countries if they don’t like it here, he was dividing them as US citizen vs non-citizen? You don’t think he’s made comments to make Americans of color or different religions feel like they are any less than their co-Americans?

Nothing and no one is 100% good or bad, black or white. Why be so dramatic and make it seem like Trump can make no mistakes and Democrats want to destroy America? Life is a lot more nuanced, your opinions should be as well.

Wow, this again? You do realize that Omar and Tlaid are avowed anti-Semites? Literal anti-Semites. People in their countries of ethnic heritage (Palestine and Somalia) routinely target Jews...

 

[vector2]

So white support for republicans is racist, but the far more disproportionate minority support for democrats is not racist?

Maybe you should reconsider the logic of the point you are trying to make, because I hate to break it to you, bud, but 90% of black voters voted for a white lady in 16, and as of July, Biden (hint: white guy) was polling the highest among black voters in the 2020 primary. By far, like not even close. He's then followed by Bernie. Kamala next and then Booker way down the list. Blacks, on average, vote for candidates who have liberal policies, regardless of race, and I'm not sure why this would be confusing to you considering conservatives historically championed Jim Crow and fought tooth and nail the Civil Rights Act, voting rights, school integration, equality in housing etc etc

I'm not saying every white person who votes Republican is racist, but a much higher percentage of that cohort who also support trump definitely are. There are a few R's who have called out the nonsense, i.e. Scarborough, Bill Kristol, Bill Weld, Justin Amash, Michael Steele, Steve Schmidt. On the other hand, you have folks who don't bat an eye at trump's birtherism, his weak disavowals of white supremacists ("both sides"), his insulting and disdain of Hispanic people, his insults to "urban" inner cities, his hate of Muslim people and sh*thole countries in Africa. Honestly, I don't see much difference between an actual racist and those who cheerlead a racist, xenophobic leader.

 

[deleted126335]

When I was a schoolboy, they told me that America is a country where ANYONE can become the President. I now know that to be true.

 

[MoMoGesiologist]

Wow, this again? You do realize that Omar and Tlaid are avowed anti-Semites? Literal anti-Semites. People in their countries of ethnic heritage (Palestine and Somalia) routinely target Jews...

You disregarded everything in my post and started talking about anti-semitism...

 

[Mikkel]

On the other hand, you have folks who don't bat an eye at trump's birtherism

,

A lot of Obama's background was hidden from the public, and is still hidden to this day, stuff that has actual constitutional considerations (like natural born citizenship). Funny how the Democrats are screaming about Trump's tax returns which don't have any constitutional basis.

his weak disavowals of white supremacists ("both sides")

Go read his original quote, I dare you.

, his insulting and disdain of Hispanic people

He doesn't have disdain for Hispanics.

, his insults to "urban" inner cities

Trump isn't allowed to point to the disaster that is Democrat-run inner cities and states?

, his hate of Muslim people

He doesn't hate Muslims, he just hates importing people into the US who come from countries that have high rates of radical ideology and hatred of the US and high likelihood of being a threat to the safety of American citizens.

and sh*thole countries in Africa.

Trump isn't allowed to criticize sh*thole countries?


Come on man, your entire post is "orange man bad".

 

[Mikkel]

You disregarded everything in my post and started talking about anti-semitism...

You disregarded my entire post, especially the part where those congressmen are openly anti-Semitic, but you don't bat an eye.

I don't think flagrant anti-Semitism is a core aspect of being an American.

 

[vector2]

,

A lot of Obama's background was hidden from the public, and is still hidden to this day, stuff that has actual constitutional considerations (like natural born citizenship). Funny how the Democrats are screaming about Trump's tax returns which don't have any constitutional basis.



Go read his original quote, I dare you.



He doesn't have disdain for Hispanics.



Trump isn't allowed to point to the disaster that is Democrat-run inner cities and states?



He doesn't hate Muslims, he just hates importing people into the US who come from countries that have high rates of radical ideology and hatred of the US and high likelihood of being a threat to the safety of American citizens.



Trump isn't allowed to criticize sh*thole countries?


Come on man, your entire post is "orange man bad".

Wooo buddy, leave some koolaid for the rest of the other true believers


I get it, you think trump is the infallible second coming of christ and I think he's a racist, ignorant, unqualified, corrupt buffoon who is mostly using the presidency to either currently or in the future enrich himself, his family, the Trump org, his associates, and the donor class. I mean, why else would he compel the Air Force to refuel at a failing airport and stay at his failing Scotland resort?.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure neither of us is changing the others' mind so let's just leave each other at our current impasse.

 

[Mikkel]

Orange man bad

I'm a reasonable person, I don't think Trump is infallible. In fact, I think he brings a lot of pain on himself.

But you need to stop deluding yourself into automatically assuming everything CNN is telling you is the 100% truth, or that everything Trump does is bad.

Just look at the DNC candidates, Trump says one thing and they say the opposite, no matter how stupid.

The DNC candidates have already vowed to give welfare benefits to illegal aliens.

 

[Gern Blansten]

Wooo buddy, leave some koolaid for the rest of the other true believers


I get it, you think trump is the infallible second coming of christ and I think he's a racist, ignorant, unqualified, corrupt buffoon who is mostly using the presidency to either currently or in the future enrich himself, his family, the Trump org, his associates, and the donor class. I mean, why else would he compel the Air Force to refuel at a failing airport and stay at his failing Scotland resort?.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure neither of us is changing the others' mind so let's just leave each other at our current impasse.

Compare the net worth of the Clintons and Obamas prior to presidency and after the presidency. How do they become ultra rich on a presidents salary?
You have basically said that anyone who is white and voted for Trump is a racist. Why is it that people who are liberal refuse to consider the possibility that there can exist a different opinion than their own, and frequently respond to those who differ with acts of violence?
I have never met a Trump supporter that believes he is without fault as you stated (likely hyperbole on your part, but still).
All candidates are flawed. Trump is a narcissist and I would never want to hang out with him. However, his stance on illegal immigrants is simply enforcing the same ideas that all presidents before him have publically stated and then backed down on. Illegal immigrants has the word illegal in the name. In addition, anti-semitism should not be tolerated by a sitting elected official. Him calling them out for their stances is supporting American ideals. He could always use some guidance in grace and etiquette and he has a tendency to be unfiltered. But I do not get the impression he is un-American. I suspect that, if you visited the war torn and corrupt countries that are run by radical muslims and drug lords, you may have the same opinion of those locations. Maybe you would choose to keep your opinions to yourself, but you have a President whose every word is recorded and broadcast, for better or worse. Sometimes, he broadcasts them himself through Twitter. I have done medical and humanitarian mission work in many impoverished countries. I like helping the impoverished receive help that they would not otherwise receive. There are always very sad cases where I wish I could just bring a dozen or so home to live with me so I could help them. It is just not practical and it is highly illegal. People have to go through proper channels. When did that become such a bad thing?

Let's examine all of your opinions word by word-
Racist-I have not seen evidence of this existing more than in the general public, as noted above. When you really think about it, everyone is racist to some degree with their inherent biases based on a whole host of influences in their lives. We all struggle to minimize these biases, but they are still there.
Ignorant-likely, he is of above average intelligence as a businessman and as a politician. If you are honest, you will admit that someone cannot rise to his level of success and be ignorant. I think you likely mean that his opinions differ from yours. That does not mean he is ignorant. It just means you disagree with his priorities and opinions.
Unqualified-depending on if you want a run of the mill politician doing the same old stuff. If that is what you desire, maybe he is unqualified. The American people decided that they wanted to try something different and maybe they think he is more qualified by virtue of the fact that he is not a career politician.
Corrupt-anyone who reaches that level in any field has likely become somewhat corrupt in a purist sense. In that regard, he is no different. Shady business deals could likely be uncovered in his past. However, name any candidate and tell me they have not been corrupt in the past. Sadly, those are the ones who rise to the top. So, I will give you that one as likely having some truth to it. he is just like the people that he runs with and against. Washington is a dirty place. Those who completely comply with the rules get thrown out like yesterday's garbage.
Buffoon-I will give you that he is rougher around the edges than most ( a lot rougher ), but he is not stupid. I generally feel that he knows exactly what he is doing when he chooses to say things that will make the CNN crowd go ballistic. He really doesn't seem to care how they respond and does not care if they disagree. I find that kind of refreshing, since I rarely disagree with mainstream news and politics and socialistic liberal policies. He seems to find joy in pushing the buttons of those who dislike him. I find that very interesting.

As I have said before, I do not agree with some of the actions of Trump, but I do agree with many of them. I like his United States first approach because we, as a country, are teetering on the edge of ending the empire that we have grown to love. The policies that many in government endorse are not sustainable. We have to preserve the U.S. in order to be able to assist other countries. The old airplane rule, apply the oxygen to yourself before you try to assist others. There is an old saying in non-profit organizations. There is no mission without a margin. If you are wasteful of your resources and can't keep the lights on, your mission to help others is dead in the water. All of the people supporting the socialist policies are coming at it with a caring approach but are not being realistic and realizing that, eventually, the programs will run out of other people's money.

 

[deleted171991]

So white support for republicans is racist, but the far more disproportionate minority support for democrats is not racist?

No. Support for racists is racist, on either side, regardless of rationalization.

Also, people who keep demonizing other races (or even their own) are racist. One can't talk about "white privilege" or "black entitlement" all day long and not be racist.

 

[Mikkel]

No. Support for racists is racist, on either side, regardless of rationalization.

Also, people who keep demonizing other races (or even their own) are racist. One can't talk about "white privilege" or "black entitlement" all day long and not be racist.

Affirmative action is racist by definition.

Would you agree with the statement that people who support affirmative action are racist?

 

[deleted50478]

No. Support for racists is racist, on either side, regardless of rationalization.

Also, people who keep demonizing other races (or even their own) are racist. One can't talk about "white privilege" or "black entitlement" all day long and not be racist.

I agree. I wasn’t making a statement. I was interpreting and questioning the previous comment.