Will Trump win again???

[nimbus]

Has anybody flipped and changed their mind since 2016? I don’t know a single person.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted171991]

Has anybody flipped and changed their mind since 2016? I don’t know a single person.

"To err is human, to persist in error is diabolical." (Seneca)

 

[ChiDO]

Trump is finally standing up to the world and doing a lot of things that past presidents have promised, but haven't accomplished.

From his last rally, here's a great quote:

On Monday night, President Trump, speaking at a rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina, took a shot at his predecessor and elicited a roar from the crowd by asserting, "You finally have a president who understands that I’m not supposed to be president of the world; I’m supposed to be president of the United States of America." He stated, "Obama is more popular in Germany than Trump. He's got to be. I'm making people pay their bills. The day I'm more popular than him, I'm not doing my job. They like him more in Europe than they like Trump. I think they should," according to The Daily Mail.

Washington is very corrupt. We need term limits. All the past presidents have become ultra wealthy from minimal salary, while Trump has lost millions. Heck, he doesn't even take a salary.

Our culture is too PC. Saying you are a Trump supporter is like a death sentence in public now. You can't have a conversation.

 

[vector2]

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?

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.

They became rich by doing what all high-level politicians have done- writing books, consulting for various non-profits and for-profits, and making a shtton of speeches. This is the sort of blase post-presidency behavior that is perfectly legal, borderline unethical, and that every president both D and R has engaged in. What you fail to realize the importance of is the fact that every president for the last 50 years except Trump has released a number of years of tax returns and put their assets in a blind trust while they were president. Even Jimmy Carter realized that controlling a peanut farm while being ultimately in charge of the USDA was at the very least an ethical violation. Trump supporters have their heads buried in the sand and continue to ignore the fact that Trump still profits directly off the Trump Org on a daily basis, and is free to make policy decisions which can directly financially benefit him. It's a joke to think that making his sons the CEOs is any different than him continuing to run the business. In any other era, various businesses, lobbies, and foreign states throwing $100,000 parties at Trump's hotels while he still profits off of them would be a 24/7 story. Same goes for the essentially pay-to-play access that maralago members get. Same goes for the absurd amount of money that the taxpayer has spent for transport and secret service ops at all his resorts and golf courses. Same goes for Mike Pence staying in a Trump hotel 180 miles from his meeting place in Dublin. Same goes for the Air Force being forced to stop at his Scottish resort instead of typical .mil European bases. Same goes for the millions if not dozens of millions that the Trump Org stands to make from quid pro quo foreign ties once Trump leaves the presidency. Same goes for the half dozen cabinet and campaign members who have been fired or resigned secondary to corruption, or who are currently awaiting prison sentencing.

Are you honestly not at all concerned about how vehemently he has tried to prevent the release of his tax returns and the nonsense about an audit preventing him from doing so? It doesn't raise any suspicion at all that he has his lawyers doing a full court press by suing to prevent Deutsche Bank from complying with subpoenas? The most logical conclusion is that A. he is not worth nearly as much as he claims thus demonstrating that he's really a business failure for someone who inherited so much money, and B. there are a number of suspect foreign interests with whom he may have done business or has obligations towards

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?

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.

I absolutely have considered the possibility. Unfortunately, the weight of the evidence essentially shows that his core support are low-education folks who are pretty damned racist (some of his most vehement supporters like those in rural WV or MO are actually people who essentially never interact with brown people on a daily basis given their local demographics, but yet they are always scared half to death of all those danged illegals), mixed with some higher-education folks who probably aren't as racist but like tax cuts, blowing up the deficit for the purposes of more corporate welfare, cutting benefits to the working poor and truly needy, banning abortion/gay marriage, and having the ability to pollute at will. It's also tragically ironic that you bring up acts of violence, considering the most memorable public acts of violence recently were the 20 people killed in El Paso by a right wing white supremacist who hated Mexicans, the 11 people killed in Pittsburgh by a right wing white supremacist who hated Jews, and the 50 people killed in New Zealand by a right wing white supremacist who hated Muslims.

Honestly, if historical recountings of Trump's racism, his racist public statements and tweets the last few years, and the fact that he's endorsed by David Duke, Steve King, Stormfront, and the Proudboys doesn't convince you, you're being willfully ignorant.

------------------------------------

Donald Trump’s long history of racism, from the 1970s to 2020

Trump has repeatedly claimed he’s "the least racist person." His history suggests otherwise.

www.vox.com

• 1973: The US Department of Justice — under the Nixon administration, out of all administrations — sued the Trump Management Corporation for violating the Fair Housing Act. Federal officials found evidence that Trump had refused to rent to black tenants and lied to black applicants about whether apartments were available, among other accusations. Trump said the federal government was trying to get him to rent to welfare recipients. In the aftermath, he signed an agreement in 1975 agreeing not to discriminate to renters of color without admitting to discriminating before.
• 1980s: Kip Brown, a former employee at Trump’s Castle, accused another one of Trump’s businesses of discrimination. “When Donald and Ivana came to the casino, the bosses would order all the black people off the floor,” Brown said. “It was the eighties, I was a teenager, but I remember it: They put us all in the back.”
• 1988: In a commencement speech at Lehigh University, Trump spent much of his speech accusing countries like Japan of “stripping the United States of economic dignity.” This matches much of his current rhetoric on China.
• 1989: In a controversial case that’s been characterized as a modern-day lynching, four black teenagers and one Latino teenager — the “Central Park Five” — were accused of attacking and raping a jogger in New York City. Trump immediately took charge in the case, running an ad in local papers demanding, “BRING BACK THE DEATH PENALTY. BRING BACK OUR POLICE!” The teens’ convictions were later vacated after they spent seven to 13 years in prison, and the city paid $41 million in a settlement to the teens. But Trump in October 2016 said he still believes they’re guilty, despite the DNA evidence to the contrary.
• 1991: A book by John O’Donnell, former president of Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino in Atlantic City, quoted Trump’s criticism of a black accountant: “Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day. … I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault, because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It’s not anything they can control.” Trump at first denied the remarks, but later said in a 1997 Playboy interview that “the stuff O’Donnell wrote about me is probably true.”
• 1992: The Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino had to pay a $200,000 fine because it transferred black and women dealers off tables to accommodate a big-time gambler’s prejudices.
• 1993: In congressional testimony, Trump said that some Native American reservations operating casinos shouldn’t be allowed because “they don’t look like Indians to me.”
• 2000: In opposition to a casino proposed by the St. Regis Mohawk tribe, which he saw as a financial threat to his casinos in Atlantic City, Trump secretly ran a series of ads suggesting the tribe had a “record of criminal activity [that] is well documented.”
• 2004: In season two of The Apprentice, Trump fired Kevin Allen, a black contestant, for being overeducated. “You’re an unbelievably talented guy in terms of education, and you haven’t done anything,” Trump said on the show. “At some point you have to say, ‘That’s enough.’”
• 2005: Trump publicly pitched what was essentially The Apprentice: White People vs. Black People. He said he “wasn’t particularly happy” with the most recent season of his show, so he was considering “an idea that is fairly controversial — creating a team of successful African Americans versus a team of successful whites. Whether people like that idea or not, it is somewhat reflective of our very vicious world.”
• 2010: In 2010, there was a huge national controversy over the “Ground Zero Mosque” — a proposal to build a Muslim community center in Lower Manhattan, near the site of the 9/11 attacks. Trump opposed the project, calling it “insensitive,” and offered to buy out one of the investors in the project. On The Late Show With David Letterman, Trump argued, referring to Muslims, “Well, somebody’s blowing us up. Somebody’s blowing up buildings, and somebody’s doing lots of bad stuff.”
• 2011: Trump played a big role in pushing false rumors that Obama — the country’s first black president — was not born in the US. He even sent investigators to Hawaii to look into Obama’s birth certificate. Obama later released his birth certificate, calling Trump a ”carnival barker.” (The research has found a strong correlation between “birtherism,” as this conspiracy theory is called, and racism.) Trump has reportedly continued pushing this conspiracy theory in private.
• 2011: While Trump suggested that Obama wasn’t born in the US, he also argued that maybe Obama wasn’t a good enough student to have gotten into Columbia or Harvard Law School, and demanded Obama release his university transcripts. Trump claimed, “I heard he was a terrible student. Terrible. How does a bad student go to Columbia and then to Harvard?”

--------------------------------

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?

The spin you are trying to put on this does not gel with the reality of Steve Bannon's agenda when he was in the WH and Stephen Miller's current agenda. There is a difference between enforcing the law and going flat out with hateful, ignorant rhetoric about Mexico only sending criminals, drug dealers, and rapists. And it's a damn shame that people such as yourself who have done humanitarian work don't speak out about the fact that most people coming from Central America (the so-called caravan) are refugees who are fleeing gangs, poverty, and violence- not just a band of criminals as Trump would have his supporters believe. Every American should be ashamed and embarrassed by Ken Cuccinelli's apparent wish to change the line on the Statue of Liberty to "Give me your tired and your poor......who can stand on their own two feet and who will not become a public charge.". Also, maybe the Trump admin didn't start the policies of family separation and putting children in cages, but they sure have accelerated it to the nth degree. It's not about law enforcement, because for them, cruelty is the point.

Let's examine all of your opinions word by word-

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.

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.

I'm not sure if you're deluded or maybe you haven't actually sat through a speech or rally of his and witnessed how his thought processes and speech pattern is the polar opposite of cogent. Maybe you weren't aware that his daily intelligence briefing was cut down to a few pages and he requested lots of shiny pictures be added? Did you miss that fact that he wasn't sure if anyone had heard of a Category 5 hurricane? One of my favorites was Trump's theory that the body has a finite amount of energy like a battery, and that exercise will only deplete it. As for his business acumen and him being a success, if he had taken all the money his daddy gave him and just put it in an index fund in 1988 he would be worth $13 billion dollars. Instead, he managed to lose a billion dollars in the 1990s. Let's be honest, his real business is not finance or the real estate business- it's reality TV showmanship- and that's all the American people have gotten for the last 3 years.

He's demonstrated time and time again that he has no idea how the basic processes of government function, and this is evidenced by the fact that he has had more turnover than the last 4 administrations combined. Are we to believe his spin that he has a record number of "acting" directors instead of Senate-confirmed directors by choice, when in reality it's likely due to a mixture of his administration's incompetence and the hesitancy of any qualified people to join him? Hell, just today we lost another one with John Bolton (although, good riddance to that one, hopefully the 4th time is a charm for the position of National Security Advisor). We also learned today that our intelligence apparatus had to freakin' pull a high-level spy out of Russia in 2017 because our own president posed such a high risk to his safety. Also, as much as I disagree with the politics of John Kelly, Jim Mattis, and H.R. McMaster, I truly believe that these people are loyal to America and her institutions and want what's best for this country. For the life of me I can't grasp why people on the right are not taken aback by the fact that decorated generals who have dedicated most of their lives to service can't even last in this administration.

Look, I don't think that POTUS has to always be some attorney who ran for office and then become a governor or senator and then became president. Not every POTUS has to be a constitutional law scholar like Obama. But what I would ask is that a POTUS at least be able to pass a 10th grade civics class.

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.

That's all well and good. The problem is that Trump's motto is apply oxygen to yourself then tell the others to F*** off.

 

[Gern Blansten]

I respect your opinion. Thanks for sharing in a civilized manner.

 

[fakin' the funk]

Trump is finally standing up to the world

C'mon man you're not even close

Do you mean the way he stood up to Putin, Kim Jong Un, Duterte, Erdogan?

 

[jwk]

Has anybody flipped and changed their mind since 2016? I don’t know a single person.

I don't know anyone who supported Trump that now opposes him. Nobody is supporting Walsh or Sanford to oppose him on the Republican side, and several state GOP parties have already announced they'll omit their primaries/caucuses in 2020. A lot of those who voted Hillary last time will be voting for Trump in 2020. And c'mon - really - 20+ Democratic clowns in the race, and not a reasonable centrist remotely worth considering in the whole bunch. They're all in a battle to see how far left they can go.

 

[Mikkel]

C'mon man you're not even close

Do you mean the way he stood up to Putin, Kim Jong Un, Duterte, Erdogan?

F35 program cancelled for Turkey.

Putin got sanctions

North Korea got crushing sanctions.

China got tariffs.

Who cares about duterte, other than everyone who transports through the South China Sea..........

 

[Stank811]

"To err is human, to persist in error is diabolical." (Seneca)

Agreed which is why I scratch my head on those who oppose Trump as much or more then they did when he ran vs Clinton.

He has been doing a great job. Based on what the majority where saying in 2016 we should be in a economic depression and in the middle of WWIII.

Turns out the whole Russian collusion was really just an insurance policy by our own political/intelligence community in hopes of impeachment to cover up then spying on a citizen of the United States running for presidency to undermine his campaign.

 

[Gern Blansten]

Agreed which is why I scratch my head on those who oppose Trump as much or more then they did when he ran vs Clinton.

He has been doing a great job. Based on what the majority where saying in 2016 we should be in a economic depression and in the middle of WWIII.

Turns out the whole Russian collusion was really just an insurance policy by our own political/intelligence community in hopes of impeachment to cover up then spying on a citizen of the United States running for presidency to undermine his campaign.

I respect your opinion. Thanks for sharing in a civilized manner.

 

[ZzzPlz]

I respect your opinion. Thanks for sharing in a civilized manner.

And I respect the fact that you’ve been so respectful as well. Thanks Gern

 

[deleted126335]

People are loth to admit that they made a mistake. Just like people were embarrassed in the pre election polling to admit that they liked him.

He is still the favorite. It is rare to defeat an incumbent and the Democrats are looking like Biden/Sanders/Warren which is a gift to the Republicans.

 

[pgg]

He just fired John Bolton, so he's not all bad. We escaped his stint as NSA without a war breaking out. I'm a glass-half-full kind of guy.

 

[pgg]

Has anybody flipped and changed their mind since 2016? I don’t know a single person.

Hard to know.

One of the hardest things to gauge about President Trump's support is that so many of his supporters are quiet about it. Call it shame or fatigue defending themselves or whatever, there's no doubt that a lot of people voted for him quietly.

For all the focus on the MAGA-hat-wearing core supporters, he didn't win with just their votes. He outperformed polls and unexpectedly won in 2016. The most optimistic pre-election predictions for him were from 538 and even they put his probability of winning somewhere around 30%; most other pollsters and analysts put his odds around half that. And of course you have Rachel Maddow's epic election night meltdown that began with gleeful declarations of the impossibility of a Trump victory.

So. Given that all of those people were quiet about their support in 2016, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they're quiet about changing their mind. Or maybe they're vocally anti-Trump now. We'll never know that they changed their minds.


Also, participants in discussions rarely change their minds (Mikkel and vector2 aren't likely to flip their votes) but for every participant there are 10 or 50 or 100 observers. And some of them change their minds. True undecideds in swing states are a small and thinning slice of America, but they're real, and they matter. And so do these discussions.

 

[Mikkel]

Hard to know.

One of the hardest things to gauge about President Trump's support is that so many of his supporters are quiet about it. Call it shame or fatigue defending themselves or whatever, there's no doubt that a lot of people voted for him quietly.

For all the focus on the MAGA-hat-wearing core supporters, he didn't win with just their votes. He outperformed polls and unexpectedly won in 2016. The most optimistic pre-election predictions for him were from 538 and even they put his probability of winning somewhere around 30%; most other pollsters and analysts put his odds around half that. And of course you have Rachel Maddow's epic election night meltdown that began with gleeful declarations of the impossibility of a Trump victory.

So. Given that all of those people were quiet about their support in 2016, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they're quiet about changing their mind. Or maybe they're vocally anti-Trump now. We'll never know that they changed their minds.


Also, participants in discussions rarely change their minds (Mikkel and vector2 aren't likely to flip their votes) but for every participant there are 10 or 50 or 100 observers. And some of them change their minds. True undecideds in swing states are a small and thinning slice of America, but they're real, and they matter. And so do these discussions.

I think a lot of Democrats make a mistake by assuming that Trump was elected by people who care about his character, like Republicans voted for Bush.

Trump got elected for his platform.

 

[pgg]

I think a lot of Democrats make a mistake by assuming that Trump was elected by people who care about his character, like Republicans voted for Bush.

Trump got elected for his platform.

I think you're mostly right, though I would be more specific and argue that Trump got elected because of a vacant Supreme Court seat. Not so much his platform, but the assurance that he'd appoint someone diametrically opposed to the Kagan/Sotomayer clone Hillary Clinton would've appointed. That's the main reason evangelicals got on board, gave him money, raised funds. If even 10% of them had merely stayed home on election day, he'd have lost.

I remember Bush The Elder trying to hammer home the "Bill Clinton doesn't tell the truth" bit over and over again and he lost. That was the first election I ever voted in, and even then it was obvious to me that he was barking up the wrong tree.

 

[doctalaughs]

I keep saying:

There are many who are not fans of Trump and actually believe he’s probably a racist (and definitely a narcissistic ass****).... yet given policies laid out by dems will vote for him. These people FAR outweigh his vocal supporters.

I think he blundered on the family separation issue but overall he’s winning on immigration.... most Americans agree we can’t just have open borders. As much as the dems say they aren’t for that - they are doing a piss-poor job of articulating how you stop the flood while Trump has made actual major progress recently.

In trade no president has ever stood up to China before in a major way when they clearly gamed the system. Can’t tell where we’ll end up but he is making a stand.

In in UN it’s true that finally countries are paying more for defense of their own security... as we should have demanded years ago. Maybe it did take someone “not being diplomatic.”

For Israel there has been zero progress for 50 years and just more bloodshed while the UN is blatantly anti-semitic. Maybe we just have to not care what the world thinks, pick the side of our ally (Israel) and stop pretending to be an arbiter of a peace that clearly will never work when the terrorists are lobbing rockets.

For Iran he ripped up a joke of a deal which basically just funded a terrorist nation in exchange for kicking the can down the road 5-10 years.

I do hate how he handles Russia and the election tampering stuff... so I don’t agree with all his policies.

That being said, I think warren/sanders and most of the dems are absolutely crazy and will destroy our economy and nation with their policies.

I would vote Biden over Trump but if it comes down to voting for a racist with many policies I agree with... versus a person who I think Has crazy policies and no rational way to pay for it... guess who I’m voting for?

 

[PainDrain]

For all those saying Trump is clearly going to win re-election, let me just point out that he lost the popular vote by a large margin and won the election by less than 100k votes in three key states. Should he lose just one of theses states then he is done.


As for his policies people are kidding themselves if they think any of this is good. He is an absolute ***** in the realm of foreign policy; cozying up to dictators is dangerous territory....unless of course you want to create a dictatorship. His trade policies are equally disastrous and a trade war with China is only going to hurt us in the long run. He has destroyed the farming economy in the Midwest. Loan defaults in the agricultural sector are at a 20 year high. The midwestern farmers are people he needs to win re-election. While China is a problem, this isn’t how you fix their manipulation of the system.

For all the fiscal conservatives who voted for him, how do you feel about ballooning debt and corporate handouts? Because that is about all you have gotten under Trumps financial management. A tax break the economy didn’t need. Predictions of economic growth that were not realistic and deregulation at the expense of the environment. Hell, his environmental deregulation is going against market forces and attempting to pick winners and losers (see coal policy, renewable energy, gas mileage standards).


With regards to immigration, one thing that I would like to point out to some here (and something I wish the majority of Americans understood) is that this is merely the chickens coming home to roost. The US has a nearly 80 year history of backing dictators and destroying the political opposition in many Central American countries. Our policy in the late 80-early 90s led to the creation of MS13. If you want to wash your hands of our historical role and say whatevs then fine; but keep your mouth shut when people flock to our border.

 

[deleted50478]

If you want to wash your hands of our historical role and say whatevs then fine; but keep your mouth shut when people flock to our border.

No.

 

[Mikkel]

For all those saying Trump is clearly going to win re-election, let me just point out that he lost the popular vote by a large margin and won the election by less than 100k votes in three key states. Should he lose just one of theses states then he is done.

Wrong. Trump won 304 to 227.

He would have to lose two of Wisconsin/Michigan/Pennsylvania.

As for his policies people are kidding themselves if they think any of this is good. He is an absolute ***** in the realm of foreign policy

So you think Obama's foreign policy was smart?

Iran, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, China, North Korea.

All disasters that Obama accelerated over his 8 years.

cozying up to dictators is dangerous territory....unless of course you want to create a dictatorship.

Yeah, because our previous policy with North Korea worked so well.

His trade policies are equally disastrous and a trade war with China is only going to hurt us in the long run.

China's manufacturing has increased and taken business away from the US and our allies over the last 30 years.

I suppose you want China, a communist dictatorship, to be the biggest world economic and military power.

He has destroyed the farming economy in the Midwest. Loan defaults in the agricultural sector are at a 20 year high. The midwestern farmers are people he needs to win re-election. While China is a problem, this isn’t how you fix their manipulation of the system.

China pigs are not needing feed from the US because of viral infection. You should educate yourself on this.

For all the fiscal conservatives who voted for him, how do you feel about ballooning debt and corporate handouts? Because that is about all you have gotten under Trumps financial management.

Record employment and record low unemployment. Stock market at all time highs. Economic policy that will propel the US to economic prosperity for generations if allowed to continue.

A tax break the economy didn’t need. Predictions of economic growth that were not realistic and deregulation at the expense of the environment.

So you're in favor of higher taxes and more crushing regulation against employers.

Hell, his environmental deregulation is going against market forces and attempting to pick winners and losers (see coal policy, renewable energy, gas mileage standards).

You need to balance environmental concerns with economic concerns of poor Americans.

Obama picked winners and losers to great fail. Read up on Solyndra for example.

With regards to immigration, one thing that I would like to point out to some here (and something I wish the majority of Americans understood) is that this is merely the chickens coming home to roost. The US has a nearly 80 year history of backing dictators and destroying the political opposition in many Central American countries. Our policy in the late 80-early 90s led to the creation of MS13. If you want to wash your hands of our historical role and say whatevs then fine; but keep your mouth shut when people flock to our border.

Wow. Just wow.

So you're saying that we have no right as a country to enforce our borders, and we deserve any badness that comes our way as a result.

If that's your ideal immigration policy for 2020.........................

 

[PainDrain]

Wrong. Trump won 304 to 227.

He would have to lose two of Wisconsin/Michigan/Pennsylvania.




So you think Obama's foreign policy was smart?

Iran, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, China, North Korea.

All disasters that Obama accelerated over his 8 years.




Yeah, because our previous policy with North Korea worked so well.




China's manufacturing has increased and taken business away from the US and our allies over the last 30 years.

I suppose you want China, a communist dictatorship, to be the biggest world economic and military power.



China pigs are not needing feed from the US because of viral infection. You should educate yourself on this.



Record employment and record low unemployment. Stock market at all time highs. Economic policy that will propel the US to economic prosperity for generations if allowed to continue.



So you're in favor of higher taxes and more crushing regulation against employers.



You need to balance environmental concerns with economic concerns of poor Americans.

Obama picked winners and losers to great fail. Read up on Solyndra for example.



Wow. Just wow.

So you're saying that we have no right as a country to enforce our borders, and we deserve any badness that comes our way as a result.

If that's your ideal immigration policy for 2020.........................

God where to start. First off, yes you are correct if every other state holds then he will have to lose two of the previous flips to lose the election. But that is considering the rest of the map remains the same; possible but Florida is definitely in play and his polling is pretty bad right now in the upper Midwest. Now I am sure this is where you say that polls showed the same thing in 2016 but this isn’t 2016 and the Dems aren’t going to ignore these states.

Trumps policy is schizophrenic. He alienated most of our allies and is cozying up to dictators. You call that progress. And all you have is “well Obama did this.” Excellent defense. And N Korea has expanded its nuclear capability under Trump. They likely have ICBM technology capable of reaching all of the US (see July announcement on this). Trump gave them credibility by agreeing to meetings and state visits; this was a huge mistake.

You are not really up on economics are you? The idea that Trumps short term boosts are going to continue to fuel the economy beyond 5 years is laughable. Remember what people were saying in 2005?

As for China, the US soy and pork market have been hurt by the trade war. China still remains the largest importer of free grain in the world. China just signed a deal with Argentina to import soy meal for their pork, further hurting US farmers.

If we have “crushing regulation “ why are we still the economic behemoth that the rest of the world is measured against. Have you ever seen the environmental conditions in China or India? These countries have the worst air and water pollution in the entire world. This will ultimately be their downfall. It will ultimately prove very difficult to continue their current environmental degradation and keep growing their economy.

As for picking winners and losers I will point no further than petroleum subsidies. Don’t believe me, look it up.


I am a Democrat and I don’t want open borders or mass migrations. But you, if you are conservative or a GOP voter, need to admit the current benefit from illegal labor and how our current system is benefiting our economy. I am personally for a guest worker program, something that the GOP balked at. I am for denying benefits to these people and for taxing the hell out of their wages to deter immigration and to pay for the unintended societal costs. I have honestly not heard a decent plan come from the GOP other than calling people criminals and building a useless wall. And to deny the complicity of US foreign policy in our current mess is ridiculous.

 

[Mikkel]

Trumps policy is schizophrenic. He alienated most of our allies and is cozying up to dictators. You call that progress. And all you have is “well Obama did this.” Excellent defense. And N Korea has expanded its nuclear capability under Trump. They likely have ICBM technology capable of reaching all of the US (see July announcement on this). Trump gave them credibility by agreeing to meetings and state visits; this was a huge mistake.

Trump has imposed crushing sanctions on North Korea (and Iran). War is not a good option, and I think most people agree we shouldn't go to war. Economic means are the best way to go about this, and this is exactly what Trump is doing.

Our allies are spending more of their money to protect themselves instead of the US handing out more military welfare assistance to countries that can afford it easily. They're buying more American manufactured airplanes like the F-35. This is good for America.

I am a Democrat and I don’t want open borders or mass migrations.

If you don't want open borders or mass migration, you need enforcement of our law and a border wall. You should vote for Trump. Beto already promised to destroy existing border wall.

 

[agammaglobulin]

Trump is very, very far from perfect. But Warren and Sanders are bat$hit crazy.

 

[DirtDocMD]

I think a lot of Democrats make a mistake by assuming that Trump was elected by people who care about his character, like Republicans voted for Bush.

Trump got elected for his platform.

There ya go. Most folks are smart enough to pick the crazy capitalist over the crazy socialist..

 

[Gern Blansten]

There ya go. Most folks are smart enough to pick the crazy capitalist over the crazy socialist..

There it is. You nailed it.

 

[PainDrain]

If you don't want open borders or mass migration, you need enforcement of our law and a border wall. You should vote for Trump. Beto already promised to destroy existing border wall.

You do realize the wall is a boondoggle right? Seriously you do realize the vast majority enter legally and overstay their visa. How’s that wall gonna stop that?

 

[deleted50478]

You do realize the wall is a boondoggle right? Seriously you do realize the vast majority enter legally and overstay their visa. How’s that wall gonna stop that?

By ‘Wall’ Trump meant a virtual wall, aka a worker ID card with severe employer consequences for hiring illegals. By steel or concrete he meant the mental image of a steel or concrete wall that knowledge of an effective worker ID would create in the minds of would-be illegal immigrants.

 

[deleted162650]

Seriously you do realize the vast majority enter legally and overstay their visa.

That is true for Canadians. That is not the case with those crossing the southern border.

A wall isn’t going to help the southern border because most of the immigrants there are coming through ports of entry. Same applies to the bulk of illegal drugs.

 

[PainDrain]

By ‘Wall’ Trump meant a virtual wall, aka a worker ID card with severe employer consequences for hiring illegals. By steel or concrete he meant the mental image of a steel or concrete wall that knowledge of an effective worker ID would create in the minds of would-be illegal immigrants.

This is sarcasm right? Seriously you don’t really believe this right?

 

[pgg]

By ‘Wall’ Trump meant a virtual wall, aka a worker ID card with severe employer consequences for hiring illegals. By steel or concrete he meant the mental image of a steel or concrete wall that knowledge of an effective worker ID would create in the minds of would-be illegal immigrants.

I don't believe for a second that he ever spoke in such abstract terms. Come on, really, he's not a person known for layered use of metaphors.

A physical wall from one ocean to the other is a stupid idea because it won't work. That's the only argument that needs to be made against it. No one needs to delve into the weeds of cost or derail their argument with cries of racism or fairness. It's a stupid idea because it won't work.

 

[deleted126335]

There ya go. Most folks are smart enough to pick the crazy capitalist over the crazy socialist..

Most folks in our income demographic. Fixed it for ya.

 

[deleted50478]

This is sarcasm right? Seriously you don’t really believe this right?

Right. It’s what I think he should have meant but definitely not what I think he actually meant.

 

[doctalaughs]

I keep saying:

There are many who are not fans of Trump and actually believe he’s probably a racist (and definitely a narcissistic ass****).... yet given policies laid out by dems will vote for him. These people FAR outweigh his vocal supporters.

I think he blundered on the family separation issue but overall he’s winning on immigration.... most Americans agree we can’t just have open borders. As much as the dems say they aren’t for that - they are doing a piss-poor job of articulating how you stop the flood while Trump has made actual major progress recently.

In trade no president has ever stood up to China before in a major way when they clearly gamed the system. Can’t tell where we’ll end up but he is making a stand.

In in UN it’s true that finally countries are paying more for defense of their own security... as we should have demanded years ago. Maybe it did take someone “not being diplomatic.”

For Israel there has been zero progress for 50 years and just more bloodshed while the UN is blatantly anti-semitic. Maybe we just have to not care what the world thinks, pick the side of our ally (Israel) and stop pretending to be an arbiter of a peace that clearly will never work when the terrorists are lobbing rockets.

For Iran he ripped up a joke of a deal which basically just funded a terrorist nation in exchange for kicking the can down the road 5-10 years.

I do hate how he handles Russia and the election tampering stuff... so I don’t agree with all his policies.

That being said, I think warren/sanders and most of the dems are absolutely crazy and will destroy our economy and nation with their policies.

I would vote Biden over Trump but if it comes down to voting for a racist with many policies I agree with... versus a person who I think Has crazy policies and no rational way to pay for it... guess who I’m voting for?

I don't believe for a second that he ever spoke in such abstract terms. Come on, really, he's not a person known for layered use of metaphors.

A physical wall from one ocean to the other is a stupid idea because it won't work. That's the only argument that needs to be made against it. No one needs to delve into the weeds of cost or derail their argument with cries of racism or fairness. It's a stupid idea because it won't work.

I agree that it’s a stupid idea. What Democrats don’t understand is that many people who will vote for Trump think along these lines “meh... the wall seems dumb but at least he acknowledges that we can’t have open borders and is trying to do something about it. And his policy requiring application for asylum in countries you pass through before applying here is working. Meanwhile the democrats are proposing my tax dollars go to paying for free illegal healthcare and many of them are for abolishing ICE and making violating our border no longer illegal.... hmm, who should I vote for??? Not hard. ”


Given that choice Trump scores a huge win in that category. If on the other hand Dems were saying “the wall is a colossal waste of money.... we propose strict employer enforcement with punishment for violators, streamlining the legal immigration process and smart technological barriers to illegal crossings .... well, maybe they would be winning.

As it stands, Trump has successfully painted them as the party of open borders because their policies read like the illegals are their sole constituents!

 

[vector2]

He definitely means a literal, physical, stupid-a$$ wall (that Mexico was supposed to pay for). This is not a point of contention as the Pentagon signed off on diverting $3.6B in already earmarked domestic and foreign military construction spending to a project that an R congress wouldnt even sign off on.

 

[Impromptu]

I tend to vote Republican, but I did not vote for Trump last election. I voted for one of the alternatives. Every time something good happens in the country to make me consider voting for Trump, he says or does something that pushes me back to one of those alternatives. I do not believe he has a mastermind strategy that we just do not see. I think it is easy to see that most of it is simply inconsistent. Except for the China policy. That is a chance to do some good. I cannot see Biden, Warren, or Sanders standing up to China in any way. I think they would shrivel up, or in Sander's case, apologize to China and give them half of our wealth.

For dealing with China, our economy is roaring, which is the only time that one can engage in a trade war. Just as in the 1980s when we outspent the USSR and helped cause their collapse, we are in a position where we can out-tariff China and cause their economy to collapse. The 1980s spending was not good for our national debt, but it did accomplish the collapse of the USSR. Our current spending makes the 1980s look like extreme fiscal responsibility. But due to the great economy, this could be the only time that we can actually get positive world change with regard to China. It would also help China, in the long run.

 

[GravelRider]

I tend to vote Republican, but I did not vote for Trump last election. I voted for one of the alternatives. Every time something good happens in the country to make me consider voting for Trump, he says or does something that pushes me back to one of those alternatives. I do not believe he has a mastermind strategy that we just do not see. I think it is easy to see that most of it is simply inconsistent. Except for the China policy. That is a chance to do some good. I cannot see Biden, Warren, or Sanders standing up to China in any way. I think they would shrivel up, or in Sander's case, apologize to China and give them half of our wealth.

For dealing with China, our economy is roaring, which is the only time that one can engage in a trade war. Just as in the 1980s when we outspent the USSR and helped cause their collapse, we are in a position where we can out-tariff China and cause their economy to collapse. The 1980s spending was not good for our national debt, but it did accomplish the collapse of the USSR. Our current spending makes the 1980s look like extreme fiscal responsibility. But due to the great economy, this could be the only time that we can actually get positive world change with regard to China. It would also help China, in the long run.

You can say a lot of bad things about Bernie Sanders, but one thing he has been consistent with is opposing free trade deals with China. He was critical and actually opposed U.S trade deals with China long before it was cool to do so. Sanders has said some supportive things about Trump’s aggressive tactics with China, but he tends to want to go further about addressing income inequality at home.

 

[PainDrain]

I agree that it’s a stupid idea. What Democrats don’t understand is that many people who will vote for Trump think along these lines “meh... the wall seems dumb but at least he acknowledges that we can’t have open borders and is trying to do something about it. And his policy requiring application for asylum in countries you pass through before applying here is working. Meanwhile the democrats are proposing my tax dollars go to paying for free illegal healthcare and many of them are for abolishing ICE and making violating our border no longer illegal.... hmm, who should I vote for??? Not hard. ”


Given that choice Trump scores a huge win in that category. If on the other hand Dems were saying “the wall is a colossal waste of money.... we propose strict employer enforcement with punishment for violators, streamlining the legal immigration process and smart technological barriers to illegal crossings .... well, maybe they would be winning.

As it stands, Trump has successfully painted them as the party of open borders because their policies read like the illegals are their sole constituents!

I recently heard a story regarding a series of raids and deportations at dairy farms in Wisconsin. One of the people interviewed was a Trump-voting dairy farmer who has had trouble finding labor for his farm since several area workers were deported. To paraphrase, he basically said “yah they are illegal but I didn’t think people like that would get deported.” I think his statement hits at the heart of the stupidity of the general public regarding immigration. He honestly didn’t think these were the people who would or should get deported. To this farmer I would say “well who the hell did you think would get deported?”

 

[radsisrad]

Claims that a wall alone is ineffective are based on intellectual dishonesty or myopia. A physical barrier is virtually always significantly effective (see Hungary, Israel, China, etc.). But, yes, E-Verify, visa enforcement, ending chain migration, and termination of birthright citizenship all should be parts of comprehensive immigration reform.

 

[Mikkel]

Claims that a wall alone is ineffective are based on intellectual dishonesty or myopia. A physical barrier is virtually always significantly effective (see Hungary, Israel, China, etc.). But, yes, E-Verify, visa enforcement, ending chain migration, and termination of birthright citizenship all should be parts of comprehensive immigration reform.

Or Nancy Pelosi's mansion, or George Soros, or Mark Zuckerberg.

Or anyone who lives in a walled house with locked doors.

Same idea with guns. The rich and powerful talk about disarming the public, yet they have armed security.

 

[jw3600]

This thread is already pretty wild. So I’m just gonna throw this out there.

When did it become “anti-Semitic” to questions the actions of Israel?

I don’t give a flying F that they're Jewish.

They could be purple Martians. They have done horrendous things and simply just play the 20th century victim card and accuse you of hating Jews if you say anything.

Edit: to make my point clearer. The Chinese government is basically an authoritative oligarchy of dickbags. I don’t think we have even scratched the surface of the degree of oppression of that country because of their world class censorship and propaganda. But if I say that no one calls me “anti-Chinese” or accuses me of hating Chinese people. Stark contrast to my comments about Israel.

 

[Mikkel]

This thread is already pretty wild. So I’m just gonna throw this out there.

When did it become “anti-Semitic” to questions the actions of Israel?

I don’t give a flying F that they're Jewish.

They could be purple Martians. They have done horrendous things and simply just play the 20th century victim card and accuse you of hating Jews if you say anything.

Edit: to make my point clearer. The Chinese government is basically an authoritative oligarchy of dickbags. I don’t think we have even scratched the surface of the degree of oppression of that country because of their world class censorship and propaganda. But if I say that no one calls me “anti-Chinese” or accuses me of hating Chinese people. Stark contrast to my comments about Israel.

Are you kidding?

In the 1930s and 1940s, millions of Jews were killed, but a lot of the world turned a blind eye.

For the last 1000+ years, there has been a group of people with an ideology that approved of that event. They also want to go farther than that.

The BDS movement, which Tlaib and Omar support, has the express purpose of strangulating the only Jewish country in the entire world.

The "criticism" of Israel is fundamentally fueled by hatred of the Jewish people.


P.S., you should be absolutely ashamed of saying they're playing the "victim card" when they lost millions of people in death camps and their existence is threatened even today.

 

[deleted50478]

Are you kidding?

In the 1930s and 1940s, millions of Jews were killed, but a lot of the world turned a blind eye.

For the last 1000+ years, there has been a group of people with an ideology that approved of that event. They also want to go farther than that.

The BDS movement, which Tlaib and Omar support, has the express purpose of strangulating the only Jewish country in the entire world.

The "criticism" of Israel is fundamentally fueled by hatred of the Jewish people.


P.S., you should be absolutely ashamed of saying they're playing the "victim card" when they lost millions of people in death camps and their existence is threatened even today.

If only people realized that religion is bull**** these things would never happen again on a large or small scale.

 

[Mikkel]

If only people realized that religion is bull**** these things would never happen again on a large or small scale.

Stalin and Mao agree with you. The outcomes were different than your prediction.

 

[deleted50478]

Stalin and Mao agree with you. The outcomes were different than your prediction.

I was suggesting religion would end through education not eradication.

 

[Mikkel]

I was suggesting religion would end through education not eradication.

Are you saying that the better educated you are, the less you'll be satisfied with religion?

For me personally, the more I've been through education, the more I have been satisfied by my faith.

 

[deleted171991]

If only people realized that religion is bull**** these things would never happen again on a large or small scale.

if there weren't the religious angle, they would find some different brainwash. Stupid people always like to "think" in black and white, and to be told stories. Like stupid little children. No real difference.

It's called scapegoating. It's "us" vs "them". We are "good", they are "bad", and everything bad in our lives is because of "them". The kind of lies most alpha-wiseguys spread to the beta-*****s to get to and keep power.

For that to disappear, one would have to cure human stupidity, Gattaca-style.

Sometimes I see apparently intelligent people write some truly stupid and hateful stuff, even on this very forum. The basic human emotion is not love, it's hate based on envy.

I've also seen some very intelligent and rational religious people in my life. It's not religion that's bad, it's when a hateful religion (e.g. certain currents of Islam) gets to brainwash a ***** with an IQ of less than 100 or more (more than 50% of the population).

Btw, the main reason one doesn't like to be told one is stupid is usually that one is.

 

[deleted50478]

Are you saying that the better educated you are, the less you'll be satisfied with religion?

For me personally, the more I've been through education, the more I have been satisfied by my faith.

Education won’t cure gullibility but it will remove religion from many logical, critical thinkers.

I’m not saying religious people generally aren’t critical thinkers, most aren’t, but the rest are critical thinkers in every aspect of their lives except religion.
(Unless you have personal experience with a deity in which case visiting a psychiatrist would probably be more beneficial than a religious leader.)

Education would significantly decrease population religiosity.

 

[Mikkel]

Education won’t cure gullibility but it will remove religion from many logical, critical thinkers.

I’m not saying religious people generally aren’t critical thinkers, most aren’t, but the rest are critical thinkers in every aspect of their lives except religion.
(Unless you have personal experience with a deity in which case visiting a psychiatrist would probably be more beneficial than a religious leader.)

Education would significantly decrease population religiosity.

In the context of the latest research on quantum mechanics, astrophysics, biology, astronomy, this is the best time in the history of Christianity to be a well educated Christian.

The philosophical questions that religion tries to address are not "scientific" questions, but that doesn't make them an invalid pursuit of the mind.

Science can't answer philosophical questions, and philosophy can't answer scientific questions. Being in the middle is the most intriguing.

 

[Mikkel]

Education would significantly decrease population religiosity.

Depends on what kind of religiosity you're talking about.

I know many "well-educated" who go beyond logic and science in their attitudes toward GMOs and vaccines for instance.

Religiosity exists in people who think science can answer all questions, even philosophical ones.

 

[odyssey2]

Depends on what kind of religiosity you're talking about.

I know many "well-educated" who go beyond logic and science in their attitudes toward GMOs and vaccines for instance.

Religiosity exists in people who think science can answer all questions, even philosophical ones.

I don't think education removes a sense of spirituality, and it can't remove all traces of ignorance and misguided beliefs (although I think scientific education specifically helps prevent strange beliefs about GMOs and vaccines, etc.) but I think it has been shown to remove unquestioning belief in organized religion and at least open people up to skepticism of dogma. This leads people to strange places sometimes but it definitely erodes the bedrock of religion.