Donald Trump for President Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bruce Wayne said:
For me Sanders is in much the same camp as Trump, albeit he's infinitely more likeable. The reason I lump them (and to a large extent Corbyn) together is that they can largely attribute their popularity to proposing schemes that sound great but are largely unworkable. It's an old adage that it's best to under-promise and over-deliver, but populist politicians are the exact opposite, as we've seen with the likes of Syriza and the mess we're in with Brexit at the moment, where most of the promises that got them where they are, are unlikely to be kept.

I'd much rather a politician who was honest with the electorate and ensured pledges had at least some attachment to reality, even if that makes them less grandiose and tub thumping.
Click to expand...

Do you really think Sanders was tub thumping just to get elected? Not playing dirty surely showed he wouldn't follow the usual tactics just to get the nomination, and as such would that not suggest he was genuine in his beliefs and in what he could do? Rather than just say whatever all the time like Trump.

Perhaps Sanders point was....this is how it should be. Your point about unworkable schemes is fair enough in the current climate and system, but perhaps what Sanders was saying is this is how things should be and the system should change to make these things workable. Considering the large flaws in most governments in the US for many years, what cost an idealist who would try to make a proper change?

If we always only play within the current system and rules nothing can move forward. Which is dangerous in politics when for so many it seems the system is rigged. The reality that you feel the pledges should be attached to is perhaps not the preferred one for many people. Even if ultimately such a President might hit a brick wall in his efforts it would be a start, no?

To be honest I am far from an expert in this area so my point might be a little superficial, but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
 

joey_macmo said:
I don't even think you've seen the statement have you? The government has said it's nothing to do with the US and is following its own foreign policy.

You said that opposite opinions are oppressed yet Ecuador have housed a fugitive from the US government for 4 years.

Is it realistic to think they'd grant a them a request now after 4 years of disobeying them on a much greater issue?
Click to expand...
Read my post again. The minister himself has said that.
 

bicycleheader said:
Do you really think Sanders was tub thumping just to get elected? Not playing dirty surely showed he wouldn't follow the usual tactics just to get the nomination, and as such would that not suggest he was genuine in his beliefs and in what he could do? Rather than just say whatever all the time like Trump.

Perhaps Sanders point was....this is how it should be. Your point about unworkable schemes is fair enough in the current climate and system, but perhaps what Sanders was saying is this is how things should be and the system should change to make these things workable. Considering the large flaws in most governments in the US for many years, what cost an idealist who would try to make a proper change?

If we always only play within the current system and rules nothing can move forward. Which is dangerous in politics when for so many it seems the system is rigged. The reality that you feel the pledges should be attached to is perhaps not the preferred one for many people. Even if ultimately such a President might hit a brick wall in his efforts it would be a start, no?

To be honest I am far from an expert in this area so my point might be a little superficial, but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
Click to expand...

Oh for sure, I don't doubt he believed what he was saying, much as Jeremy Corbyn undoubtedly believes what he says too, I'm just not sure that either of them propose things for the real world as opposed to their ideal world. That isn't to say we shouldn't try and improve things, but I'm not sure veering towards fantasy helps anyone, but that's the standard populist position. It tries to make what is very complex, very simple.
 

Bruce Wayne said:
I really don't get the big deal with the email situation. Mountain out of a molehill isn't it?
Click to expand...
You've been a reasonable fellow for as long as I've seen you on this forum and I welcome this opportunity.

As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was an employee of the federal government, just as is the lowest E-#, and is subject to the same legal relationship regarding our national security. It is undeniable that she took extraordinary secret means to firewall herself from FOIA scrutiny of her correspondence, through the use and creation of another server against the direct letter of the law as it applies to all federal employees. All federal employees are subject to this kind of scrutiny because it tends to keep them honest. Unless, of course, she is different in some way, and is exempt from the constraints of the law.

Additionally, it is entirely possible that this server has played a role in compromising the entire security structure of this nation, as the prolific release of hacked documents has so clearly showed in this election year. For some months now, we have learned that she has consistently lied about her role in the debacle. The failure of the GOP to nominate a plausible candidate this year does not obscure the fact that our next President will be guilty of far more serious breaches of the national trust prior to her inauguration than the worst has been at the close of their regretful terms. The details regarding her arrangements make it undeniable that very bad people with bad designs on both you and me are in possession of lots of information they have no business holding. You might not call the abetting of this sort of thing treasonous, but you must call it feckless and shortsighted at the very least, and criminal by the definition of the laws of this nation. To follow further, due to the discovery of the POTUS alias correspondence to the Clinton private server address, it's pretty clear he was not only aware but complicit in the whole thing, which explains so much more. And these folks are guaranteed to stay in power for at least the next four years.

I'm a bit gobsmacked that a reasonable fellow like you can't see this clearly and in full. You're too busy looking at the dumpster fire that is Trump to see the real threat. It's clear to me and to lots of others over here that's something's just not right with this.

And then, I find that the only way to stop this criminal gang is to vote for yet another toxic narcissist named Trump. It's enough to make you want to join the next Mars expedition just to get away from it all. If the fix was truly in, how would it looks any different from what we already see?

@TX Bill
 
Bruce Wayne said:
Oh for sure, I don't doubt he believed what he was saying, much as Jeremy Corbyn undoubtedly believes what he says too, I'm just not sure that either of them propose things for the real world as opposed to their ideal world. That isn't to say we shouldn't try and improve things, but I'm not sure veering towards fantasy helps anyone, but that's the standard populist position. It tries to make what is very complex, very simple.
Click to expand...

again, without being an expert....isn't keeping things "too complex to change" one way of keeping a system rigged?
 
mezzrow said:
You've been a reasonable fellow for as long as I've seen you on this forum and I welcome this opportunity.

As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was an employee of the federal government, just as is the lowest E-#, and is subject to the same legal relationship regarding our national security. It is undeniable that she took extraordinary secret means to firewall herself from FOIA scrutiny of her correspondence, through the use and creation of another server against the direct letter of the law as it applies to all federal employees. All federal employees are subject to this kind of scrutiny because it tends to keep them honest. Unless, of course, she is different in some way, and is exempt from the constraints of the law.

Additionally, it is entirely possible that this server has played a role in compromising the entire security structure of this nation, as the prolific release of hacked documents has so clearly showed in this election year. For some months now, we have learned that she has consistently lied about her role in the debacle. The failure of the GOP to nominate a plausible candidate this year does not obscure the fact that our next President will be guilty of far more serious breaches of the national trust prior to her inauguration than the worst has been at the close of their regretful terms. The details regarding her arrangements make it undeniable that very bad people with bad designs on both you and me are in possession of lots of information they have no business holding. You might not call the abetting of this sort of thing treasonous, but you must call it feckless and shortsighted at the very least, and criminal by the definition of the laws of this nation. To follow further, due to the discovery of the POTUS alias correspondence to the Clinton private server address, it's pretty clear he was not only aware but complicit in the whole thing, which explains so much more. And these folks are guaranteed to stay in power for at least the next four years.

I'm a bit gobsmacked that a reasonable fellow like you can't see this clearly and in full. You're too busy looking at the dumpster fire that is Trump to see the real threat. It's clear to me and to lots of others over here that's something's just not right with this.

And then, I find that the only way to stop this criminal gang is to vote for yet another toxic narcissist named Trump. It's enough to make you want to join the next Mars expedition just to get away from it all. If the fix was truly in, how would it looks any different from what we already see?

@TX Bill
Click to expand...

You'll have to forgive me as I haven't really followed this in great detail, and many of the emails that have come out via the hacks appear to simply be standard political chatter. I get that emailing from a private server is daft, but I don't really get the massive security risk the nation now faces as a result of it. What was in the emails that was so dangerous?
 
bicycleheader said:
again, without being an expert....isn't keeping things "too complex to change" one way of keeping a system rigged?
Click to expand...

I'd say it's realistic. The world is a complex place, and too often it's overly simplified, and certainly in the sense that politicians say with great certainty that doing x will equal y. There's no such thing as probability in the lexicon of many politicians, at least not publicly. For instance, if you look at his core pledges, he's spending an incredible amount of money - https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-bernie-pays-for-his-proposals/

There must be a huge element of doubt as to whether his plans for raising those funds would ever raise even close to what he'd need.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top