DEFCON Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 Okay, Trump is a walking bag of personality faults and other undesirable things, but how can the Democratic side allow their own charade to go on? From the Rebel ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Hudson Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 mo32a, if others' contributions get tiresome for you, just move on to comments more in agreement with your own views . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Hudson Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 Hi DEFCON; To me a decision on which candidate to vote for is now a question of risk management. A decision to vote for the "Least Worst" candidate for 4 years so that the nation remains sufficiently stable in order to accomodate change being heralded by angry voters, without a loss-of-control accident so to speak, is such a decision. It is highly probably that the alternative would be a nation distracted with various attempts to control Trump's actions in office. Change has to occur, that much is clear, but it is better to survive to fight another day, than go all in this time around for a candidate who has proven himself inordinately vulnerable to the rough-and-tumble of politics let alone the demands of high public office. The risks of a Trump presidency are being signalled by every nation and every governmental institution with which the U.S. has an important connection or relationship. It is not only the Republicans who are rightly abandoning their candidate. This is by no means equivalent to a "Brexit" decision; not even close. The existence of Great Britain was never in doubt after such a vote. The objection to worst-case dire predictions of a Trump presidency is that the United States has checks and balances in all three branches of the U.S. government which would protect the Republic against the consequences of "one-man rule". But think of it. Such a need for severe controls and limitations on Presidential powers has never been seen or done before. The situation is rife with the potential for unnecessary precedents on the office and that would be nation-altering. The very worst case was Nixon in 1973-74 which took enormous quantities of time, energy, focus and resources but the impeachment process worked. This time around, a claim of executive privilege is virtually guaranteed with such a dysfunctional personality. We would be talking about a real power vacuum, not the hypothetical accusations raised during this abysmal electioneering process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 "But think of it. Such a need for severe controls and limitations on Presidential powers has never been seen or done before. The situation is rife with the potential for unnecessary precedents on the office and that would be nation-altering" It's all only my opinion, but I believe the US and the world would have fared a lot better had Presidents beginning with Johnson respected their Constitution, the protection of which is a President's first and primary duty. There's loads of blame to direct at various Congresses too that were and are supposed to ensure a President doesn't exceed the Constitutional limits of his office, but failed to do so. Regardless of a governor's perceived responsibilities, or any checks & balances against abuses of power that may be in place, ignoring the rules seems to have become the preferred style of governance since Eisenhower. As things presently stand, it appears the banksters are prevailing; they have come to own & direct the affairs of Western governments, all at the expense of the people. In the Clinton's case, the evidence seems obvious, they chose long ago to be friends to the corporatocracy and have nothing but crocodile tears to offer the little guy they claim to care about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deicer Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/trumps-other-doctors-weigh-in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mo32a Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 On 8/27/2016 at 7:33 AM, Don Hudson said: mo32a, if others' contributions get tiresome for you, just move on to comments more in agreement with your own views . . . Not tiresome, more like telling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 Holy pots and kettles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Hudson Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 A record number of Americans now dislike Hillary Clinton https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/31/a-record-number-of-americans-now-dislike-hillary-clinton/?wpisrc=nl_most-draw8&wpmm=1 Quote Hillary Clinton hit her stride after the Democratic National Convention, riding to a double-digit lead over Donald Trump in some national and swing-state polls -- her highest of the year. As of today, though, Americans' views of her just hit a record low. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows 41 percent of Americans have a favorable impression of Clinton, while 56 percent have an unfavorable one. That's the worst image Clinton has had in her quarter-century in national public life. Her previous low favorable rating this year was in July, when it was 42 percent, lower than any mark in historical Post-ABC polls except a few points in the 1990s when a large share of the public had no opinion of her. Her previous high for unfavorable views was in June, when 55 percent disliked Clinton. http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/politics/washington-post-abc-news-poll-aug-24-28-2016/2084/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted August 31, 2016 Author Share Posted August 31, 2016 Maybe our only hope is for both candidates to be declared unfit somehow, so Obama can sit for a third term? .... Good grief this is getting more like a bad dream every day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Hudson Posted September 1, 2016 Share Posted September 1, 2016 Keep in mind that the popular vote is separate from the Electoral College Vote. Today was a good day for Trump. His speech was a brilliant performance tonight. He had a great day in Mexico City even if his approval rating by Mexicans is 2%, (lower than Kim Jong Un). It was for many, likely a welcome change and may even be seen by some as "presidential", so low has the standard plummeted for both parties in terms of expectations and performance. But such one-day successes don't make a pattern. His campaign still has much to overcome before the E.C. would reflect significant change. Also, we have the Commander-in-Chief debate next week, and the three debates for later in September and in October. The country has two candidates and they must deal with them regardless of what they think of either. It will be interesting to hear what the hard-right have to say to Trump after today's speech. It was extremely well crafted to move hearts and minds and it certainly did that to the audience in Phoenix. We'll see how that translates over the next week or two. That said, it was nothing new, just a firming up of the "softening" he had slipped into; the speech was as racist as ever and the plan for solving illegals entirely, wholly impractical as a solution to immigration issues. He's just pipe dreaming, selling snake oil and reasons to keep angry. Even Bush 43 quickly realized that deporting a significant part of the workforce couldn't be done without harming the U.S. economy. It just isn't possible to round up 11-million people and send them back to their country so they can re-apply. They're way too far down the road - take Bush 41 & Reagan debating in 1980: http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a41023/ronald-reagan-george-bush-immigration/ All this said, how does Trump plan to deport U.S. citizens? . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mo32a Posted September 1, 2016 Share Posted September 1, 2016 Which US citizens would those be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Hudson Posted September 1, 2016 Share Posted September 1, 2016 The question applies to the children of illegal immigrants born on U.S. soil, (jus soli), and who are American citizens under the 14th Amendment. The disparaging term usually seen is "anchor babies", (like real-estate tourism here in B.C.), which is a misnomer because it actually does not work as intended; - citizen sponsorship (of parents) does not apply for those under 21. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mo32a Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 I don't think Trump ever stated that the children born in the US would be deported. It was under Obama's watch that deportations significantly increased, all Trump has to do is continue that practice. He would make a big show of ramping it up but then it would slowly go back to where it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Hudson Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 mo32a; So, the children stay, and the parents go?! Can you imagine how that would play in a country already being torn apart, and a Republican Party in its death throes? We will see what actually transpires under a Trump presidency should he be elected, but he unequivocably, on record, stated that "11 million" were going and "2 million" would be outa the country on Day One. I can see the Constituional challenges now when he tries to send families with American citizens "back to their country". I agree however, that continuing the practice that Obama instituted is a solution. But that's not what Trump has been saying in all his speeches, and, you will grant, last week's "softening" on deportations elicited an unbelievably hostile tirade from Trump supporters. What he said was what Jeb Bush, Rubio and others had advocated during the debates and that was unacceptable. So Trump flips again, driven by hostility on the part of his followers on the one hand and idle flattery to which he is addicted, on the other. It's a mess, no? If you want to take a look at what Trump is unleashing which is "replacing" a Republican voice... https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/aug/30/breitbart-takes-centre-stage-as-donald-trump-embraces-the-alt-right https://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/how-2015-fueled-the-rise-of-the-freewheeling-white-nationali?utm_term=.sl0kzZbPp#.fkKzlvdV2 http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-conservatives-guide-to-the-alt-right/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Don "Can you imagine how that would play in a country already being torn apart, and a Republican Party in its death throes?" Bernie's bid to become the Democrats nominee for the Presidency was conducted under false pretences; he was posing as a Democrat to achieve his ambition. Had he prevailed, the Party probably would be renamed the 'New Democratic Party' ... socialistic irony at its best! This is the same sort of impact Trump has already imparted upon the status quo of the Republican Party and its ruling elite. It's only mho, but Bernie's inclusion in the Democratic Primary is / was a pretty clear indication of that Party's beginning the long overdue process of renewal, which apparently can only take place when extreme circumstances exist; anything less has only led to more talk and unfulfilled political promises. History will likely remember Trump as the extreme catalyst that was necessary to get the process of instituting meaningful change underway. It's important to note I think that Obama promised 'change you could believe in', but the record will show he fell dismally short of the stated objective, likely because he is unfortunately lacking in the kind of leadership skill & experience necessary to meeting the commitments made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaEH Posted September 3, 2016 Share Posted September 3, 2016 Quote A decision to vote for the "Least Worst" candidate for 4 years This is how I feel every time an election comes up. Judging by the apathy in recent years I'm not alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JL Posted September 5, 2016 Share Posted September 5, 2016 A film I watched on Netflix last night that has oddly familiar themes to what is going on down south...."Look Who's Back" You will laugh, you will wince, you will be offended and above all you will think about it for a few days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 Hello Don Yes, Trump is the anti-Christ of, or antithesis to conventional Party politics. A couple of weeks back over 50 prominent establishment Republicans joined hands and wrote a letter condemning Trump. In short order and with typical flippant flare Trump responded by simply classifying the signatories as the gang that made the world the mess it is today. Trump's instant slap back was quite brilliant, very fitting and totally dismissive I thought; he had sucked the air right out of the gang of 50's balloon with one sentence.. I don't know that I could claim that the report I saw earlier is accurate, or just foolery as I'd hope, but it sounds typical of the man; it's alleged that Trump advanced his view on the history of Canada / US relations etc. on the FOX morning show yesterday. Anyway, make sure you're bolted down for that little gem of American revisionist history when it comes across your screen. I completely appreciate your concern Don and I'd never suggest your analysis is somehow fatally flawed and therefore unreasonable, but as an old guy that really does want to see meaningful change in his time, I know Trump is the only catalyst capable of disrupting the current game plan and status quo that runs completely contrary to the notion of true freedom and is limiting humanity's ability to flourish accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 Given that even his own party doesn't really want him, I wonder just exactly how one man can ever hope to be a catalyst for change. The powers that be in Washington are not likely to just roll over and play dead at his beck and call. More likely, they will drag him kicking and screaming into accepting the status quo because there's just too much money in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 I like most people was dreading the 18 + month long US Presidential election cycle, but Trump's inclusion 'changed' all that and for better, or worse, the whole world is now sharing in the experience. I trust a 'President Trump' will have at least the same impact on the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 My prediction if Trump becomes president is the the impact will be a large caliber hit to the upper body. the "mainstream" government cronies (let alone the Clintons) wont let him get far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 A lot of people share that horror Boestar. Can you imagine the civil war that would follow an assassination; the West would look like a repeat of the French Revolution.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 4 hours ago, boestar said: My prediction if Trump becomes president is the the impact will be a large caliber hit to the upper body. the "mainstream" government cronies (let alone the Clintons) wont let him get far. My prediction is that you are now on a "Watch List". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 For those who are still pro-Hillary: (skip ahead to 4:30) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Hudson Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 When this is all over, I think Kellyanne Conway's book is going to make fascinating reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.