Donald J Trump, your thoughts on his Presidency

[Weave]

And for background, I took a break from this site back before the election because of the tone of those characterizing Trump voters.  During the primaries, and in the run up to the election there was alot of noise on this site stating basically that if you support Trump you are supporting bigotry.  I took exception to it because it was characterizing members of my immediate family as supporters of bigotry.  I took enough exception to it that I disappeared for a few months.

I'm stating that to say that my movement towards the idea that supporting this President is supporting bigotry has been an evolving one.  The family members who supported and voted for Trump acknowledge their error and see now that his policies really are based on intolerance and not patriotism.  That he makes decisions for his benefit and not the country's.  I'm proud to say that I have surrounded myself with people that don't have a party loyalty that clouds their judgement of the people in those parties.

Given how far we are into his term, and that Pence is the next batter up, there is no need to support Trump to get the policy you want.  So if you are still supporting Trump at this time, and using some policy point to defend that support, you are in fact supporting the bigotry and intolerance he is using to base his policy decisions.  Because you don't need Trump in office to have that policy maintained through the next inauguration.  There really is no valid defense for using policy to support the President at this point.  If you are defending Trump, it is because you support Trump the person and not Trump the policy anymore.

Edited December 22, 2019 by Weave

[LTS]

23 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said:

It only took three years to get here. On election night people rioted in the streets, committed acts of vandalism and some called for violence. Then they took to social media articulating their hate. Then they targeted his wife with their hate. Now they target millions of fellow Americans by calling them supporters of all kinds of vile things. So I’m supposed to believe I support hate and bigotry from the very people who point fingers and propagate hate and division? Maybe if those who claim to be woke actually set a better example they wouldn’t come across as hypocritical and just as bad as what they accuse others of being.

 

Hate is hate, it doesn't matter what side you are on.  Just because the left act like a bunch of jerks doesn't absolve the right from doing the same.  It can be hypocritical for one side to speak it of the other but that doesn't change the fact that supporting Trump is supporting his bigotry and hate.  If you take any equivalent person, from any political ideal, and they were like Trump, it would be the same scenario.

As long as people continue to support these attitudes, nothing will improve.

[LGR4GM]

On 12/21/2019 at 11:34 AM, SABRES 0311 said:

It only took three years to get here. On election night people rioted in the streets, committed acts of vandalism and some called for violence. Then they took to social media articulating their hate. Then they targeted his wife with their hate. Now they target millions of fellow Americans by calling them supporters of all kinds of vile things. So I’m supposed to believe I support hate and bigotry from the very people who point fingers and propagate hate and division? Maybe if those who claim to be woke actually set a better example they wouldn’t come across as hypocritical and just as bad as what they accuse others of being.

 

And what do you say to trump calling for Democrats to be tried for treason, Jews are anti Jewish if they don't support him, those who oppose him are un american. Look in the mirror. Both sides use this tactic. It's why I'll never join a party. Trump however takes it to an extreme. It's very nationalistic. You support him or you're a traitor. That's not democracy. 

22 hours ago, Hank said:

Keep crying. You entertain me. ?

We should keep track of how often you do this. It's a fairly regular tactic of yours. Someone disagrees and they are "whining" "crying" "a snowflake". For someone claiming the other side is this, you sure do it the most often when challenged. 

Edited December 22, 2019 by LGR4GM

[SABRES 0311]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

And what do you say to trump calling for Democrats to be tried for treason, Jews are anti Jewish if they don't support him, those who oppose him are un american. Look in the mirror. Both sides use this tactic. It's why I'll never join a party. Trump however takes it to an extreme. It's very nationalistic. You support him or you're a traitor. That's not democracy. 

I think it sucks when he personally attacks other people. I think it’s unbecoming the position. I also think pointing fingers at Trump supporters or saying things like our country won’t survive Trump is school yard emotional outbursts. Just like Trump looks like a crybaby so do Americans who act like him to attack other Americans. 
 

I think the left is being hypocritical. Sometimes I wonder if I’m the only one who sees where this road leads. 
 

 

Edited December 22, 2019 by SABRES 0311

[Eleven]

2 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said:

I think it sucks when he personally attacks other people. I think it’s unbecoming the position. I also think pointing fingers at Trump supporters or saying things like our country won’t survive Trump is school yard emotional outbursts. Just like Trump looks like a crybaby so do Americans who act like him to attack other Americans. 
 

I think the left is being hypocritical. Sometimes I wonder if I’m the only one who sees where this road leads. 
 

 

 

On 12/20/2019 at 4:34 PM, SABRES 0311 said:

So single issue voters who acknowledge the bad but support the president based on that issue still support bigotry? 

 

What is the "single issue" that can't be addressed by another Republican who doesn't act like Trump?

I will keep at this until you answer it.

Edited December 22, 2019 by Eleven

[SABRES 0311]

58 minutes ago, Eleven said:

 

 

What is the "single issue" that can't be addressed by another Republican who doesn't act like Trump?

I will keep at this until you answer it.

I already did. To me, the single issue no other Republican will address correctly is foreign policy as it pertains to projecting combat power. I believe leading Republicans will go with status quo of 21st century combat application which is nation destabilization leading to nation building. This presumption is based on the previous Republican president’s approach to the Global War on Terrorism which that administration also added NK in the Axis of Evil. I believe doing that conflated two different foreign threats/policy issues.

The reason I think leading Republicans will misuse combat power is because they simply don’t know any better. The only recent history they have to rely on is Afghanistan and Iraq. Although a president can rely on the Joint Chiefs for input, a person’s decision making will resort to their lowest level of experience. If you look at Republican leadership they are ingrained in the Washington way of doing things. That’s the best term I could come up with for it.

So the question is how is Trump different in this issue? The teachings of Sun Tzu, Von Clausewitz, and other sources in their application of military affairs is not too different than business dealings. At least from what has been explained to me. Perhaps Trump’s authorizing of small, specialized units and tactics reflects lessons learned in business ventures, failed and successful. In no way am I saying a businessman is an expert in warfighting or warrior mentality. Trump may simply have gotten lucky so far. 

The next question is why would someone care about this to the point of being a single voter issue? Many people if not all Americans are affected by decisions at the national level. It just so happens that right now this issue affects me and my family in a very direct way. So if large scale combat power must be projected I would appreciate it be done in the same manner with which I have seen combat power projected under this president.

Essentially the answer to your question is subjective. You will undoubtedly resort to anyone can do what I described. And because anyone can do it then why do we have to put up with Trump’s behavior? The easiest answer is you have to put up with it because he is still president. If you believe anyone could do what I described or better then go ahead and vote for them. Maybe the next Democrat president won’t screw it up like the last.

If you would like to change people’s minds about an issue I recommend changing your method. By you I mean those who do not support Trump. Buzzwords and finger pointing are laughable. Last time I checked it’s the same thing people fault Trump on. 

 

[LGR4GM]

6 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said:

I think it sucks when he personally attacks other people. I think it’s unbecoming the position. I also think pointing fingers at Trump supporters or saying things like our country won’t survive Trump is school yard emotional outbursts. Just like Trump looks like a crybaby so do Americans who act like him to attack other Americans. 
 

I think the left is being hypocritical. Sometimes I wonder if I’m the only one who sees where this road leads. 
 

 

Literally said both sides engage in similar behavior. But trump takes it to a new level. 

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, SABRES 0311 said:

I already did. To me, the single issue no other Republican will address correctly is foreign policy as it pertains to projecting combat power. I believe leading Republicans will go with status quo of 21st century combat application which is nation destabilization leading to nation building. This presumption is based on the previous Republican president’s approach to the Global War on Terrorism which that administration also added NK in the Axis of Evil. I believe doing that conflated two different foreign threats/policy issues.

The reason I think leading Republicans will misuse combat power is because they simply don’t know any better. The only recent history they have to rely on is Afghanistan and Iraq. Although a president can rely on the Joint Chiefs for input, a person’s decision making will resort to their lowest level of experience. If you look at Republican leadership they are ingrained in the Washington way of doing things. That’s the best term I could come up with for it.

So the question is how is Trump different in this issue? The teachings of Sun Tzu, Von Clausewitz, and other sources in their application of military affairs is not too different than business dealings. At least from what has been explained to me. Perhaps Trump’s authorizing of small, specialized units and tactics reflects lessons learned in business ventures, failed and successful. In no way am I saying a businessman is an expert in warfighting or warrior mentality. Trump may simply have gotten lucky so far. 

The next question is why would someone care about this to the point of being a single voter issue? Many people if not all Americans are affected by decisions at the national level. It just so happens that right now this issue affects me and my family in a very direct way. So if large scale combat power must be projected I would appreciate it be done in the same manner with which I have seen combat power projected under this president.

Essentially the answer to your question is subjective. You will undoubtedly resort to anyone can do what I described. And because anyone can do it then why do we have to put up with Trump’s behavior? The easiest answer is you have to put up with it because he is still president. If you believe anyone could do what I described or better then go ahead and vote for them. Maybe the next Democrat president won’t screw it up like the last.

If you would like to change people’s minds about an issue I recommend changing your method. By you I mean those who do not support Trump. Buzzwords and finger pointing are laughable. Last time I checked it’s the same thing people fault Trump on. 

 

I disagree with you. But thank you for stating your position. 

[SABRES 0311]

48 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I disagree with you. But thank you for stating your position. 

Which part or how?

[SABRES 0311]

59 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Literally said both sides engage in similar behavior. But trump takes it to a new level. 

Really? So Trump is a misogynist but it’s cool for people who dislike him to post naked pictures of his wife (publicly available) from when his wife did that stuff to denigrate her and memes saying she wants to have sex with other men? Please tell me how those who hate him are any better.

[LTS]

4 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said:

Really? So Trump is a misogynist but it’s cool for people who dislike him to post naked pictures of his wife (publicly available) from when his wife did that stuff to denigrate her and memes saying she wants to have sex with other men? Please tell me how those who hate him are any better.

From my point of view, no, it's not cool.  But it's easy for people to act as childish as those they oppose. At a minimum they can fall back on, "well, they did it."  It's all BS.

I know I am responding to a post that wasn't directed at me.  I don't hate Trump. Hate is a strong word.  Trump is completely incompetent for his position and I think he's not someone I would ever want to be around.  He's a problem as the face of the country, and of that I have no doubt.  Those who resort to the same childish, ignorant, and immature behavior to oppose him are no better.

But again, that doesn't make him right, it just makes him equally wrong.

[SABRES 0311]

23 minutes ago, LTS said:

From my point of view, no, it's not cool.  But it's easy for people to act as childish as those they oppose. At a minimum they can fall back on, "well, they did it."  It's all BS.

I know I am responding to a post that wasn't directed at me.  I don't hate Trump. Hate is a strong word.  Trump is completely incompetent for his position and I think he's not someone I would ever want to be around.  He's a problem as the face of the country, and of that I have no doubt.  Those who resort to the same childish, ignorant, and immature behavior to oppose him are no better.

But again, that doesn't make him right, it just makes him equally wrong.

Childish and immature as accusing millions of supporters you don’t even know of supporting bigotry? 

[Weave]

6 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said:

Childish and immature as accusing millions of supporters you don’t even know of supporting bigotry? 

Yes, the bigot is more childish and immature than the people saying that the bigot’s followers are supporting bigotry.

Really, I thought that would be self evident.

[Weave]

Since that was a hit and run post I’ll expand on it.

Absolute best case scenario, if you are excusing the behavior you are enabling it.  Enabling is supporting.  So as long as you are willing to look the other way and excuse it away because he’s doing something you agree with you are enabling his behavior.

 

Taking this further, I understand the discomfort regarding being lumped in with the bad part of Donald Trump, but if you are being honest with yourself you have to see and accept that by supporting Trump you are inherently reinforcing the bad.

When Nixon was impeached the reason that Senate leadership approached Nixon and asked him to step down was because Nixon was just about out of support from the Republican portion of populace.  Nixon doesn't get asked to resign if the Republican voters maintained support.  By the same token, the only thing stopping McConnell from asking for Trump to step down is the base that is sticking with Trump through all of the controversy.  And without any real pushback from the Republican party, the bad part of Trump is emboldened and enabled.

Edited December 23, 2019 by Weave

[LTS]

8 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said:

Childish and immature as accusing millions of supporters you don’t even know of supporting bigotry? 

What are you getting at here?  Are you referring to me or are you defending Trump's behavior by comparing it to the childish and immature behavior of some of his opposition?

 

 

[Hank]

23 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

 

We should keep track of how often you do this. It's a fairly regular tactic of yours. Someone disagrees and they are "whining" "crying" "a snowflake". For someone claiming the other side is this, you sure do it the most often when challenged. 

This is complete nonsense. 

What political opinion have I offered in this thread that the drunk Irishman, or you for that matter, disagreed with me on? 

What political opinion have I offered in here that I have been challenged on by anyone at all?

 

Think about it. Take your time.....

[LGR4GM]

On 12/21/2019 at 11:34 AM, SABRES 0311 said:

It only took three years to get here. On election night people rioted in the streets, committed acts of vandalism and some called for violence. Then they took to social media articulating their hate. Then they targeted his wife with their hate. Now they target millions of fellow Americans by calling them supporters of all kinds of vile things. So I’m supposed to believe I support hate and bigotry from the very people who point fingers and propagate hate and division? Maybe if those who claim to be woke actually set a better example they wouldn’t come across as hypocritical and just as bad as what they accuse others of being.

 

 

On 12/21/2019 at 1:13 PM, Hank said:

You're wasting your time. Ignorant people who won't see past their own hypocracy can't be reasoned with. 

 

On 12/21/2019 at 1:51 PM, drnkirishone said:

I am glad we found something we agree on about trump defenders

 

On 12/21/2019 at 1:54 PM, Hank said:

Keep crying. You entertain me. ?

You're clearly showing your support for the first post and sharing an opinion that the other side are hypocrites. You get cheeky push back from drnk and respond by telling him to "keep crying". 

This is a politics thread so all opinions here are political in nature. Considering what you responded to you can stop the attempted gaslighting. I'm just trying to suggest the snowflake  or crying accusations don't need to be apart of your responses. 

Edited December 23, 2019 by LGR4GM

[Hank]

6 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 

 

 

You're clearly showing your support for the first post and sharing an opinion that the other side are hypocrites. You get cheeky push back from drnk and respond by telling him to "keep crying". 

This is a politics thread so all opinions here are political in nature. Considering what you responded to you can stop the attempted gaslighting.

If you've been paying attention at all over the last few years you know I'm not a republican, not a huge fan of Trump, and think both sides are hypocrites and equally suck balls. 

Yes, a large percentage of his post's are some form of "the orange man is evil!!!!"  Yes, it does entertain me. 

You care, why?

[SABRES 0311]

1 hour ago, LTS said:

What are you getting at here?  Are you referring to me or are you defending Trump's behavior by comparing it to the childish and immature behavior of some of his opposition?

 

 

I’m referring to any and all who do that. Imagine going into a meeting where you have to present a competing idea. Now imagine the first thing you say is “this guy sucks and if you support his idea instead of mine you suck too.” Do you think anyone is actually going to apply active listening when you speak? 

[drnkirishone]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

If you've been paying attention at all over the last few years you know I'm not a republican, not a huge fan of Trump, and think both sides are hypocrites and equally suck balls. 

Yes, a large percentage of his post's are some form of "the orange man is evil!!!!"  Yes, it does entertain me. 

You care, why?

Commander in orange, he didn't sacrifice and seperate himself from all that money he makes from his businesses to just be called the orange man!

[Hank]

1 minute ago, drnkirishone said:

Commander in orange, he didn't sacrifice and seperate himself from all that money he makes from his businesses to just be called the orange man!

???

[LTS]

11 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said:

I’m referring to any and all who do that. Imagine going into a meeting where you have to present a competing idea. Now imagine the first thing you say is “this guy sucks and if you support his idea instead of mine you suck too.” Do you think anyone is actually going to apply active listening when you speak? 

No, I agree with that which is what i had said outright.

Constraining the discussion for Trump, if one supports him, then one does so accepting that he has demonstrated his bigotry and hatred.  It's just that one finds his redeeming qualities to outweight his negative.  However, it's still support for the overall person.

 

[SABRES 0311]

24 minutes ago, LTS said:

No, I agree with that which is what i had said outright.

Constraining the discussion for Trump, if one supports him, then one does so accepting that he has demonstrated his bigotry and hatred.  It's just that one finds his redeeming qualities to outweight his negative.  However, it's still support for the overall person.

 

Yes I can say in my own opinion the risk does not outweigh the gain for me specifically. As for bigotry how do you explain non white people who support him? 
 

So I outlined my specific reason why I still support him. I know one policy people don’t like are the tariffs against China. I do wonder if it is more than economics. I’d like to discuss that if you are open.

[Eleven]

On 12/22/2019 at 5:47 PM, SABRES 0311 said:

I already did. To me, the single issue no other Republican will address correctly is foreign policy as it pertains to projecting combat power. I believe leading Republicans will go with status quo of 21st century combat application which is nation destabilization leading to nation building. This presumption is based on the previous Republican president’s approach to the Global War on Terrorism which that administration also added NK in the Axis of Evil. I believe doing that conflated two different foreign threats/policy issues.

The reason I think leading Republicans will misuse combat power is because they simply don’t know any better. The only recent history they have to rely on is Afghanistan and Iraq. Although a president can rely on the Joint Chiefs for input, a person’s decision making will resort to their lowest level of experience. If you look at Republican leadership they are ingrained in the Washington way of doing things. That’s the best term I could come up with for it.

So the question is how is Trump different in this issue? The teachings of Sun Tzu, Von Clausewitz, and other sources in their application of military affairs is not too different than business dealings. At least from what has been explained to me. Perhaps Trump’s authorizing of small, specialized units and tactics reflects lessons learned in business ventures, failed and successful. In no way am I saying a businessman is an expert in warfighting or warrior mentality. Trump may simply have gotten lucky so far. 

The next question is why would someone care about this to the point of being a single voter issue? Many people if not all Americans are affected by decisions at the national level. It just so happens that right now this issue affects me and my family in a very direct way. So if large scale combat power must be projected I would appreciate it be done in the same manner with which I have seen combat power projected under this president.

Essentially the answer to your question is subjective. You will undoubtedly resort to anyone can do what I described. And because anyone can do it then why do we have to put up with Trump’s behavior? The easiest answer is you have to put up with it because he is still president. If you believe anyone could do what I described or better then go ahead and vote for them. Maybe the next Democrat president won’t screw it up like the last.

If you would like to change people’s minds about an issue I recommend changing your method. By you I mean those who do not support Trump. Buzzwords and finger pointing are laughable. Last time I checked it’s the same thing people fault Trump on. 

 

Sorry it took me so long to respond.  You're right, I would reply that there are plenty of Republicans who would take the same position you desire--a position I find admirable, by the way--it was the main reason I could not vote for Hillary Clinton.

Is there really no way that the entire Republican-controlled Senate and formerly Republican-controlled House can't or couldn't simply stand up to him and tell him that his behavior is unacceptable while still supporting his policy agenda?  Doubtful...

On 12/23/2019 at 7:54 AM, Weave said:

Since that was a hit and run post I’ll expand on it.

Absolute best case scenario, if you are excusing the behavior you are enabling it.  Enabling is supporting.  So as long as you are willing to look the other way and excuse it away because he’s doing something you agree with you are enabling his behavior.

 

Taking this further, I understand the discomfort regarding being lumped in with the bad part of Donald Trump, but if you are being honest with yourself you have to see and accept that by supporting Trump you are inherently reinforcing the bad.

When Nixon was impeached the reason that Senate leadership approached Nixon and asked him to step down was because Nixon was just about out of support from the Republican portion of populace.  Nixon doesn't get asked to resign if the Republican voters maintained support.  By the same token, the only thing stopping McConnell from asking for Trump to step down is the base that is sticking with Trump through all of the controversy.  And without any real pushback from the Republican party, the bad part of Trump is emboldened and enabled.

Much more well-stated than how I put it.

[SABRES 0311]

21 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Sorry it took me so long to respond.  You're right, I would reply that there are plenty of Republicans who would take the same position you desire--a position I find admirable, by the way--it was the main reason I could not vote for Hillary Clinton.

Is there really no way that the entire Republican-controlled Senate and formerly Republican-controlled House can't or couldn't simply stand up to him and tell him that his behavior is unacceptable while still supporting his policy agenda?  Doubtful...

Much more well-stated than how I put it.

I think changing the way he talks/tweets would go a very long way. He’s not exactly the type of person who would listen to that guidance. I don’t think someone in their seventies is going to change.  
 

I don’t think other Republicans would take the same position. In the last 20 years it’s been one extreme or the other. Full scale invasion or full scale withdrawal.