Opinion The man that is Trump

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Saintly Viewed said:
Nothing is perfect except Collingwood winning flags and I picking Melbourne Cup winners
Click to expand...
Sometimes I wish you'd come out on one side or another rather than treading the middle ground, particularly with Trump, because I can't see any reason to be ambiguous about his election or performance. I agree that the democrats ran the wrong person against him but I can understand why the media would have shown bias towards Clinton and against Trump - most sane people would have prefered Clinton with all her faults and baggage to Trump. It's fine to be sceptical of politics, but sometimes recognizing a lesser of evils takes precedence over disdainful neutrality. Anyway I haven't read the 20 pages of this thread so have no idea if you offered a more direct opinion. One page of Trump is about my tolerance limit.
 
deltablues said:
I wrote this back in July 2016, and it still holds:

"There is clearly a backlash by the average voter/independent against the professional political nomenklatura and their donors/enablers/sponsors. This has resulted in candidates such as Trump (and the flip side Bernie Sanders). Years ago we had an equivalent in Ross Perot. Political mavericks in some ways. Hillary Clinton is by comparison your typical career politician.

There are other reasons as well, such as the current US administration not enforcing Federal law in a number of key areas, including border control; free trade agreements and outsourcing of US jobs/work visa abuses; the politicization of the IRS, DOJ and others; the high cost of health care under Obamacare.
Overall I would say that many voters feel disenfranchised with the changing of normative America.There is also an air of disillusionment about the 2 main parties, who are increasingly seen as 2 ears on the same pig, feeding at the trough. At election time distinctions are drawn along party lines, but post-election it is business as usual for the professional political class.

This vibe is particularly noticeable in the independents/swinging voters, who are dismayed at having to choose between Hillary and Trump. The choice kind of echoes the old joke - whoever wants to be a politician should automatically be disqualified from running."

I omitted the MSM, which got its collective ass handed to it.

And re the immigration pause -

"8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens.
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."

In 1979, Carter suspended all Iranians from entry into the country. Obama ditto re Iraqis.

Using religion as a screening test is permitted by US law. Up until 1952 there was a total ban specifically on Muslims because it was understood that their religion prohibited them from swearing allegiance to a non-Muslim constitution and set of secular laws.

But, hey, haters gonna hate.

PS here is a relevant link, context-wise.

http://cis.org/1965ImmigrationAct-MassImmigration
Click to expand...
So what's your opinion? Or are you another fence sitter?
 
TheGreatGrundy said:
Sometimes I wish you'd come out on one side or another rather than treading the middle ground, particularly with Trump, because I can't see any reason to be ambiguous about his election or performance. I agree that the democrats ran the wrong person against him but I can understand why the media would have shown bias towards Clinton and against Trump - most sane people would have prefered Clinton with all her faults and baggage to Trump. It's fine to be sceptical of politics, but sometimes recognizing a lesser of evils takes precedence over disdainful neutrality. Anyway I haven't read the 20 pages of this thread so have no idea if you offered a more direct opinion. One page of Trump is about my tolerance limit.
Click to expand...
Mr The Great, I cant recall the before posts.
And Trump reading would be hard to do again.

I think if one was inclined to the Republican Party can’t imagine how they’d vote for him to be their candidate. Surely there was far better.
Can’t imagine how a country overall voted for him.

Suffice to say he is manifestly unqualified to do the job.

Whilst the democrats picked the wrong candidate it’s fair to say she was and is qualified to do the job. On that there is no doubt.

I hope that clarifies.

That said sitting up high on the fence does give a good view of both sides.

(Ps America has decided to trade in their paramount position from politicians experienced to reality TV. The rise of China will be quicker because of this decision made by Americans.)

(PPS if Trump runs again I am quite sure Mitt Romney will run against him for the nomination. Another qualified person to do the job.)
 
PicaBoo said:
Doubt he will go to war with ISIS. Boots on the ground in the ME is a nightmare for any POTUS. Obama loved his drones, it did keep the US casualty count down. Israel is loving the fact that Syria is still divided . Don't think they will be jumping for joy to move into conflict anytime soon. But Iran perhaps can entice them. Nothing that Israel can contribute there though.
China is on a deliberate collision course with SE Asian countries. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Nothing peaceful or noble from China A bit of flare up with the Japanese on the 80th anniversary of the Nan King massacre at the end of this year and after a good 11 months of Trumping, why not?
Click to expand...
Are you sure? Which countries? Certainly not Cambodia, Laos or the Philippines where the Chinese wield enormous and unrivalled economic influence, allowing the leaders of those countries to ignore democratic principles and procedures. Chinese tourists dwarf other tour groups in Thailand, and politically the Thai military junta wouldn't look out of place operating out of Peking. I would suggest that America is the country losing ground in SEA, not China.
 
Baltimore Jack said:
The regressive populism of Trump acknowledges people’s economic insecurity, but directs their grievances toward scapegoats, from new immigrants and people of color to religious minorities. Regressive populism sees our rules rigged to benefit “elites” and these outsider groups.

Regressive populism is fundamentally a deflection, sometimes encouraged by wealthy elites, to shift populist rage away from the real holders of power onto less powerful groups. Similar to the historic role of anti-Semitism, deflection politics exacerbates differences in race and ethnicity that go underground in more equitable times.

Many of the changes that Trump wants to implement — tax cuts for the wealthy, deportations, corporate-friendly deregulation — won’t fix the underlying drivers of inequality. President Trump will not succeed in raising real wages, reversing declining home ownership, or reducing student deb. Repealing Obamacare, with no alternative, will leave millions without health coverage
Click to expand...
Perhaps next time you'll quote your source rather than pass it off as your own work https://inequality.org/great-divide/sides-populism/.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

TheGreatGrundy said:
Name one quality local politician?
Click to expand...
Australia? Andrew Leigh, Labor Party (not aligned with any faction which is a plus and a negative for him).

Speaks well and not into blaming (LNP) and clearly understands population. Very intelligent.

Not good though that I can only think of one current politician.
 
Maggie5 said:
Australia? Andrew Leigh, Labor Party (not aligned with any faction which is a plus and a negative for him).

Speaks well and not into blaming (LNP) and clearly understands population. Very intelligent.

Not good though that I can only think of one current politician.
Click to expand...
At least you could name one, l was snuggling to even think of one
 
TheGreatGrundy said:
So what's your opinion? Or are you another fence sitter?
Click to expand...
My opinion is as stated.

Were you hoping for some partisan political polemic/clickbait?

I prefer a more analytical approach.

And I am not a fence sitter - I am a small-l Libertarian who favors small Federal government, states' rights, the Constitution, and black-letter law. I sift Trump (and all POTUS's) through that political sieve.
 
nahnah said:
I don’t recall tagging you on the pies board but you seem to be a man of your word
Click to expand...

Also I assume you're tagging me onto this discussion so I can argue for arming toddlers.

Its guns all the way down mate
 
nahnah said:
I’m fine with them having hand guns in case of an active shooter in the Montessori but an assault rifle is over the top
Click to expand...

Studies have shown that two toddlers with an assualt rifle can help mitigate 80% of gun violence. The argument holds up.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Opinion The man that is Trump

Similar threads

TradeDraft
The End of Reddit
Replies
5
Views
837
Black_White
Black_White
Daicos Torpedo
The food i cooked omg...
Replies
3
Views
1K
Black_White
Black_White
jonbe54
Roast Football fans and violence the true instigators.
2 3
Replies
53
Views
3K
TradeDraft
TradeDraft

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top