Trump 2016

This is not a joke, he's really running this time.

Christmas came early. This is rich enough to make up for that whole "impending nuclear armageddon" thing.

 

[Dudeofteenage]

The Clinton scandals are the furthest thing from minor. He and the misses are and always have been incredibly crooked, nasty, and corrupt financially, personally, and politically.

This is what people were saying in 1992 with Whitewater and 1998 with Monica Lewinsky. And yet...

 

[DoshesToDoshes]

So Trump encouraged his supporters to beat up a black protester at one of his rallies. wow

I get the feeling that he just went with the flow, rather than actively encouraging them to beat the guy up over skin colour. He wouldn't have seen his skin colour at that distance either, especially with that many people around methinks. Still a dick move either way, as he could have addressed the violence better.

 

[Dudeofteenage]

The point is that initiating tax reform is a potential career ending proposition for any career politician because they rely on corporate campaign donations.

I'm pretty sure if corporate donations disappeared overnight, politicians would still have jobs?

In my opinion, Rubio is one of the worst candidates. He comes across to me as corrupt and slimy

Hey, I'm not saying I would vote for the guy. I'm just saying, he can win.

there's an actual reformer on the stage for the first time in decades, so the establishment promotes a competitor who promises double, but with no intention of actually going through with any of it. For 200 years, it worked every time. That is, until Caesar.

So let me get this straight - Trump is the reformer? Trump has the potential to play the Caesar role in this metaphor you're constructing?

 

[*Asterisk*]

This is what people were saying in 1992 with Whitewater and 1998 with Monica Lewinsky. And yet...

Clinton was disbarred and impeached because he committed perjury in a pathetic attempt to save his own ass. It's on the Republicans for botching actually removing him from office.

That said, it's not that Hillary can't win. Iylt's that she shouldn't win. She's cruel, corrupt, cynical, only concerned with assuaging her id, and is far less competent than even other historical corrupt figures such as her husband.

How the fuck can anyone justify supporting such a person?

 

[autisticdragonkin]

Clinton was disbarred and impeached because he committed perjury in a pathetic attempt to save his own ass. It's on the Republicans for botching actually removing him from office.

That said, it's not that Hillary can't win. Iylt's that she shouldn't win. She's cruel, corrupt, cynical, only concerned with assuaging her id, and is far less competent than even other historical corrupt figures such as her husband.

How the fuck can anyone justify supporting such a person?

Hillary Clinton has more money to spend on campaigning then Bernie Sanders and some people will always support the democrats

 

[*Asterisk*]

Hillary Clinton has more money to spend on campaigning then Bernie Sanders and some people will always support the democrats

It's these exact reasons why American politics has been fubarred for the past generation.

We might indeed have a Clinton/Trump election this year. But if so, I'm still not changing my mind. I'll vote for every election I can aside from the Presidency if that's what it comes down to.

 

[AnOminous]

I'm pretty sure if corporate donations disappeared overnight, politicians would still have jobs?

Some of them would. Possibly, some others wouldn't. And other people would have those jobs.

 

[PeteyCoffee]

I'm pretty sure if corporate donations disappeared overnight, politicians would still have jobs?

Corporate donations aren't disappearing. If a politician seriously initiates tax reform, it means he's giving a large portion of his future campaign funds over to somebody else. That and it's socially unacceptable, with how much that politician owes them. It's like not tipping a waiter, or snubbing a client.

Hey, I'm not saying I would vote for the guy. I'm just saying, he can win.

I think Rubio will likely win the primary, but I don't think he can win the general election. I think Rubio and Hillary are both going to be seen as conventional politicians by Americans as a whole, so neither will embolden masses of people who don't usually vote Republican or Democrat. At that point, it will just be a power game, and there's no way Rubio can win at that. Hillary's probably one of the most powerful Americans. She'll get all the endorsements, most of the positive media coverage, and the greatest share of the campaign donations. Add that in with the shrinking private sector and the growing public sector, I think Hillary's got this election in the bag. 1

So let me get this straight - Trump is the reformer? Trump has the potential to play the Caesar role in this metaphor you're constructing?

Trump says he wants to initiate border reform and tax reform. 2 Over the last decade, a lot of different politicians have run quite prudently on those issues, but didn't care to do anything once they were elected (also prudent.) But Trump actually appears serious to me, and to a lot of Americans. Mad serious.

What I meant before: I think Rubio is using that ancient tactic of markedly outpromising the real reformers, and I think he has no real intention of trying to initiate any of his promises. I mean, most of the candidates are trying to match Trump's and Carson's proposals, and one could argue how genuine or disingenuous each is being, but Rubio's proposals don't even make sense to me. Rubio's new tax plan promises lower taxes AND a trillion dollars in new tax credits for "families." He promises to increase the military budget by a trillion dollars (close to tripling it). He promises to balance the budget. He's currently the Republican establishment's choice candidate. 3

Say Rubio wins the general election by outpromising Trump and doesn't follow through with any of his promises. Say shit like that happens repeatedly for like two centuries. At that point, Caesar. Of course, you hope your government can reform itself before the critical point and serious upheaval.
___________
1. Maybe Rubio has a chance if he chooses an unconventional vice president who excites a lot of people - maybe a businesswoman like Carly Fiorina. Even then, it probably wouldn't work because vice presidents usually don't get that kind of attention. But frankly, I don't think Rubio or his people have the mind to initiate anything like this. I think Rubio will pick a political elite circle jerk of a council, for the immediate prestige.

2. I disagree with Trump on the border issue because I view a controlled border in the same light as a controlled market - the rich and powerful suppressing competition in order to remain rich and powerful without having to make the natural effort. However, I think if Trump ships out fewer illegal immigrants than new legal immigrants he lets in, he'll be doing less harm than good. (Trump at least appears to support increased immigration.) To me, the most important issue by far is that corporations don't pay taxes but companies have like a 40% tax rate (the highest in the world, so I've heard.) I want Trump's tax plan. To be honest, I prefer Carson's tax plan, but I believe Trump is the only man who could possibly succeed at getting his plan passed and fixing this particular issue. But even Trump, I think, can't. Even if Trump "succeeds", I imagine the tax plan getting bastardized by Congress to the extent it's no better than the current system.

3. If Rubio's actually serious about this stuff, and if he becomes president, he'll be the biggest federalist of a president we've ever had. More a proponent of corporations and larger government than George W Bush and Obama. He might even match Hillary.

 

[*Asterisk*]

Uri Geller appeared serious to the same type of people who don't automatically see through Trump. He couldn't give less of a shit about reform. He's running because he's a greedy sociopath.

Not seeing this is nothing more than willful self-delusion.

 

[PeteyCoffee]

The Clintons are an exceptionally powerful group, and people have short memories. The exact same thing happened with Bill Cosby, R. Kelly, Woody Allen, and many others.

That said, it's not like nobody's been talking about it, even recently, even on the left, and even on Fox News:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=tdkTqkLbL_4
Of course, with the last one, a big reason it was ignored was because of the Jerry Jarrett principle and its inverse: If you tell someone A, B, and C are true, when you work them on D, E, and F, they'll still believe you. The same thing's holds for Ann Coulter: She bullshits on A, B, and C, so when she tells the truth on D, E, and F, no one believes her.

That's the first time I've heard Hillary laugh.

Uri Geller appeared serious to the same type of people who don't automatically see through Trump. He couldn't give less of a shit about reform. He's running because he's a greedy sociopath.

Not seeing this is nothing more than willful self-delusion.

That's a good thing. Greedy sociopaths, at least the mature and successful ones, usually have this neurotic ego-driven complex where they care about how future people will see them and how history will portray them, so they try their best to do what's right in order to satisfy that.

 

[TrippinKahlua]

@TrippinKahlua How are you going to vote for Trump? I thought you were a Bahamian.

I was born in the United States so I can vote. I don't think I will put in the effort to vote in the primaries, but I will certainly do so in the General.

 

[Dudeofteenage]

Corporate donations aren't disappearing.

I know. I used an extreme example to prove a point. If the total disappearance of corporation donations won't affect politicians' ability to have jobs, a measure less extreme than that won't either.

I think Rubio will likely win the primary, but I don't think he can win the general election.

I was only talking about the likely winner of the Republican primary, not about the winner of the actual election.

Rubio's new tax plan promises lower taxes AND a trillion dollars in new tax credits for "families." He promises to increase the military budget by a trillion dollars (close to tripling it). He promises to balance the budget. He's currently the Republican establishment's choice candidate. 3

This is boilerplate Republican primary campaigning though. Rubio's hardly unique in this. Even leaving aside low hanging fruit like Trump and Carson, Jeb, Cruz and Christie all have equally mathematically bizarre "Increase spending and also lower taxes" promises. They always claim to make up the shortfall with nonspecified talk about 'loopholes' and 'efficiencies' and, in extreme cases, by cutting foreign aid.

 

[AnOminous]

They always claim to make up the shortfall with nonspecified talk about 'loopholes' and 'efficiencies' and, in extreme cases, by cutting foreign aid.

This is another joke, of course. Foreign aid is a minuscule fraction of the budget, but more importantly, the only really big outlays in that area are shit like money for Israel. Nobody is fucking cutting that shit. They'd as soon cut their own balls off.

 

[*Asterisk*]

This is another joke, of course. Foreign aid is a minuscule fraction of the budget, but more importantly, the only really big outlays in that area are shit like money for Israel. Nobody is fucking cutting that shit. They'd as soon cut their own balls off.

The Paul's would, but they'll never be in the Oval Office anyway.

 

[PeteyCoffee]

I know. I used an extreme example to prove a point. If the total disappearance of corporation donations won't affect politicians' ability to have jobs, a measure less extreme than that won't either.

A total disappearance of campaign donations creates the least extreme possible example because it means an equal playing ground, not one politician receiving a massive funding handicap next to all the others. But a lot of politicians couldn't even survive an equal playing ground.

This is boilerplate Republican primary campaigning though. Rubio's hardly unique in this. Even leaving aside low hanging fruit like Trump and Carson, Jeb, Cruz and Christie all have equally mathematically bizarre "Increase spending and also lower taxes" promises. They always claim to make up the shortfall with nonspecified talk about 'loopholes' and 'efficiencies' and, in extreme cases, by cutting foreign aid.

Rubio seems to be the only one who's promising the old line "we're going to create new tax credits" and the new line "we're going to reform the tax code. No more credits and loopholes." The majority of the candidates took up the new line after Trump proved its potential, and they're likely to abandon that once the general election comes around (depending on what's prudent), but at least they aren't talking out of both sides of their mouths.

I actually kind of respect Jeb Bush because him and Kasich are the only ones who did not change their platforms in order to match Trump's. Of course I don't want a classic Republican, I want something different. Hell, I would choose Bernie over most of these guys. I don't think we've ever had an affable New York Jew for president.

 

[SpessCaptain]

@*Asterisk*.

I don't appreciate the attacks you are giving out to other members for their opinions, asking them to 'get fucked'. Consider this a final warning.

 

[Dudeofteenage]

This is another joke, of course. Foreign aid is a minuscule fraction of the budget, but more importantly, the only really big outlays in that area are shit like money for Israel. Nobody is fucking cutting that shit. They'd as soon cut their own balls off.

Yeah, "cutting foreign aid" is the rhetoric of somebody who cares largely about being popular with voters, not saving money. It's like a management consultant promising he's going to save a business' bottom line by cutting back on custom mousepads. And that, as you say, is before we get into the stupidity of promising to cut foreign aid and at the same time fully support Israel.

Rubio seems to be the only one who's promising the old line "we're going to create new tax credits" and the new line "we're going to reform the tax code. No more credits and loopholes."

Promising to reform the tax code by getting rid of loopholes is hardly a new line. I mean seriously, Nixon campaigned on it in 1960.

 

[Falcon Lord]

The republicans have been desperately looking for a scandal that will destroy the Clintons for the past quarter-century. They haven't found it yet, and they never will.

 

[Too Many Crooks]

Back on topic:

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2...o-nazi-and-this-is-how-the-media-reported-it/

 

[KatsuKitty]

I've never been an unironic, serious Trump supporter. But this isn't a joke anymore; Trump is scaring me. His rhethoric is increasingly bombastic and most importantly, divisive. And anyone who knows anything about history knows this is bad. The notion that a candidate can demand ordinary American citizens of a specific background register for a "list" and retain frontrunner status for the GOP is horrifying. This is the kind of rhethoric that started internment of Japanese-Americans during WW2, all the way to the Holocaust in Germany.

You may not like Islam; I certainly don't. That's why you need to understand why Trump's demand for a "Muslim Registry" should instead be seen as a demand for a registry of any kind, and why this is so terrifying. Trump is pandering to an angry majority when he says this. There's nothing to say he won't come for you after he makes all the Muslims sign up, much less what he's going to do with this information. Or what he can do with such a list. There can be a Mexican List, a Black List, I would say it's most likely he'd make the Gay List. Anyone the angry-redneck-powered GOP doesn't like stands their own chance of being targeted for a "list". Are you ready to sign up for who you are or what you believe in?

I have the resources to get the fuck out of here if the shit hits the fan and I become one of the GOP's shitlisted minorities, for whatever I am or believe in. But many, if not most people, don't. If you've been on the fence about Trump, it's time to hop off onto the opposing side after his calls for a Muslim registry. You are already witnessing a dark new turn in American politics and the heralding of an era of persecution and misery.

The writing has been on the wall since the signing of the Patriot Act and the revelations of parallel construction. American civil liberties are now beginning to be unabashedly eroded, 30s European-style. Even if Trump doesn't retain his lead and win, the fact he's been able to grow in popularity after saying such shocking things says a lot about how dangerous my country is becoming. It's not an exaggeration to say that we are headed in the direction of an ultranationalist Christian dictatorship; people have lost their civil liberties on-by-one, people are being convicted and spied upon without due process, and registries for innocent groups are now a popular political platform. All by popular request, the hallmark of ultranationalism.

The writing's on the wall for an atheistic gay weirdo like me, and I don't think I'm nuts for inferring that from calls to make a Muslim registry. People like Albert Einstein knew when to get the fuck out. I'm really now beginning to make plans to move abroad. Perhaps @Null isn't so crazy for going globetrotting himself.