How convenient! Perhaps you should tackle ISIS before poor old The Donald.
There are organized acts of civil disobedience in which a minority of participants are destructive. That is NOT proof that lefties “like to break things and burn shit.” And you seem to be saying that threats to use lethal force should not not count. Gotcha.
I will, by voting for someone who is not an impacted, encrusted ideologue who wants to sell fear, and a book to you.
Wanna bet? I’ll put up a grand.
Slee
Note, this offer is only good for Fear Itself.
You need to read for comprehension.
I never said that threats are not serious. Threats are serious, however, actually burning shit and breaking things are more serious than threats. I never claimed all liberals burn shit and break things. What I did say is that, if you look at the past 30 or so years, the ones doing the actual burning of shit and breaking of things for political reasons come from the liberal side. And I provided actual facts to back up my claim.
And no, burning shit and breaking things is not civil disobedience.
Slee
Conservatives are supposed to be doing less burning, breaking, and threatening too. That’s what conservative means.
That’s just point one. There are plenty of good reasons why you would get such a finding. The right is trying to destroy organized labor for one.
You need to own what you write. Burning shit and breaking things is more serious than threatening to burn shit and break things, but the threats being considered here entail use of lethal force. Threatening to kill someone is more serious than burning their shit and breaking their things. Show me even one instance of of a liberal making death threats and I’ll give you proper credit.
And some of the Bundy supporters are at it again.
I didn’t vote because my opinion wasn’t offered as an option.
Trump is a phony and an unprincipled assumes would make a horrible President. So, Trumpism is a negative thing overall.
But he’s forced several issues to the forefront that would be ignored by both major parties if Trump weren’t in the race. So, to that extent, he’s a positive.
I didn’t have a good option on the OP poll either, because I’m a liberal Republican. Yes, I realize that the liberal wing of the national GOP died out around 1980. If we moved, maybe I’d register as a Democrat. But until then, I see no need to change parties. Regardless of registration, I’d vote in the primary for whomever seems the least bad (Kasich?). As for party loyalty, I’m four-square against it.
This is not true. You were asked to evaluate the overall conditions and there is a choice for all there.
That he is bad prez material doesn’t mean you have not got a good choice. It means that you misread the question or don’t want to engage with it.
Trump can be a bad penny but be good for you, your party, the public discourse, or bad for any of these independently of his intentions.
You don’t have to like him to think “good” and you don’t have to dislike him to say “bad” and many repubs don’t.
You obviously think you have a point.
The naive, blind assumption throughout this thread is that Trump somehow is in contrast to the usual “politicians.”
Trump is nothing more than a TOTAL, COMPLETE, CLASSIC politician-EXACTLY LIKE ALL THE OTHERS that you all are complaining about. He will say anything to get attention and potential votes. He’s just playing the game better than the others.
It amazes me that so many people can’t see this, and are falling for it. He is the ultimate bullshitter.
I have to agree. The stupid, offensive, inarticulate and obnoxious Trump is an act.
Donald Trump has held every possible position on every issue, at one time or another. He’s been vocally pro-abortion, pro-gun control, and pro-immigration at various times.
Which is why I laugh when Trump fans praise him for “saying what he thinks.” Because odds are, every time he “says what he thinks,” he’s contradicting what he said ten minutes ago.
Wow; they must have been busy to burn and break enough stuff to outweigh the Alfred P. Murrah Building…
I think the biggest thing is he knows everyone knows; he just doesn’t let it bother him. There’s almost an ironic honesty in being so transparent.
I think also a thing that is a little different about him is that he’ll willing say he doesn’t have the answers or solutions but he’ll get the best people on it. I don’t have positive or negative feelings about this - I just see it as a different approach than I’m used to.
I find it difficult to be quite so sanguine about it. I don’t think that the most loyal and devoted members of his base know any such thing. It’s undoubtedly true that the rest of the population knows it – the ones that are either enjoying or are embarrassed by Trump as an international laughingstock – and the only reason it doesn’t bother him is that he has an ego the size of the solar system and a mercenary ambition to match. This could not be a good thing.
As for “I’ll get the best people on it”, he isn’t the slightest bit reticent to offer outrageous and absurd solutions to complex problems to promote his demagoguery. The other is just an asinine deflection when he has absolutely no idea what should be done – when in fact any serious presidential candidate most assuredly should. This could not be a good thing either.
I know. As a liberal, I’ve just been instructed by the Liberal Supreme Command that it’s my duty on this first day of a bright new year to keep up the tradition and go out and burn shit and break things. I asked some Muslim friends to join me as we all know they’re really into that sort of thing, too.
We thought we’d start by burning down the Donald J. Trump School of Great and Terrific Hairstyling (motto: “Hairstyles inspired by the natural beauty of the orange marmoset. They’re great and terrific!”).
But since the OP asks the question, no. There’s a word commonly used to describe someone who knowingly and deliberately undermines the peace, security, and best interests of his own country for personal gain. The word is “traitor”. In the best case of a successful insanity defense, one would substitute the word “idiot”. Neither is really a presidential qualification.
Sanguinity aside, I don’t think what you say necessarily disagrees so much from what I say - the biggest difference is you don’t really like or think his approach is good.
My point is only that his approach is markedly different than any frontrunner in recent memory.
Fair enough, and I agree. If the proposition is “The Donald is something else, ain’t he?” then I firmly assert that indeed he is!
But, again, it’s not just a side issue that there’s a huge problem with this. Those who are tired of the status quo of politics and want something refreshingly different had better be careful what they ask for. When you get someone who rails against a CNN moderator and accuses her of being unfair because she has “blood coming out of … whatever” then we’re hitting new lows of public dialog. Or when he declares his principal female Democratic candidate to be “disgusting” because she went to the bathroom, we’re in a new realm where even the degenerating wilderness of American political discourse no longer knows how to respond.
He is humiliating and embarrassing the GOP and Fox news and creating an existential crisis for conservatism. The very people who have practically screwed our country into the ground over the last 15 - 40 years. They don’t know what to do about it. I honestly can’t see what there is to not like about that fact. I didn’t have any hope of ever seeing this day in my life, but here it is. Do you think Romney is better for the country overall than this far-right fiasco putting a blazing light on things? With a populace like ours, and watching these polls, it’s obvious we were going to have this crisis eventually, anyway. This is much different than just lowering the discourse. And this isn’t a presidential poll you know.
Happy lefties just went over 16% for the first time!