USA Politics

Perun said:
I wouldn't be too sure about this. The Republicans are suspiciously quiet about the whole Trump matter. It's true that they are not publicly lambasting Trump at the moment, but they're also not coming out at his defence. This is significant. I have the feeling that many GOP members are holding back with their comments, waiting for things to unfold - because once Trump actually does break the law, they are the ones who are going to have to vote for an impeachment, as they have the majorities. Fact is, Trump is their guy, and I can imagine it's hard to find a way to deal with the way he behaves right now.
Click to expand...
I know it does not sound nice but I was more talking about certain forum members out here, criticizing only Democrates/lefties/liberals.
 
Forostar said:
I know it does not sound nice but I was more talking about certain forum members out here, criticizing only Democrates/lefties/liberals.
Click to expand...

I think you saw more criticism for Hillary because she was supposed to be a "normal" candidate. Whereas with Trump everyone already knew he was batshit crazy and would do a terrible job.

Trump fucking up generates less conversation because people expect nothing different from him.
 
Last edited:
I don't think our more conservative members consider themselves pro-Trump. Honestly, very little of what Trump has done is, of itself, surprising.
 
The Flash said:
I think you saw more criticism for Hillary because she was supposed to be a "normal" candidate. Whereas with Trump everyone already knew he was batshit crazy and would do a terrible job.
Click to expand...
I've also heard the line that Trump's cockups are 'just human', and he's admired to some extent for not using proof readers or allowing advisors to vet what he plans to say/do (since they're part of the establishment elite). He's still selling himself as the People's President.
 
LooseCannon said:
I don't think our more conservative members consider themselves pro-Trump. Honestly, very little of what Trump has done is, of itself, surprising.
Click to expand...
It's not just a lack of general criticizing. It's specific stuff where the silence is deafening.
Some people out here are silent on about the same matters as the stuff they attacked Clinton for.
 
Last edited:
Maybe you can ask these people in person why they are silent.
 
Collin said:
Can you show us the quote in which he says it was a good thing.

Edit: My main point is that Hillary makes the worst possible decisions in the worst situations. (Voting for the war, Bengahzi, email scandal, etc.) It will only get worse when she is given more power.
Click to expand...
@Collin If these points were important, then why are you so silent about Trump's (and his personnel's) more dangerous doings?
bearfan said:
Sucks we got hacked by the Russians, but it is good all this came out to show the level of sleaze that is the Clinton's ..
Click to expand...
@bearfan Is your appreciation for Trump's transparent sleaze of a comparable level? How do you look at his (and his personnel's) leaking? You were very outspoken when Obama did wrong things, in your opinion. Is Trump really doing better in your view, or/and is it hard to criticize a Republican President, even if he's doing the dumbest and most dangerous things? Why the silence for this particular President?
Cornfed Hick said:
I can't wait until Trump attacks Hillary's personal appearance, like he did with Fiorina.

I think it will certainly be the most entertaining campaign in many many years. I'm looking forward to the campaign. It's the subsequent administration that concerns me.
Click to expand...
@Cornfed Hick How entertaining do you find Trump's Presidency so far? Enjoying personal attacks on Trump as well? Why have you been so silent about his crappy Presidency? You seem to be more bothered about people who criticize him and the media.
 
Last edited:
Forostar said:
@Cornfed Hick How entertaining do you find Trump's Presidency so far? Enjoying personal attacks on Trump as well? Why have you been so silent about his crappy Presidency? You seem to be more bothered about people who criticize him and the media.
Click to expand...
See post 7586 above.

You seem to assume I'm a Trump supporter. I'm not. As I've noted a number of times. You should take a deep breath.
 
You seem to assume I assume you are Trump supporter. Not immediately. However, I've missed criticism from your side. I am questioning this Not meaning you are a supporter of his per se, but I do tend to think that people who never vote for a Democrat (Republicans included) have a problem with openly showing criticism on an opponent of a Democrat. I wonder how you and the other two stand here. Why the silence?
Cornfed Hick said:
See post 7586 above.
Click to expand...
That was a generic statement not much to do with the forum or yourself, or is it?
 
Last edited:
Forostar said:
@Collin If these points were important, then why are you so silent about Trump's (and his personnel's) more dangerous doings?
Click to expand...

Personally I believe the that his presidency so far is disappointing, however I'm optimistic that it can turn around. If Hillary was president right now, we would be in a world of shit, espically with how many times she's talked in a negative way about Putin. And as for my absence here, this thread is way too toxic. I came here to talk about Maiden, not all this crap.
 
A deep breath would be good ... I did not vote for Trump, I think now and always have thought (back when I first because aware of him in the USFL days) that he is a world class jackass. Hillary certainly is a incredibly sleazy and will continue to be ... it was a no win election with those two.

I like some of the things he has done (deregulation, letting the pipelines get built, his general ideas on taxes, etc) .. the great big wall will never be built .. so I do not really worry about that kind of stuff

Obama, I thought was a nice enough guy, I am guessing a good husband and Dad, but I thought generally a pretty poor President policy wise (with some exceptions, some low level criminal justice reform comes to mind)

Perhaps a good lesson for all would be for those who rooted for Obama when he said "I have a phone and a pen" ... should be that the next guy who you might like a lot less has that phone and pen as well. It would be a really nice idea to downsize the President as a whole .. no matter who it is .. which I think should be the main lesson from the past 4 administrations. On the other hand, it is heartening to see Democrats be fans of states rights again ... at least for now when it suits them.
 
You guys seen what just happened in Washington? Foreign security service brutally attacks U.S. citizens in front of U.S. police. Wow.
 
bearfan said:
Perhaps a good lesson for all would be for those who rooted for Obama when he said "I have a phone and a pen" ... should be that the next guy who you might like a lot less has that phone and pen as well. It would be a really nice idea to downsize the President as a whole .. no matter who it is .. which I think should be the main lesson from the past 4 administrations. On the other hand, it is heartening to see Democrats be fans of states rights again ... at least for now when it suits them.
Click to expand...
I would like to think that the chaos of the Trump presidency will inspire a bipartisan effort to downsize the executive branch, but then again I think there was a similar expectation after GWB and that clearly didn't happen. Congressional gridlock is underrated IMO. With the country being this sharply divided, I am ok with either party having a slow moving agenda. So executive powers can undermine that. Same thing with removing the filibuster.
 
Zare said:
You guys seen what just happened in Washington? Foreign security service brutally attacks U.S. citizens in front of U.S. police. Wow.
Click to expand...

I obviously did. The police should've dealt with the problem themselves before it got out of hand.

Nothing good would come out of PKK/PYD symphatizers going near people who welcomed Erdoğan to protest.
 
Zare said:
I don't get that last sentence at all.
Click to expand...

"Foreign security service" was Erdoğan's security team and they were standing beside the people who welcomed Erdoğan's arrival. "U.S. citizens" were PKK/PYD symphatizers who brought PKK and PYD flags and posters of Kurdish leaders to protest Erdoğan's arrival. The two sets of groups were right next to each other.

A fight would obviously break out in that situation, which is why I said the police should've taken care of the situation before it happened.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the explanation. It had some ambiguity to it, so I asked. Well the problem is that U.S. is allied with two parties, who are enemies with 'overlapping territorial claims', so to speak. Regardless of that slippery slope, only U.S. police should be involved between U.S. citizens who support PKK and U.S. citizens who support Erdogan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top