I don't understand all the hoo-hah over Trump, given that he's scarcely worse than any of the other Republican candidates. Surely it must be more a reaction against the cult of celebrity than anything else, because the likes of Ted Cruz are orders of magnitude more abhorrent.
I think it's the lack of veneer which does it. Cruz is undeniably worse, but he's also more lacquered, so you can forgive people for being taken in.
Trump is just a parody of Every Bad Right-wing American Political Stereotype Ever, so the fact that he's being taken seriously gets added to how actually reprehensible his ideals are.
Here's the funny thing though: Trump has only been that way AFTER he started campaigning. Historically he's been a anti free trade, pragmatic, centrist. He only started wheeling out the "Mexicans" and "Make America Great" at that point.
It's blatantly obvious that he's a practical business type who is crafting his argument to appeal to disenfranchized, blue collar workers(notice I didn't say white, given his popularity among hispanic and blacks who are blue collar workers and American citizens.....those groups also don't want immigrants competing for their jobs).
Besides which....Trump has one major point in his favor: He is the ONLY Republican candidate who doesn't want to start World War 3. It leaves me feeling conflicted because I feel like if I vote for anyone other than the biggest asshole in this race we're going to get someone who thinks it's a good idea to start shooting down Russian planes.
Tony, funny how I feel it is just to opposite. I think Trump would start a war. I can't tell if he is just a blow hard or a real deal. He is speaking with forked tongue though. He used to be a good old fashion blue boy from Queens. Part of that is why he is not "establishment". The royals would not have him. He's not a blue blood. He is still white trash in their eyes. He's hitched is wagon to the Republicans merely because it is advantageous at this time. If he wins, the GOP is over. It is anyway, at least the GOP I knew.
So which is worse? An evangelical? A liar and quite probably a murderer too? A communist hippy? Or, a braggart blow hard with a terrible comb over? Pretty dismal choice. Hey, I liked Carson, until he started to speak. Rubio seemed promising until he turned out to be a little bitch. Trump, if he wants to succeed, need to keep his mouth shut more. I swear he sounds crazy.
And yes, I have a head ache
Lacquered so much that when you take off the shine, turns out there was never anyone under it.Originally Posted by faetal
Here:
If you guys want a rational Republican you should be supporting Kasich. I attended one of his events in my town. I found him to be sensible and approachable with a very deep well of knowledge. He's a little too social conservative for me, but still, if we had a Democratic Congress I would have voted for him.
Agreed, I saw him in the Colbert show and he struck me as pretty reasonable. It's a shame he's being so overshadowed by the rest.
Trump wants to build the Great Wall of America. That counts as pretty revolutionary. Are any other candidates planning to build such a structure?
Kasich is easily the best GOP candidate, and he knows it, which is a problem because the most important thing he needs to do right now is drop out and throw his support to Rubio to stop the Trump juggernaut.
Of the list bjack gave, obviously the liar is top of the pack. Far from a bad thing, good politicians need to compromise, be realistic, and know when a failed policy needs to be dropped. Bush no. 1 did the right thing raising taxes and was martyred for it as breaking his word, and then Clinton no. 1 reaped the benefit of Bush I's martyrdom.
I don't know how many of you here remember or have read about my journey from evangelical pastor to liberal heathen, but this Trump thing is a confirmation that I made the right decision, gut-wrenching and scary as it was, to leave my old life in the dust 9 years ago.
See, I'd always suspected that the people I was surrounded by - be they more conservative or "liberal" within the context of Christian theology - would, if given an opportunity, reveal a dark side that they collectively hid from one another, and especially from outsiders. Keep in mind, I was involved in the Calvary Chapel/Vineyard movement - arguably the most progressive "Christian" collective in the world, and yet within the bounds of mainstream theology. There were little hints here and there, for years. Hints of racism and bigotry, xenophobia, and cruelty toward the poor and needy. It would only slip out at times, for instance, when there was money at stake, or when a situation invaded comfort zones. There was of course outright homophobia and hatred toward gays. But no one dared to speak those other things out loud, or to let them be seen, because they knew they would likely be shouted down, ostracized, and thought badly of. Yet, I always had a feeling that most kept this stuff bottled up inside, and if I poked them hard enough, it would come oozing out.
Trump has done the poking that I never wanted to do and guess what? I was right. I'm not judging American Christianity as a whole, but I spent nearly 25 years among pretty much every denomination, flavor, and spin-off on both ends of the spectrum, and I could never shake that suspicion. And now, I'm beyond relieved to look back and know that I saved my kids from being raised in that mess, because they would otherwise, right now, probably be surrounded by "friends" and respected adults who are going to vote for Trump.
Religion? Check the "none of the above" box, please. And put a smiley face next to it.
At least it's not going completely unnoticed -- http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/01/op...-jesus-do.html
Christians today are massive pussies compared to Christians of the past.Hints of racism and bigotry, xenophobia, and cruelty toward the poor and needy.
Could you be any edgier?
Super Tuesday seems to point to a Trump v Clinton finale and a question I would like to ask; Should Trump win the Presidency and the Senate remain Republican, would clearing the national debt and setting the annual budget become easier for the US government?
P¬{
Back in the day, we used to be eaten by lions! Then they'd throw us up, and eat us again! We'd be pelted to death with our own foreskins, which they'd chop off with rusty spoons! And then the lions would eat our foreskins! And there'd be none of that Romans nailing you to the cross - no, we'd have to nail ourselves to those crosses, in the snow, uphill!
1. The Rep Congress has already made it clear they have no intention of working with a Trump presidency. So no.
2. Even if they did, Reps always raise the debt. Only Dems have been good at budget control because taxes.
3. As an aside & something you don't really need to know, budget is something where the House of Reps takes the lead, not Senate.
So the US could for the next four years have a Republican President with a non cooperative Republican majority government? How strange. Is that a workable arrangement?
P¬{
Not at all. This is why, for all the people crying that the Dems are split because Bernie people distrust Hillary and the Dem establishment behind her, the real story this election is that the Republicans are fundamentally broken as a functionable political party, like broken to its core. I'm suspecting this may be a case where they have to lose 5 elections in a row before they can pull themselves together. And yeah, this election is very strange, bordering on surreal.
You don't think that if Trump did become president the Republicans would still unite behind them, because he may not be the candidate they wanted but he's still better than those wily Democrats?
Is anything?
You cook dinner every night and I will have sex with you is a workable arrangement, yes?
wait, as long as the dinner is good
come to me faetal and taste my creamy chicken pie
oh god why do I even bother
i
THE PIE IS REAL
fuck your 8 seconds
This post makes my foreskin and I feel somewhat afraid for ourselves.
Also, PigLick's promise of creamy chicken pies when he's not the one doing the cooking means dastardly things for faetal. Things that might involve... foreskin. He should be afraid too.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote