[garygreen]

there are (and were) plenty of alternatives: kasich, clinton, bush, rubio, sanders, nolan ryan, my neighbor's new cat, an interesting leaf i saw outside once, etc.  maybe even ted cruz.

I don't agree that those are better options. Can you explain why you think they are?

nolan ryan was throwing 100mph fastballs in the 1970s.  and he's the all-time strikeout leader.  if that's not presidential material, i dunno what is.

more seriously, i'm not sure i could be much more clear: i think trump is divisive, abrasive, insulting, bullying, and ignorant.  i think his personality is awful, i think his policies are dogshit, and i think the nationalism he's trying to rile up is dangerous and disturbing.  i don't think the other candidates share all of those qualities.  kasich, for example, is even-keeled and smart.  i disagree with many of his policies, but they're at least debatable.  kasich wouldn't completely fracture the gop as trump is doing now.  he wouldn't be a daily embarrassment to our country.  foreign heads of state probably wouldn't fantasize about strangling him.

not literally all of them.

is that better?  was i precise enough for you?

You're improving, but I'd still like to see some literally illegal policies

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/432350/if-i-say-do-it-theyre-going-do-it-thats-what-leadership-all-about

BAIER: Mr. Trump, just yesterday, almost 100 foreign policy experts signed on to an open letter refusing to support you, saying your embracing expansive use of torture is inexcusable. General Michael Hayden, former CIA director, NSA director, and other experts have said that when you asked the U.S. military to carry out some of your campaign promises, specifically targeting terrorists’ families, and also the use of interrogation methods more extreme than waterboarding, the military will refuse because they’ve been trained to turn down and refuse illegal orders. So what would you do, as commander-in-chief, if the U.S. military refused to carry out those orders?

TRUMP: They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me. Believe me.

BAIER: But they’re illegal.

TRUMP: Let me just tell you, you look at the Middle East. They’re chopping off heads. They’re chopping off the heads of Christians and anybody else that happens to be in the way. They’re drowning people in steel cages. And he — now we’re talking about waterboarding.

http://time.com/4244608/donald-trump-military-orders-illegal/

The targeting of terrorists’ families isn’t a close call. “You have to take out their families,” Trump said in December, referring to members of ISIS and other terrorist groups. “They say they don’t care about their lives. You have to take out their families.”

The logic of Trump’s call is clear: use the threat of death against terrorists’ families as a crowbar to change the terrorists’ behavior. So, ironically, is its legality: “Any order to specifically target civilian family members who are not directly participating in hostilities is simply a nonstarter for today’s military,” says Dunlap, who says he has no public opinion on any candidate. Such a command, he adds, would be a “classic example of an illegal order that could not and would not be obeyed.”

trump has since "clarified" that he won't ask the military to break the law.  i'm not sure why i should believe that.

i don't think he's backtracked on china, though.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roger-alford/trumps-proposed-great-chinese-tariff-wall_b_9358376.html

Second, how would the tariff increase impact American exporters? Trump's tariff wall is undoubtedly illegal under the WTO rules. The rules were designed to make sure that countries keep their trade promises. Donald Trump's proposal is a blatant breach of our promise to keep tariffs low. All of our tariff rates are "bound," meaning we have committed by treaty not to increase beyond the bound rate. Every imported product has a bound tariff rate, and under GATT Article II, any tariff above that ceiling violates the WTO rules.

Trump's proposed tariff wall would break United States' promise to maintain its current tariff rates. China would have the right to bring an action before the WTO to challenge the 45 percent tariff increase. Just as the United States would undoubtedly win if China tried to do something similar to us, China would undoubtedly win if it challenged the Trump tariff wall. The WTO would demand that the United States keep its tariff promises, and authorize China to raise tariffs on United States' products coming into China equal to the harm the United States caused to China.

[Blanko]

more seriously, i'm not sure i could be much more clear: i think trump is divisive, abrasive, insulting, bullying, and ignorant.  i think his personality is awful, i think his policies are dogshit, and i think the nationalism he's trying to rile up is dangerous and disturbing.  i don't think the other candidates share all of those qualities.  kasich, for example, is even-keeled and smart.  i disagree with many of his policies, but they're at least debatable.  kasich wouldn't completely fracture the gop as trump is doing now.  he wouldn't be a daily embarrassment to our country.  foreign heads of state probably wouldn't fantasize about strangling him.

Well, that's a lot of opinions people clearly disagree with. Sure, you can have your own views, but I think a lot of what you've said is symptomatic of shaming people for holding a different view - perhaps due to not fully understanding their perspective.

You want to hear my take on it? It's precisely because of the leftist culture of shaming that Trump is gaining traction - people see a constant increase in identity politics and silencing of dissenting views, and a public condoning of hate groups like BLM. They're up against people with an "it's fine if I do it" mentality, people who scream at and spit on Trump supporters for simply wearing a MAGA hat, and they're infuriated that nobody is condemning their actions. People can complain all they want about Trump "inciting violence", but at the end of day, it's not Trump supporters that are actually violent - it's their opponents. Yet whenever a 78 year old redneck punches a protester, it's Trump's supporters that are under the magnifying glass.

You can't blame Trump for starting it. He's not divisive; the country was already divided before he stepped into the ring. What he's doing is simply bringing attention to it and giving people a voice. It's true that Trump is reckless and many of his policies don't hold up, but I think it's just a gamble Trump supporters are willing to take - they see in Trump a catalyst of change in the cultural mind set, and really Trump is the only person who could make it happen - an iconoclast that can be abrasive and insulting while using it to his advantage. Nobody plays the media like Trump does, and it's fundamental to his success.

And what of his "dangerous" policies? No problem - the US government has plenty of checks in place to prevent the president from doing anything too extreme. It's probably not something Bernie supporters have realised yet. I think a Trump presidency and a Bernie presidency would look pretty similar in practice. Neither would sign TPP, neither would start any wars and neither are beholden to the rich elite and special interests. Trump wouldn't get his tariffs and mass deportation, and Bernie wouldn't give free shit to everyone. And I think that's just fine - it's certainly preferable to the cronyism of Hillary, or the theocracy of Cruz.

Also, don't worry about Trump being an embarrassment - America already is an embarrassment to the rest of the world. 

[Rushy]

Explain to me how Trump saying he does not condone violence at his rallys is false.

There's nothing wrong with telling people to punch someone who pushes and shoves them or rips up their property.

Saying these are "protesters" at Trump rallies is a misnomer. They're terrorists. They attack people.

Tell me this, Dave. If Trump is so violent and encouraging his supporters to be violent, why is it that Trump's rallies are being attacked almost every time but not once has a Trump supporter attacked a Bernie or Hillary rally? I mean certainly if this violent rhetoric is working, wouldn't attacks on their rallies be more commonplace than attacks on Trump's rallies?

[Lord Dave]

Explain to me how Trump saying he does not condone violence at his rallys is false.

There's nothing wrong with telling people to punch someone who pushes and shoves them or rips up their property.

Saying these are "protesters" at Trump rallies is a misnomer. They're terrorists. They attack people.

Tell me this, Dave. If Trump is so violent and encouraging his supporters to be violent, why is it that Trump's rallies are being attacked almost every time but not once has a Trump supporter attacked a Bernie or Hillary rally? I mean certainly if this violent rhetoric is working, wouldn't attacks on their rallies be more commonplace than attacks on Trump's rallies?

Oh for the love of...

That is not my issue!  My issue is that he is saying he does NOT want his peiple to do that when talking to an interviewer but DOES when talking at his rally.  If he wanta to promote the use of force against force, I don't give a fuck, but be fucking consistent!


As for why they aren't attacking a Hillary or Bernie rally:
I suspect either its because they can't be arsed to do it(not enough motivation to go out of their way) or the "thugs" are paid for by Trump to garnish media attention.  After all, why would the other side want to make Trump a victim? 
I actually think its more the former.  Trump supporters are energetic and brave when surrounded by like minded people and when Trump says fight, they fight.  But outside of that, they're not going to do it.  They aren't going to risk anything when the safety of the crowd isn't on their side.

Meanwhile, Trump has gained such a polarized view that some are just angry enough to fight against the crowd.


Basically: Trump supporters are cowards. 

[Pete Svarrior]

Or perhaps they're just regular Americans, while the "protesters" have already shown their true colours in Ferguson.

Only one of these groups has yet to set a town on fire, y'know.

[Lord Dave]

Or perhaps they're just regular Americans, while the "protesters" have already shown their true colours in Ferguson.

Only one of these groups has yet to set a town on fire, y'know.

But Trump is being attacked at all his rallys, even the ones not near Ferguson.  Are you saying that one town is traveling/tailgating?

[beardo]

Obviously there are Trump haters all over the US.

[Rushy]

the "thugs" are paid for by Trump to garnish media attention. 

I can't do this anymore.

[Pongo]

Basically: Trump supporters are cowards.

w0w, generalize much? Are you saying that only cowards can support Trump or that once one supports Trump they become a coward?

[Lord Dave]

the "thugs" are paid for by Trump to garnish media attention. 

I can't do this anymore.

Oh please.  What, you think people aren't paid to go to rallys to show numbers?  That people aren't paid to post on social media sites?  This shit happens.  Of course you'll note I didn't think it likely.  Doesn't make it impossible though.

Basically: Trump supporters are cowards.

w0w, generalize much? Are you saying that only cowards can support Trump or that once one supports Trump they become a coward?

Yeah, I am.  Fuck being PC.  You trump supporters are cowards.  All of you are cowards.  You yell and scream when you're safe in a crowd or hiding behind the computer but where are you the rest of the time?  Do you complain about the filthy rapist mexicans to your coworkers?  Do you talk about how Muslims need to be banned to your friends?  Do you protest the media, loud and true?

Or have you been sitting on your fucking ass waiting for some big and powerful man's cock to suck?

[Saddam Hussein]

the "thugs" are paid for by Trump to garnish media attention. 

I can't do this anymore.

Oh please.  What, you think people aren't paid to go to rallys to show numbers?  That people aren't paid to post on social media sites?  This shit happens.  Of course you'll note I didn't think it likely.  Doesn't make it impossible though.

Basically: Trump supporters are cowards.

w0w, generalize much? Are you saying that only cowards can support Trump or that once one supports Trump they become a coward?

Yeah, I am.  Fuck being PC.  You trump supporters are cowards.  All of you are cowards.  You yell and scream when you're safe in a crowd or hiding behind the computer but where are you the rest of the time?  Do you complain about the filthy rapist mexicans to your coworkers?  Do you talk about how Muslims need to be banned to your friends?  Do you protest the media, loud and true?

Or have you been sitting on your fucking ass waiting for some big and powerful man's cock to suck?

what in God's name am I reading

[Lord Dave]

the "thugs" are paid for by Trump to garnish media attention. 

I can't do this anymore.

Oh please.  What, you think people aren't paid to go to rallys to show numbers?  That people aren't paid to post on social media sites?  This shit happens.  Of course you'll note I didn't think it likely.  Doesn't make it impossible though.

Basically: Trump supporters are cowards.

w0w, generalize much? Are you saying that only cowards can support Trump or that once one supports Trump they become a coward?

Yeah, I am.  Fuck being PC.  You trump supporters are cowards.  All of you are cowards.  You yell and scream when you're safe in a crowd or hiding behind the computer but where are you the rest of the time?  Do you complain about the filthy rapist mexicans to your coworkers?  Do you talk about how Muslims need to be banned to your friends?  Do you protest the media, loud and true?

Or have you been sitting on your fucking ass waiting for some big and powerful man's cock to suck?

what in God's name am I reading

My rant.  Wanna complain about it?  Tell me it makes no sense?  Wanna pick it apart word by word?  Go on!  Do it!  I fucking DARE you!

[beardo]

That's almost Th*rk level.

[Roundy]

Suddenly this thread has become kind of epic.

[sandokhan]

http://www.vox.com/2016/3/14/11224468/donald-trump-women-ad

[Blanko]

Trump supporters are cowards for not attacking people? Well, that's an interesting way to look at it...

[Rushy]

Are you okay, Dave? Are they giving you any strange pills or injections in Norway?

I don't think I am ok.

[Lord Dave]

Trump supporters are cowards for not attacking people? Well, that's an interesting way to look at it...

Trump Supporters are cowards for only speaking out and fighting back when in Trump's presence as opposed to all the pussy, wimpy liberals who are willing to fight inside the lion's den and risk a punch to the face. 

[Blanko]

You don't think it's problematic that they live in a country where they're afraid to be open about their political preferences at risk of persecution?

[Lord Dave]

You don't think it's problematic that they live in a country where they're afraid to be open about their political preferences at risk of persecution?

Well, that IS the way they want it.  Just not THEIR political preferences.