Are we gonna get Trump for another term?

[Arnox]

Well, if you yourself do not believe it any less likely that one candidate would be a turn off than the other, then I'm wondering why you think high numbers for Clinton indicate a rigged election, but not high numbers for Trump.

Because I had personally seen MANY people from many places oppose Hilary, whether they were for or against Trump.

 

[Silvanus]

Because I had personally seen MANY people from many places oppose Hilary, whether they were for or against Trump.

This is anecdotal, then?

 

[Arnox]

This is anecdotal, then?

Of course it is. That's why I said, "no firm evidence". lol

 

[Silvanus]

Of course it is. That's why I said, "no firm evidence". lol

The number of people we personally interact with is going to be the tiniest fraction of a percentage of the voterbase; both statistically insignificant and unrepresentative. One cannot really draw any conclusions at all about the population as a whole from personal interaction alone.

 

[Arnox]

The number of people we personally interact with is going to be the tiniest fraction of a percentage of the voterbase; both statistically insignificant and unrepresentative. One cannot really draw any conclusions at all about the population as a whole from personal interaction alone.

You still haven't answered my question though. Around how many Hilary supporters have you met as compared to those who oppose her?

 

[Runic Rogue]

Actually, that is partially the point I am making, yes.

Considering the dem's now run on a platform of moral superiority as demonstrated by using outrage every 5 minutes, it is more the problem with hypocrisy coming from the people seen as ineffective bullies. Trump looks like an idiot, and is excused for his failings in some respect because he is seen as an idiot.

It ends up a case of trump is expected to behave in that fashion, while the dems are expected to be better as viewed by their voters. When they aren't, they lose the people who would vote for them on that basis. This compounds when they look at trump as a fool being attacked by hypocritical and corrupt politics and still succeeding in spite of it. Thus they are more likely to listen to his rhetoric, if not agree with some of his statements, especially if he too is calling out the behavior on the left. The first part costs the dems voters, the second increases the chance of them siding against them.

Both parties assert moral superiority (if not explicitly, then implicitly). This has been the case, also, since the advent of democracy. Parties decry the moral and ethical impact of their opponents' policies so routinely, that this is in no ways unique. Moral argument is a foundation of public debate (as it should be).

The only differentiating factor is that recently, people seem to have a greater problem with the tone from the Democratic Party than in the past. Yet their campaign ads and public statements remain less moralising and less condemning than those from the Republican Party.

Here's the problem though, what people see as justifying claims of greater morality has changed a lot and rapidly in the democratic party compared to the standard core ideas of "old fashion american first values" that the republicans have hitched their wagon to time and again. Lets go back a few years to the Bush era. Back then democrats railed against the war, his invasion of freedoms with things like the Patriot act, they hated the questionable way he won Florida by supreme court overrule, they disliked his corporate ties and his aiding of shipping manufacturing jobs overseas, they openly decried his aiding of banks and corporations over the average citizen, they opposed his stances on gay marriage and rights, and they absolutely loathed the political scumbag machine that Bush and his friends seemed to represent. This created the very anti-establishment view that made Obama's grassroots efforts so effective, and why his campaign beat hillary for nomination, and beat McCain for election. The very idea of hope and change. That was why made people support the democratic party at the time, and it was the lack of delivering that made people cool off when the second term came around. By the time it came to hillary versus trump, the dem's had swapped their positions on most of the issues from 8 years ago. Hillary herself being a horrible candidate openly caught sabotaging her opponent in the primary, actively seen as an elite, out of touch, unlikeable harpy of a person, who was entitled to the job and who's sneering contempt of those who didn't like her or were unlikely to support her actively drove people not just away in apathy, but into the arms of the most powerful opposing party.

Which brings it all back to my point from the start.
Both parties sell themselves on morality, this is true, but the dem's have changed what is or is not acceptably moral stances on far too many issues too fast for a lot of their supporters. Lets compare.

Trump comes off as a fool, but one who wants to put america first in all the usual ways that republican base cares about (immigration, crime, manufacturing jobs, american values of being the best). Even the less traditional stances he has (his infidelity opposing the religious aspects of the base, his stance on gay marriage opposing the core) are more easily dismissed or outright ignored in part because of how the left demonized him for it (his infidelity making him look more repentant when the media tries to demonize him for it, and the media's fear-campaign about trump grinding up gay people and sprinkling them into volcanos actually making it less likely to believe he was really pretty progressive about his acceptance of gay marriage).

The net gain/loss here is that while some of the harder lines core religious wont vote for him, most of the usual core will, and some of the independents will. He was about where any other republican candidate would be in terms of numbers.

The dems on the other hand, changed their values faster then their voters would accept. What was once railed against in things like over-reaching executive powers, the ongoing wars in the middle east, and constant political machine helping corporate and bank interests and harming the common man, are now seemingly championed by the party. Hillary herself making blunder after blunder in her desperation to guarantee her candidacy and then victory, instead drove party members away as the political underhandedness toward bernie disgusted core dem supporters, her disregard for manufacturing and working class concerns, including ignoring "safe" states in the midwest while hosting expensive donor dinners making her feel like a corporate stooge, and the party's own continued involvement in the middle east 8 years after running a campaign on getting out. The party leading with a very "support her even if you dislike her" attitude, to say nothing of the demonizing and attacks at those who disliked her, such as the blame on the "bernie bros", further helped alienate voters and make them feel like the morality they held that shaped their positions on those topics was abandoned by the party as they "let the mask slip" so to speak. After the election loss, even things they formerly had as positives, such as "unlike the republican's, we didn't waste time and effort on pointless obstructionism" have also been lost.

The net loss/gain here is hillary lost a lot of support that had voted obama before and became more and more jaded by the lack of results they wanted. Independents had no incentive to support her (opposing Trump not counting as that is opposing him, not supporting her), and even long-time core dem supporters were often viciously attacked and demonized, with a feeling of "shut up and tow the party line" about the whole thing leading to many actively opposing the party just to spite the corrupt system and hope it broke instead. The loss was a chunk of the core and a lot of people in the middle, as well as a few blue bastion states all together. The gain was nothing of value.

That was a few years ago. Since then, things have gotten a lot worse for the dem's as their constant hypocrisy and the way the party still seems to circle wagons around the unpopular hillary like she is some martyr only increases this effect. Trump's arguments for morality, for all the dislike of them people may have, are at least consistent with a positive ideal: America is good, lets make it better". It is a very simple ideal, but effective with people tired of political double-speak, international agendas, or entitled ego projects. The dem's, in contrast, have only a very negative ideal: Stop trump. And do keep in mind I don't mean those ideals are positive and negative in a moral sense here (your personal opinions vary person to person after all), but rather the concentration of effort into building something or destroying it. Trump wants to build (hell, even is often criticized positions are building, such as walls), where as the dem's are exclusively destroying Trump's efforts.

Also, for all the demonizing, Trump came out as the far lesser of the two evils in the last election in all those respects. His campaign was very negative, but he still championed issues such as immigration fixes, bringing back trade and jobs, and dealing with isis, with the media and opposing politicians trying to tear him down because of those stances helping reaffirm them as things he was championing.

I cannot even begin to take this idea seriously...

Of course you can't. And that is why the dem's lost in 2016, and likely why they will again in 2020.

His campaign was known for a lot of things, such as "build the wall", defeating isis, bringing back coal and manufacturing, and dealing with north korea. This on top of his mudslinging at hillary and obama. But the very thing his campaign sold itself on, was "make america great", the idea of improving things and building them up.

Hillary's was seen as near-exclusively attacking trump, and it is easily what nearly everyone remembers most. That is not say that was all she had, but that is all that stuck in popular consciousness. Even at best, her position was "status quo" at a time when people were sick of it and the lack of change happening, on top of her rigging the primary and screwing Bernie over unnecessarily.

And even now, long after the election, people still refuse to see that and the problem it was. Even worse, the dem party itself seems incapable of self-examination, let alone the outright required public jettisoning of Hillary as the dead-weight she is. Instead they, like yourself, will continue to ignore the people who once voted democrat trying desperately to let the party know what they need to fix to have a chance again, to instead hang-up on how much you dislike trump.

At the end of the day, Trump won largely because Hillary and the democratic party gave it to him by their incompetence, greed, and entitlement. Everything they have done since shows they have not learned a damn thing. This is why he is likely to win in 2020 unless they do something to change.

 

[Silvanus]

You still haven't answered my question though. Around how many Hilary supporters have you met as compared to those who oppose her?

I answered the question insofar as stating that I don't know the ratio.

I live in the UK, so US politics is naturally not that common a topic. When it does come up, though, I've easily met more people who would support Clinton than people who would support Trump.

More than either, though, are people who dislike both candidates, but would choose Clinton as the lesser evil.

 

[Arnox]

I answered the question insofar as stating that I don't know the ratio.

I live in the UK, so US politics is naturally not that common a topic. When it does come up, though, I've easily met more people who would support Clinton than people who would support Trump.

More than either, though, are people who dislike both candidates, but would choose Clinton as the lesser evil.

OK, there you go.

 

[Silvanus]

OK, there you go.

But my meeting those people was not meaningfully indicative of anything whatsoever in terms of the population as a whole. I cannot extrapolate any meaningful conclusion from it, and I'd be a fool to try.

 

[Signa]

A career con-man and fraudster is preferable to a career politician?

I would debate on how much of a fraudster or con-man trump actually qualifies as, but yes, if he is exactly as you say, I would have still voted for him. I hate politicians that much. If there is only one difference between Trump and the scum of politicians is that I can trust trump to be unable to lie effitively due to his sheer arrogance.

 

[Silvanus]

I would debate on how much of a fraudster or con-man trump actually qualifies as, but yes, if he is exactly as you say, I would have still voted for him. I hate politicians that much. If there is only one difference between Trump and the scum of politicians is that I can trust trump to be unable to lie effitively due to his sheer arrogance.

Well, alright. I mean, I think those priorities are really out of whack, but YMMV.

When I spoke of him as a "con-man", I was referring to schemes like Trump University, which swindled students into maxing out their credit cards and never made good on its promises, until it was eventually forced to settle with (some of) the past students it had defrauded. Claims were demonstrably false, seminars were miss-sold, and ex-employees of the place attested that it intentionally preyed on the elderly and uneducated. I also had in mind Trump's refusal to pay his contractors.

Now, fact-checkers have quite routinely found that while politicians routinely lie, Trump does so at an even higher rate, significantly. If one's issue with politicians is corrupt, then Trump has proven himself more so. If one's issue with politicians is dishonesty, Trump has proven himself more so.

In what sense is this preferable?

 

[Taesahnim]

I sincerely hope so.

Given what he's accomplished in 19 months, gimme more!

 

[Kaleion]

I'm a Mexican and I live in México so it's not something I can really influence and I'm not all that knowledgeable in US politics as well as having my own presidential populist to worry about it.

All I can say is that I most certainly hope not, Trump basically represents every negative stereotype of the US we have here in México and the general populous of México has a pretty awful perception of the US, now more than ever, and I need to remind you that most of the South of the USA used to belong to México and that by default makes Mexicans think ill of the the US, not to mention that people are also affected in their daily lives by the corrupt energy deals we've had with the US concerning both Oil and Electricty plants such as the Thermoelectric plants of the Northwest of México.

So if percepion of you was bad before, it's basically abyssmal now especially considering a huge part of the Trump campaign is demonizing us which to be honest is very demorilizing when our lives are being affected very negatively by the political and economic control the US has over our country, which was actually a huge factor when it came to electing the moron that we just chose as president, so yeah you're poor choices for political leaders are actually having a huge effect on the morale of our people, especially the ones living in the North of the country who have mroe contact with your country than the ones in the South.
Of course it wasn't actually one of the main factors but Andres Manuel did mention it on his campaign, the main factors were typical political lies and the general ignorance of the populous, with that said it's not that surprising since all of the candidates were downright awful, it's just that I personally think the one that had the most in common with your piece of shit president was most likely the worst.

That aside I do feel I have to extend a huge fuck you to all Trump supporters, while in the end your country is your own and you can make your own choice, I do take issue with the fact that you are using my people as a scapegoat and that you are treating them as less than human.

Anyway that's about as Patriotic as I could possibly get, we all know that the only true way to solve the problem politics would be fine is if you stuffed my brain into a computer and let my brain become one with the information highway and then letting me assume world dominance through manipulation of all electronic devices.

 

[Signa]

I'm a Mexican and I live in México so it's not something I can really influence and I'm not all that knowledgeable in US politics as well as having my own presidential populist to worry about it.

All I can say is that I most certainly hope not, Trump basically represents every negative stereotype of the US we have here in México and the general populous of México has a pretty awful perception of the US, now more than ever, and I need to remind you that most of the South of the USA used to belong to México and that by default makes Mexicans think ill of the the US, not to mention that people are also affected in their daily lives by the corrupt energy deals we've had with the US concerning both Oil and Electricty plants such as the Thermoelectric plants of the Northwest of México.

So if percepion of you was bad before, it's basically abyssmal now especially considering a huge part of the Trump campaign is demonizing us which to be honest is very demorilizing when our lives are being affected very negatively by the political and economic control the US has over our country, which was actually a huge factor when it came to electing the moron that we just chose as president, so yeah you're poor choices for political leaders are actually having a huge effect on the morale of our people, especially the ones living in the North of the country who have mroe contact with your country than the ones in the South.
Of course it wasn't actually one of the main factors but Andres Manuel did mention it on his campaign, the main factors were typical political lies and the general ignorance of the populous, with that said it's not that surprising since all of the candidates were downright awful, it's just that I personally think the one that had the most in common with your piece of shit president was most likely the worst.

That aside I do feel I have to extend a huge fuck you to all Trump supporters, while in the end your country is your own and you can make your own choice, I do take issue with the fact that you are using my people as a scapegoat and that you are treating them as less than human.

Anyway that's about as Patriotic as I could possibly get, we all know that the only true way to solve the problem politics would be fine is if you stuffed my brain into a computer and let my brain become one with the information highway and then letting me assume world dominance through manipulation of all electronic devices.

Out of curiosity, do you feel Mexico has gotten better or worse since his election? I dont mean media hysteria, but quality of life stuff. Can you say there has been a difference?

And yeah, the scapegoating shit is weak, but a lot of our political parties have just turned a blind eye to the bad stuff coming from your country, and even will try to demonize anyone that has the balls to point it out. Trump was necessary, even if he's being verbally unfair. The alternative was to keep allowing suffering and injustice of the citizens without so much as acknowledgment of the real problems.

 

[Kaleion]

I'm a Mexican and I live in México so it's not something I can really influence and I'm not all that knowledgeable in US politics as well as having my own presidential populist to worry about it.

All I can say is that I most certainly hope not, Trump basically represents every negative stereotype of the US we have here in México and the general populous of México has a pretty awful perception of the US, now more than ever, and I need to remind you that most of the South of the USA used to belong to México and that by default makes Mexicans think ill of the the US, not to mention that people are also affected in their daily lives by the corrupt energy deals we've had with the US concerning both Oil and Electricty plants such as the Thermoelectric plants of the Northwest of México.

So if percepion of you was bad before, it's basically abyssmal now especially considering a huge part of the Trump campaign is demonizing us which to be honest is very demorilizing when our lives are being affected very negatively by the political and economic control the US has over our country, which was actually a huge factor when it came to electing the moron that we just chose as president, so yeah you're poor choices for political leaders are actually having a huge effect on the morale of our people, especially the ones living in the North of the country who have mroe contact with your country than the ones in the South.
Of course it wasn't actually one of the main factors but Andres Manuel did mention it on his campaign, the main factors were typical political lies and the general ignorance of the populous, with that said it's not that surprising since all of the candidates were downright awful, it's just that I personally think the one that had the most in common with your piece of shit president was most likely the worst.

That aside I do feel I have to extend a huge fuck you to all Trump supporters, while in the end your country is your own and you can make your own choice, I do take issue with the fact that you are using my people as a scapegoat and that you are treating them as less than human.

Anyway that's about as Patriotic as I could possibly get, we all know that the only true way to solve the problem politics would be fine is if you stuffed my brain into a computer and let my brain become one with the information highway and then letting me assume world dominance through manipulation of all electronic devices.

Out of curiosity, do you feel Mexico has gotten better or worse since his election? I dont mean media hysteria, but quality of life stuff. Can you say there has been a difference?

And yeah, the scapegoating shit is weak, but a lot of our political parties have just turned a blind eye to the bad stuff coming from your country, and even will try to demonize anyone that has the balls to point it out. Trump was necessary, even if he's being verbally unfair. The alternative was to keep allowing suffering and injustice of the citizens without so much as acknowledgment of the real problems.

Well quality of life is decreasing though I would attribute little of it to he influence of Donald Trump and more to both the capitalistic opportunist nature of huge multinational corporations such as Bimbo, Telcel, Walmart, BP and many others combined with the corruption and lack of interest in actually helping our people from our own politicians, that are reforming the law in a way that most benefits those companies, not to mention other issues such as the decline of the public education system that is being redesigned to push people to more rural jobs and very much ignoring, science, technology and culture which are all things México is actually very good at.

To be honest, there are so many factors at play that I couldn't really attribute anything to Trump, but seriously Signa fuck you, under no circumstance is systematic racism and discrimination acceptable and I would never be able to agree with you that it's a necessary evil, I mean they have children imprisoned in military camps, so don't give me any shitty excuses, if this was the way to get what you needed it is most definitely the incorrect way to go about it and that automatically makes it unacceptable, couldn't care less if it benefits you or not.

I may also clarify that I through cuss words around for anything and I'm not really riled up, it's just the way I've always expressed myself.

Also turning a blind eye to the bad stuff coming from my country is a neat way of denying that the problem is that your piece of shit country consumes an excessive amount of drugs and they have to come from somewhere, and unfortunately even the stuff that isn't produced here has to pass through here in order to be able to supply you, not to mention that if your people didn' consume so much the cartels wouldn't be as powerful as they are, so nice fucking way of dealing with the problem of which you are the main cause and sustainer by antagonizing us, maybe a better way would be to work together, but yes "The bad stuff coming from here has to be dealt with".

I'm a strong believer of the method is as important as the result, and I cannot axcept or abide by this method and everyone who supports it is amoral scum.


By the way I just want to mention that it's real nice to be called rapists and murderes by the piece of shit country that was literally founded by that cause, fuck off your people most definitely don't have the high horse or the right.

 

[Signa]

Out of curiosity, do you feel Mexico has gotten better or worse since his election? I dont mean media hysteria, but quality of life stuff. Can you say there has been a difference?

And yeah, the scapegoating shit is weak, but a lot of our political parties have just turned a blind eye to the bad stuff coming from your country, and even will try to demonize anyone that has the balls to point it out. Trump was necessary, even if he's being verbally unfair. The alternative was to keep allowing suffering and injustice of the citizens without so much as acknowledgment of the real problems.

Well quality of life is decreasing though I would attribute little of it to he influence of Donald Trump and more to both the capitalistic opportunist nature of huge multinational corporations such as Bimbo, Telcel, Walmart, BP and many others combined with the corruption and lack of interest in actually helping our people from our own politicians, that are reforming the law in a way that most benefits those companies, not to mention other issues such as the decline of the public education system that is being redesigned to push people to more rural jobs and very much ignoring, science, technology and culture which are all things México is actually very good at.

To be honest, there are so many factors at play that I couldn't really attribute anything to Trump, but seriously Signa fuck you, under no circumstance is systematic racism and discrimination acceptable and I would never be able to agree with you that it's a necessary evil, I mean they have children imprisoned in military camps, so don't give me any shitty excuses, if this was the way to get what you needed it is most definitely the incorrect way to go about it and that automatically makes it unacceptable, couldn't care less if it benefits you or not.

that's not a very good way to start an earnest conversation, and Mexican isn't a race....

I may also clarify that I through cuss words around for anything and I'm not really riled up, it's just the way I've always expressed myself.

...but no, you're clearly upset, and I'm sorry I pissed you off.

Also turning a blind eye to the bad stuff coming from my country is a neat way of denying that the problem is that your piece of shit country consumes an excessive amount of drugs and they have to come from somewhere, and unfortunately even the stuff that isn't produced here has to pass through here in order to be able to supply you, not to mention that if your people didn' consume so much the cartels wouldn't be as powerful as they are, so nice fucking way of dealing with the problem of which you are the main cause and sustainer by antagonizing us, maybe a better way would be to work together, but yes "The bad stuff coming from here has to be dealt with".

then we're in agreement in general here. I've been saying for years that if we just made drugs legal, we'd fix Mexico overnight. I'm being a little hyperbolic, but most of your problems do exist because of our drug laws.

I'm a strong believer of the method is as important as the result, and I cannot axcept or abide by this method and everyone who supports it is amoral scum.

again why someone like Trump is necessary. Outlawing drugs is the obvious head-on approach to "fixing" America's drug issue, and career politicians would never be caught going on the record by doing anything that looks pro drug. Its completely against the nature of the job because every-day-joe would never understand that a vote on a "pro drug" bill could be fixing issues with employment, economy and immagration. Trump, for all his flaws, is not a career politician. He may even still be the wrong person for this conversation, but he's the only non-politician that was able to gain enough influence to say "fuck you" to the rest of the other assholes for us. Given some of his Twitter spats, I know he's (perhaps accidentally) capable of using counterintuitive tactics to great effect. Once again, America saw something had to be done because the normal way was not working.

By the way I just want to mention that it's real nice to be called rapists and murderes by the piece of shit country that was literally founded by that cause, fuck off your people most definitely don't have the high horse or the right.

I never heard him say that all Mexicans were rapists and murders, just that a lot of them come from over the border illegally. I think you are upset at him for calling out the same people you were just talking about as the bed actors in your country. I think you accidentally agree with him here and dont know it.

 

[Kaleion]

that's not a very good way to start an earnest conversation, and Mexican isn't a race....

Sorry, I generally use very vulgar language and overall very hard to read, I find it hard to express myself in a neutral manner, as for Mexicans not being a race, I was more or less referring to latin American people but I guess yest technically correct, let's just call it ethnic discrimination though he's also guilty of religious discrimination, which is a whole different issue but also awful and completely unacceptable.

then we're in agreement in general here. I've been saying for years that if we just made drugs legal, we'd fix Mexico overnight. I'm being a little hyperbolic, but most of your problems do exist because of our drug laws.

I do agree that legalizing drug use could possibly be beneficial and hit the cartels really hard, however the cartels exert huge political power at the moment and it is an issue that not only concerns México & the US but Latin America as a whole since a lot of the drugs are produced in places like Guatemala & Colombia, so it is a huge undertaking, one that would most likely be solved through good diplomacy rather than throwing around insults like a toddler doing a tantrum, not to mention that even if drug use is legalized that doesn't necessarily mean that drug production would be, in any case there's no easy fix, it would most likely be a mix of good diplomacy, smart implementation of use and production legalization of drugs and aggressive military and police action to weed out the cartel representatives on all governments, including yours, I very much doubt that moron has the subtlety and insight to mount such a complex multinational operation considering how awful his regime is at diplomacy.

again why someone like Trump is necessary. Outlawing drugs is the obvious head-on approach to "fixing" America's drug issue, and career politicians would never be caught going on the record by doing anything that looks pro drug. Its completely against the nature of the job because every-day-joe would never understand that a vote on a "pro drug" bill could be fixing issues with employment, economy and immagration. Trump, for all his flaws, is not a career politician. He may even still be the wrong person for this conversation, but he's the only non-politician that was able to gain enough influence to say "fuck you" to the rest of the other assholes for us. Given some of his Twitter spats, I know he's (perhaps accidentally) capable of using counterintuitive tactics to great effect. Once again, America saw something had to be done because the normal way was not working.

To think such awful scum is a necessary evil simply means that your morals are corrupt and in need of fine tuning, while I can sympathyze with the feeling of disgust you feel towards politicians to try to fix the problems by using tactics that are quite frankly downright evil means that this is not the correct way to go about it, it's just convenient and apparently easy, but taking that route is the route for weak willed petty people, hate can't really be fought head on by even more hate is going to lead to more aggressive pushback and most likely an even bigger delay on fixing these issues, not to mention that the person you are choosing to trust is quite literally the definition of corrupt, the only thing worse than politicians are corporate businessmen that throw their money around to modify laws an regulations to satisfy their short term needs, meaning exactly the piece of scum Trump is, he doesn't care about your people, he simply cares about his own interests and is willing to screw everyone over to achieve it.

I never heard him say that all Mexicans were rapists and murders, just that a lot of them come from over the border illegally. I think you are upset at him for calling out the same people you were just talking about as the bed actors in your country. I think you accidentally agree with him here and dont know it.

The exact wording matters little, we understood exactly what he meant between the lines and that is that he is here to promote a message of hate and nothing more, and like I mentioned before us Latin Americans aren't his only target, Muslims are being heavily targetted too and he has clearly shown that he doesn't care much for African Americans by wanting to outlaw their peaceful protest, I seriously don't understand how can anyone defend this kind of behaviour and even go so far as to call it a necessary evil.

 

[Monoochrom]

downright evil means

Evil isn't real, it's a concept for children and the simple minded unable to understand just how complex the world is.

And while I don't think the Cages thing is good, that's also kinda the idea of a deterrent, you're not supposed to like it.

 

[Signa]

that's not a very good way to start an earnest conversation, and Mexican isn't a race....

Sorry, I generally use very vulgar language and overall very hard to read, I find it hard to express myself in a neutral manner, as for Mexicans not being a race, I was more or less referring to latin American people but I guess yest technically correct, let's just call it ethnic discrimination though he's also guilty of religious discrimination, which is a whole different issue but also awful and completely unacceptable.

then we're in agreement in general here. I've been saying for years that if we just made drugs legal, we'd fix Mexico overnight. I'm being a little hyperbolic, but most of your problems do exist because of our drug laws.

I do agree that legalizing drug use could possibly be beneficial and hit the cartels really hard, however the cartels exert huge political power at the moment and it is an issue that not only concerns México & the US but Latin America as a whole since a lot of the drugs are produced in places like Guatemala & Colombia, so it is a huge undertaking, one that would most likely be solved through good diplomacy rather than throwing around insults like a toddler doing a tantrum, not to mention that even if drug use is legalized that doesn't necessarily mean that drug production would be, in any case there's no easy fix, it would most likely be a mix of good diplomacy, smart implementation of use and production legalization of drugs and aggressive military and police action to weed out the cartel representatives on all governments, including yours, I very much doubt that moron has the subtlety and insight to mount such a complex multinational operation considering how awful his regime is at diplomacy.

Nothing to add here. I think we both are very close in agreeing what the problems are, just not the methods in fixing them.

again why someone like Trump is necessary. Outlawing drugs is the obvious head-on approach to "fixing" America's drug issue, and career politicians would never be caught going on the record by doing anything that looks pro drug. Its completely against the nature of the job because every-day-joe would never understand that a vote on a "pro drug" bill could be fixing issues with employment, economy and immagration. Trump, for all his flaws, is not a career politician. He may even still be the wrong person for this conversation, but he's the only non-politician that was able to gain enough influence to say "fuck you" to the rest of the other assholes for us. Given some of his Twitter spats, I know he's (perhaps accidentally) capable of using counterintuitive tactics to great effect. Once again, America saw something had to be done because the normal way was not working.

To think such awful scum is a necessary evil simply means that your morals are corrupt and in need of fine tuning,

c'mon man, I'm not calling you names or casting aspersions here. Can you keep your hate focused long enough at Trump at not me to have this conversation?

while I can sympathyze with the feeling of disgust you feel towards politicians to try to fix the problems by using tactics that are quite frankly downright evil means

This is a pretty long sentence, so I'm going to need to interject a few times. Let's start by your definition of evil, and how Trump has exemplified it. I may have missed something he did that I did not agree with because of the over-coverage of him in the media. I even have a game where if I see CNN on TV as I walk by, I "win" if Trump's name is not printed on the screen. I only win maybe 10% of the time. It's pretty sad how much of a hate boner they have for him.

that this is not the correct way to go about it, it's just convenient and apparently easy, but taking that route is the route for weak willed petty people,

I'd call it disgust with the system for why I voted for him. Politicians are elected to be our representatives, and there is nothing about them that represents anyone I know in America. Believe it or not, Trump actually does. He's still the 1%, but you will catch glimpses of the everyman in him, like when he chucked some Starburst at Merkle and said "Don't say I never gave you anything" in the middle of a deal. What a mad lad! It's the type of thing I'd love to do to someone like Merkle, or pretty much any politician.

hate can't really be fought head on by even more hate is going to lead to more aggressive pushback and most likely an even bigger delay on fixing these issues,

In Trump's case, because he's innately anti-establishment, people are fighting against him anyway. The thing is, he's a populist, and so far has shown himself to be committed to the people that voted for him. He's not like Obama who promised "change" and then nothing got better, or tried to get better. At worst, Trump's plans have been knee-jerk, but they are still good optics to me because he shows something is being tried to address the problem.

not to mention that the person you are choosing to trust is quite literally the definition of corrupt, the only thing worse than politicians are corporate businessmen that throw their money around to modify laws an regulations to satisfy their short term needs, meaning exactly the piece of scum Trump is, he doesn't care about your people, he simply cares about his own interests and is willing to screw everyone over to achieve it.

6 years ago when Trump mentioned something about running for president, I laughed my ass off. The moment he ran for 2016, I was instantly interested in hearing what he had to say. Something changed in those 4 year that I didn't even know happened, but it was obvious immediately what the best answer in the moment was going to be. The only thing I can say is that while Trump is a business man, I don't care about his political decisions as they relate to his business, because his business isn't in the business of oppressing people. There's a lot of companies out there that match what you said, and I'd be far more scared of them in power. I think Comcast would be a great example of that kind of corruption, because we all need internet access, and a president that allows Comcast to flourish while suppressing other ISPs would be a very dangerous thing. Trump was just a real-estate owner and a reality TV star. If you are paying Trump, it's voluntary, and he does not have a monopoly on anything.

I never heard him say that all Mexicans were rapists and murders, just that a lot of them come from over the border illegally. I think you are upset at him for calling out the same people you were just talking about as the bed actors in your country. I think you accidentally agree with him here and dont know it.

The exact wording matters little, we understood exactly what he meant between the lines and that is that he is here to promote a message of hate and nothing more,

The exact wording does matter a lot! There is nuance between saying "All Mexican's are scum" vs saying "all Mexicans that cross the boarder are scum." Both statements are VERY close to each other, but one is referring to breakers of American law, which in turn does make you scummy while in our land. Neither are completely accurate statements, but I hope it can illustrate how much of a difference the "exact wording" can make.

and like I mentioned before us Latin Americans aren't his only target, Muslims are being heavily targeted too

I have no problem with this as long as it's handled with as much fairness as possible. Islam is responsible for roughly 90% of all terrorism, followed by communism as a distant second. Trump is staying true to his "America First" policy, and we were the victims of 9/11 after all. An ongoing overreaction is warranted after an event like that. There's a ton more to be said on Islam, but that's for another topic.

and he has clearly shown that he doesn't care much for African Americans by wanting to outlaw their peaceful protest,

If you're talking about BLM, here's where I have a passionate overreaction towards you. BLM is NOT a peace movement, it's a supremacy movement. The media lied about that.

I seriously don't understand how can anyone defend this kind of behavior and even go so far as to call it a necessary evil.

Once again, how do you define "evil"? I define it as willfully causing undue harm on another. I'm sure I could come up with a few evil acts that don't adhere to that definition, but that's a broad enough net to capture what I'm talking about. How about you? I don't think Trump has committed evil. Maybe ignorance, but not evil.

 

[Kaleion]

Nothing to add here. I think we both are very close in agreeing what the problems are, just not the methods in fixing them.

Regardless of the method, it cannot be achieved without all parties involved, the USA in this case Trump isn't looking to work together with any of the countries involved therefore his plan will fail, he can't force Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, etc. to do anything and engaging in war would bring about WWIII, not to mention the hightened state of chaos would make it easier for illegal organizations to acquire power, it's not about the method it's about what will and won't work, and if it's obvious that it won't work it's a waste of resources and time, not to mention that antagonizing the only people that can help you deal with the problem makes the whole operation downright detrimental to the cause, that is why it's wrong to support Trump in this particular case, it sucks that the other politicians aren't pursuing this cause but Trump is hurting it which makes him even worse.

c'mon man, I'm not calling you names or casting aspersions here. Can you keep your hate focused long enough at Trump at not me to have this conversation?

I'll try.

This is a pretty long sentence, so I'm going to need to interject a few times. Let's start by your definition of evil, and how Trump has exemplified it. I may have missed something he did that I did not agree with because of the over-coverage of him in the media. I even have a game where if I see CNN on TV as I walk by, I "win" if Trump's name is not printed on the screen. I only win maybe 10% of the time. It's pretty sad how much of a hate boner they have for him.

Ture, perhaps I should refrain from using abstract comments in my arguments, then again that's why I'm not a debater and normally don't participate in these kinds of conversations.

I'd call it disgust with the system for why I voted for him. Politicians are elected to be our representatives, and there is nothing about them that represents anyone I know in America. Believe it or not, Trump actually does. He's still the 1%, but you will catch glimpses of the everyman in him, like when he chucked some Starburst at Merkle and said "Don't say I never gave you anything" in the middle of a deal. What a mad lad! It's the type of thing I'd love to do to someone like Merkle, or pretty much any politician.

I know what it's like to feel that you aren't being represented by the government, but I fail to see how electing this bufoon actually helps, like you said the people that don't support him outright hate him and since according to your countries own government he didn't win by majority but rather the way your country's voting system is set up which is to say divided by how many region and then it's the majority of that region that actually is counted, or something like that I'm not familiar with it and it seems kinda weird to be honest, plus Washington doesn't get to vote for some reason which is very odd, makes no sense to me but whatever.
Anyway, the point that if the majority of people don't support him and the media is spreading negative propaganda about him, that makes it very feasable that there will be a huge backlash towards this sort of movement in the future possibly huting the cause in the future.

In Trump's case, because he's innately anti-establishment, people are fighting against him anyway. The thing is, he's a populist, and so far has shown himself to be committed to the people that voted for him. He's not like Obama who promised "change" and then nothing got better, or tried to get better. At worst, Trump's plans have been knee-jerk, but they are still good optics to me because he shows something is being tried to address the problem.

I'm also anti-establishment but I don't support evey moron that is also that, Populism is also extremely dangerous as anybody in South America can tell you, I'd recommend taking a look at Venezuela since that's actually a country for which it seemed to be working really well when Hugo Chavez was in power but now, not so much, I won't rag on your country so much since the populist option also won in my country this year but I didn't support him, because he is a liar, uncult, awful at diplomacy and unwilling to consider the importance of public relations with other countries, in any case I think it's unwise to support anyone that vaguely aligns with your ideals just because they do so and it's better consider the big picture and what will be the benefits and downsides of each choice, and maybe it's because I'm an outsider and as a Mexican I do have a huge bias against Trump but I see mostly downsides to having that asshole in power.

6 years ago when Trump mentioned something about running for president, I laughed my ass off. The moment he ran for 2016, I was instantly interested in hearing what he had to say. Something changed in those 4 year that I didn't even know happened, but it was obvious immediately what the best answer in the moment was going to be. The only thing I can say is that while Trump is a business man, I don't care about his political decisions as they relate to his business, because his business isn't in the business of oppressing people. There's a lot of companies out there that match what you said, and I'd be far more scared of them in power. I think Comcast would be a great example of that kind of corruption, because we all need internet access, and a president that allows Comcast to flourish while suppressing other ISPs would be a very dangerous thing. Trump was just a real-estate owner and a reality TV star. If you are paying Trump, it's voluntary, and he does not have a monopoly on anything.

Whether he has a Monopoly or not is irrelevant, he is still corporate scum the kind of which is willing to scam people with schemes such as Trump University which has been mentioned before in this thread, and refusing to pay contractors not to mention most likely also tax evations since he refuses to show his books but whatever, if you don't see that as a negative to be honest I cannot begin to comprehend how your mind works, that isn't an insult I just feel I won't be able to empathize with you in this at all.

The exact wording does matter a lot! There is nuance between saying "All Mexican's are scum" vs saying "all Mexicans that cross the boarder are scum." Both statements are VERY close to each other, but one is referring to breakers of American law, which in turn does make you scummy while in our land. Neither are completely accurate statements, but I hope it can illustrate how much of a difference the "exact wording" can make.

Fine let's look at the exact quote then:
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."
First off let's start, he claims we are sending the people rather than Mexican people are deciding to go there, clearly an attempt to other us and make us a cohesive whole, then he remarks how the best aren't being sent, which is also a lie I have a cousin that is an excellent engineer and was sent over there to work with NASA and after that the military, but whatever we're not sending our best, then he claims people with problems, which is true illegal immigrants generally go there because they thing they have a good opportunity of success, not unlike any other immigrant including the once that formed the USA, then he points out that their problems come with them and that those problems are Drugs, Crime and Rape, a rather serious sweeping statement of accusation considering that most immigrants do honest work for what ammounts to miserable pay, the low payment given to them is actually a huge advantage to corporations one that even Trump's own company has exploited, and at the end he backtracks a little bit by saying some of them, maybe are good people, but he just assumes because he's got no proof of their existence and the vast majority are still rapist criminal drug dealers.

That's exactly how that comes across to me, if you don't think that's antagonizing, well it doesn't matter because that's more or less how we interpret that message.

I have no problem with this as long as it's handled with as much fairness as possible. Islam is responsible for roughly 90% of all terrorism, followed by communism as a distant second. Trump is staying true to his "America First" policy, and we were the victims of 9/11 after all. An ongoing overreaction is warranted after an event like that. There's a ton more to be said on Islam, but that's for another topic.

It's not being handled well, it comes off as incredibly hateful, but whatever I'll let it slide because I have even less insight into this topic than the other ones that have been mentioned.

If you're talking about BLM, here's where I have a passionate overreaction towards you. BLM is NOT a peace movement, it's a supremacy movement. The media lied about that.

Of course that the response was going to be generalization, the movement was a peaceful movement to point out the injustice that Black people face in comparison to whites, but of course like everything extremists popped out and are doing their own awful things, that shouldn't be enough to taint the whole thing and I think we can easily agree that bending the knee at the US himn during a Football game hurts absolutely no one, in any case I don't have much insight in this matter so I'll drop it.

Once again, how do you define "evil"? I define it as willfully causing undue harm on another. I'm sure I could come up with a few evil acts that don't adhere to that definition, but that's a broad enough net to capture what I'm talking about. How about you? I don't think Trump has committed evil. Maybe ignorance, but not evil.

He is clearly ignorant and most definitel a moron, but I would argue that his intetions are awful he talks about launching missiles like it's nothing, his whole campaign is built on anger, dissatisfation and stuff to direct those feelings at, his behaviour seems clearly destructive and his intentions don't seem to be all that nice, but whatever, villains don't see themselves as evil and yes it is an abbstract concept so I'll drop it.