In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On September 20 2016 03:58 Plansix wrote: The reasons I dislike him are unchanged. He is still uninformed, deeply stupid and a man-baby that is unfit for office. Even if I ignore all the populist non-sense, he is still a garbage candidate due to his lack of knowledge and complete distain for people with knowledge.
I don't think he is uninformed though.
Yes, he is tough on immigration but that's due to all those reported incidence from Europe and of course 911.
Yes, he is right that illegal immigrants needs to turn up and sign up for legal residency and whoever that isn't qualified needs to be kicked out.
That's actually really anti corporate and would grant the one that deserves it minimum wage and other social benefit.
He is doing a lot of goods for the people.
The only people that hates on him are masochist, they know that there are some undeserved illegals here and of course they do exist.
He is incredibly uninformed. He didn't even know the parties involved in the TPP in the debates, he doesn't know the current number of ships/planes/men in our military (and has as a result stated a plan to make it bigger that would in reality shrink it), he doesn't know how the national debt works, he doesn't know the current process for vetting immigrants OR refugees, he doesn't know how the formal delegate nomination process works, he doesn't know what Obamacare is, he doesn't know how his own company's maternity leave/childcare works, and he also doesn't know the difference between a poll aggregater and a pollster.
If you think Donald Trump is informed, you're arguing from another reality.
The fact that he claimed he could “renegotiate” the terms of the national debt was hilarious. Like its some bankruptcy filing and you can just get better terms.
Obama having generated 10 trillion USD in debt during his 8 years doesn't help.
The fact that US tax revenue is 3.3 trillion USD per year, and interest on debt will be 250 billion next year... If we're being realistic, it won't be paid off within 50 years.
And if interest rates go up a bit, have fun USA, so yeah, some change is likely to happen.
To bad Trump’s master plan is to increase spending, magically make 4% growth and cut taxes to the richest people in the nation. So, in a lot of ways, he is worse than Obama for the debt.
Which we can’t renegotiate and we can’t default on, both things Trump has suggested the US should do.
Just look at the article above, and it says there that currently it would be a cost of $5trillion over 10 years, so that's 500 billion a year, or 15% of the tax revenue.
Over those 5 years, if he was able to get 3% real gdp growth, the plan would be revenue neutral. That said, it doesn't take into account closing of "loopholes" that he was talking about, and also... Trump is set on reducing spending, so yes, he's promising quite a bit now, but stuff will be cut, how exactly, we don't know yet, it's natural to promise a bit more than you can follow up on.
Stuff like renegotiating with Mexico, China, and TPP bring in more revenue for the US as well. It's not completely unreasonable.
On September 20 2016 03:58 Plansix wrote: The reasons I dislike him are unchanged. He is still uninformed, deeply stupid and a man-baby that is unfit for office. Even if I ignore all the populist non-sense, he is still a garbage candidate due to his lack of knowledge and complete distain for people with knowledge.
I don't think he is uninformed though.
Yes, he is tough on immigration but that's due to all those reported incidence from Europe and of course 911.
Yes, he is right that illegal immigrants needs to turn up and sign up for legal residency and whoever that isn't qualified needs to be kicked out.
That's actually really anti corporate and would grant the one that deserves it minimum wage and other social benefit.
He is doing a lot of goods for the people.
The only people that hates on him are masochist, they know that there are some undeserved illegals here and of course they do exist.
Yeah, I disagree on every level. He shows a basic lack of understanding on most international issues. His plan to make Mexico pay for the wall was comical at best, tragically uninformed at worst. His talk about dealing with ISIS can be described as that of a middle school play ground bully or child attempting to sound tough. His distain for the press, political process and judicial system have been evident throughout this election.
He is the very definition of the person I never want to see elected, a self aggrandizing blow hard who hates people who better informed than him. And he surrounds himself with yes-men and people who are willing to ride his coat tails for their own personal gain. I got through George W Bush. I’m not doing it again, especially with someone even dumber than Bush. And somehow worse at public speaking.
He is not ACTUALLY thinking that Mexico will pay for the wall? Are you THIS naive for real? I don't believe that you are.
Its an intimidating tactics, his point is that Mexico is getting the better deal out of the US-Mexico relationship.
So he wants to set new tone with Mexico and the quickest way to get Mexico's attention is to go an outrageous deal then to negotiate afterward.
You are definitely not thinking out of the box here.
While I don't agree with you, since Mexico is going to pay for the wall, but simply through Tariffs or some other trade means, not a hey, give us $1 billion dollars a year for the next while so we can build a wall...
Plansix does take most things at absurdly face value, and hence it can be difficult to discuss anything politics with him.
On September 20 2016 04:26 TheYango wrote:
On September 20 2016 04:23 RealityIsKing wrote: He is not ACTUALLY thinking that Mexico will pay for the wall? Are you THIS naive for real? I don't believe that you are.
Its an intimidating tactics, his point is that Mexico is getting the better deal out of the US-Mexico relationship.
So he wants to set new tone with Mexico and the quickest way to get Mexico's attention is to go an outrageous deal then to negotiate afterward.
You are definitely not thinking out of the box here.
The problem isn't whether or not Mexico will pay for the wall. The problem is that suggesting that a new wall will actually significantly impact illegal immigration in a productive way deeply misunderstands how illegal immigrants end up becoming illegal immigrants, and what effects putting up a wall would actually have.
The wall is synonymous with increased border security. Anyone who imagines any kind of wall being erected and everything else staying the same is wrong. Trump and his advisors aren't/won't be stupid enough to spend billions of dollars for no reason whatsoever.
So that part of his plan he is selling is flawed, but we should trust that the rest of it is fine because reasons.
Also, this is the guy who lied to people attending his university, claiming the classes would help them make more money or provide education. But we should believe this guy, with a decades long history of defrauding to people to make a quick buck.
Well way better than Hillary with so many more dirt on her. And she ACTUALLY costed people's lives in the Middle East.
Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
If you think Trump is the lesser of two evils, go right ahead, but the optimism that one of the two options isn't completely terrible confuses me. We have a devil's bargain, no matter how you slice it.
On September 20 2016 04:35 TheYango wrote: Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
What about Hillary though?
She have more chance of not following up than Trump.
At least with Trump on the helm, he doesn't have as much favors to pay for since they are funded differently.
On September 20 2016 04:35 TheYango wrote: Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
If you think Trump is the lesser of two evils, go right ahead, but the optimism that one of the two options isn't completely terrible confuses me.
The real question is what would be a good choice?
In contemporary society, all candidates running for president will look evil. Before running for president, I thought Trump was seen as a fairly nice guy. Also in case people didn't see his thing from 3 days ago:
I like the principles from his ideas, and from the economic standpoint, every single economic policy that anyone in the world could come up with would get massive criticized, period. The sky isn't going to fall with Trump's economic policy, we've had equally crazy proposals in the past, and things manage okay... The president isn't a monarch.
On September 20 2016 04:35 TheYango wrote: Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
What about Hillary though?
She have more chance of not following up than Trump.
At least with Trump on the helm, he doesn't have as much favors to pay for since they are funded differently.
You do know that Trump is a private business owner and he says his children will be in charge of his company while he serves? If you think there will be less pay for play under Trump, you might be in for an amazing surprise. There is a reason he isn't releasing his taxes or information about his private investments.
On September 20 2016 04:35 TheYango wrote: Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
What about Hillary though?
She have more chance of not following up than Trump.
At least with Trump on the helm, he doesn't have as much favors to pay for since they are funded differently.
You do know that Trump is a private business owner and he says his children will be in charge of his company while he serves? If you think there will be less pay for play under Trump, you might be in for an amazing surprise.
There is nothing wrong with letting your children taking care of your company while you are away.
fiwi -> what would be a good choice? me for president! though really there's plenty of people who'd be decent presidents; we just need a system that does a better job of selecting for them. it's not really that hard to design such a system, but getting it implemented is.
On September 20 2016 04:35 TheYango wrote: Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
What about Hillary though?
She have more chance of not following up than Trump.
At least with Trump on the helm, he doesn't have as much favors to pay for since they are funded differently.
I don't see a functional difference between a business as usual politician, like Hillary, who is at least partially beholden to special interests, and Donald Trump, who is beholden only to his giant ego. I have to wonder what people have been smoking if they think Donald Trump is some sort of patriot or American hero. He is a powerful man who wants to become the most powerful man, nothing more and nothing less.
On September 20 2016 03:58 Plansix wrote: The reasons I dislike him are unchanged. He is still uninformed, deeply stupid and a man-baby that is unfit for office. Even if I ignore all the populist non-sense, he is still a garbage candidate due to his lack of knowledge and complete distain for people with knowledge.
I don't think he is uninformed though.
Yes, he is tough on immigration but that's due to all those reported incidence from Europe and of course 911.
Yes, he is right that illegal immigrants needs to turn up and sign up for legal residency and whoever that isn't qualified needs to be kicked out.
That's actually really anti corporate and would grant the one that deserves it minimum wage and other social benefit.
He is doing a lot of goods for the people.
The only people that hates on him are masochist, they know that there are some undeserved illegals here and of course they do exist.
Yeah, I disagree on every level. He shows a basic lack of understanding on most international issues. His plan to make Mexico pay for the wall was comical at best, tragically uninformed at worst. His talk about dealing with ISIS can be described as that of a middle school play ground bully or child attempting to sound tough. His distain for the press, political process and judicial system have been evident throughout this election.
He is the very definition of the person I never want to see elected, a self aggrandizing blow hard who hates people who better informed than him. And he surrounds himself with yes-men and people who are willing to ride his coat tails for their own personal gain. I got through George W Bush. I’m not doing it again, especially with someone even dumber than Bush. And somehow worse at public speaking.
He is not ACTUALLY thinking that Mexico will pay for the wall? Are you THIS naive for real? I don't believe that you are.
Its an intimidating tactics, his point is that Mexico is getting the better deal out of the US-Mexico relationship.
So he wants to set new tone with Mexico and the quickest way to get Mexico's attention is to go an outrageous deal then to negotiate afterward.
You are definitely not thinking out of the box here.
While I don't agree with you, since Mexico is going to pay for the wall, but simply through Tariffs or some other trade means, not a hey, give us $1 billion dollars a year for the next while so we can build a wall...
Plansix does take most things at absurdly face value, and hence it can be difficult to discuss anything politics with him.
On September 20 2016 04:26 TheYango wrote:
On September 20 2016 04:23 RealityIsKing wrote: He is not ACTUALLY thinking that Mexico will pay for the wall? Are you THIS naive for real? I don't believe that you are.
Its an intimidating tactics, his point is that Mexico is getting the better deal out of the US-Mexico relationship.
So he wants to set new tone with Mexico and the quickest way to get Mexico's attention is to go an outrageous deal then to negotiate afterward.
You are definitely not thinking out of the box here.
The problem isn't whether or not Mexico will pay for the wall. The problem is that suggesting that a new wall will actually significantly impact illegal immigration in a productive way deeply misunderstands how illegal immigrants end up becoming illegal immigrants, and what effects putting up a wall would actually have.
The wall is synonymous with increased border security. Anyone who imagines any kind of wall being erected and everything else staying the same is wrong. Trump and his advisors aren't/won't be stupid enough to spend billions of dollars for no reason whatsoever.
So that part of his plan he is selling is flawed, but we should trust that the rest of it is fine because reasons.
Also, this is the guy who lied to people attending his university, claiming the classes would help them make more money or provide education. But we should believe this guy, with a decades long history of defrauding to people to make a quick buck.
Well way better than Hillary with so many more dirt on her. And she ACTUALLY costed people's lives in the Middle East.
On September 20 2016 01:52 KwarK wrote: While I'm going to become a US citizen for purposes of convenience I doubt I will ever feel a primary loyalty to the United States over my homeland, nor have any great reverence for the constitution. Would I be allowed to stay?
I think according to certain elements within the Alt Right, you would be a part of the problem. As far as I can tell those elements view any immigrant from the 1800's on as weakening the character of the original United States- and these aren't even the supremacists, just ones that refuse to disown the supremacists. They are just those that do not believe anyone can be American. "To cite one phrase of a document in contradiction to the central theme of the entire document, which is that the People of the United Colonies are an English people, unique and distinct from foreigners, Indians, and the English people loyal to the King of Britain, is an outrageous attempt at deceit that relies entirely on the historical ignorance of the audience. To say that anyone can become an American because "all men are created equal" is a shameless lie."
On September 20 2016 04:35 TheYango wrote: Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
What about Hillary though?
She have more chance of not following up than Trump.
At least with Trump on the helm, he doesn't have as much favors to pay for since they are funded differently.
I don't see a functional difference between a business as usual politician, like Hillary, who is at least partially beholden to special interests, and Donald Trump, who is beholden only to his giant ego. I have to wonder what people have been smoking if they think Donald Trump is some sort of patriot or American hero. He is a powerful man who wants to become the most powerful man, nothing more and nothing less.
Well right now, Trump is doing the right thing for Americans and if he can follow it, then great.
And let's be honest, congress have the power to stop wars so let's face it, any president's power is severely limited in that regard and Trump knows this.
On September 20 2016 04:35 TheYango wrote: Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
What about Hillary though?
She have more chance of not following up than Trump.
At least with Trump on the helm, he doesn't have as much favors to pay for since they are funded differently.
You do know that Trump is a private business owner and he says his children will be in charge of his company while he serves? If you think there will be less pay for play under Trump, you might be in for an amazing surprise.
Are you under the impression that Trump is becoming President to get rich? I thought we put that conspiracy during the primaries.
Either way, $4.5 billion in net worth, which some of isn't even in the US doesn't allow Trump to drain the budget with his privacy business even if that was the case.
I think he is a fairly selfish person, and I think he's main motivation for what he's doing is he want to leave the world in a state similar to how he found it when he was younger, which some modifications like less racism, more modern tradition values, so allowing gay marriage, etc... But simply to fight the liberal left movement, for his kids and family (and for his own ideology too). I never get the impression that he's doing it for wealth gain - maybe for popularity sure, but that's okay with me.
On September 20 2016 04:49 RealityIsKing wrote: And let's be honest, congress have the power to stop wars so let's face it, any president's power is severely limited in that regard and Trump knows this.
The worst case scenario isn't Trump doing the things he says, the worst case scenario is him letting a Republican congress pass whatever they want.
I'm working off the assumption that both Hillary and Trump are full of shit and won't do any of what they say. From that perspective, I'll take 4 more years of obstructionism over 4 years of the President giving a Republican congress a free pass.
Granted, it's arguable that Hillary would still be worse than 4 more years of obstructionism, but still.
On September 20 2016 04:35 TheYango wrote: Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
What about Hillary though?
She have more chance of not following up than Trump.
At least with Trump on the helm, he doesn't have as much favors to pay for since they are funded differently.
I don't see a functional difference between a business as usual politician, like Hillary, who is at least partially beholden to special interests, and Donald Trump, who is beholden only to his giant ego. I have to wonder what people have been smoking if they think Donald Trump is some sort of patriot or American hero. He is a powerful man who wants to become the most powerful man, nothing more and nothing less.
Well right now, Trump is doing the right thing for Americans and if he can follow it, then great.
And let's be honest, congress have the power to stop wars so let's face it, any president's power is severely limited in that regard and Trump knows this.
Trump isn't really doing the right thing for america or americans, and there's ample evidence of harm. Spreading massive amounts of lies isn't really a positive thing; nor is encouraging the breaking of one's word.
On September 20 2016 04:35 TheYango wrote: Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
What about Hillary though?
She have more chance of not following up than Trump.
At least with Trump on the helm, he doesn't have as much favors to pay for since they are funded differently.
You do know that Trump is a private business owner and he says his children will be in charge of his company while he serves? If you think there will be less pay for play under Trump, you might be in for an amazing surprise.
Are you under the impression that Trump is becoming President to get rich? I thought we put that conspiracy during the primaries.
Either way, $4.5 billion in net worth, which some of isn't even in the US doesn't allow Trump to drain the budget with his privacy business even if that was the case.
I think he is a fairly selfish person, and I think he's main motivation for what he's doing is he want to leave the world in a state similar to how he found it when he was younger, which some modifications like less racism, more modern tradition values, so allowing gay marriage, etc... But simply to fight the liberal left movement, for his kids and family (and for his own ideology too). I never get the impression that he's doing it for wealth gain - maybe for popularity sure, but that's okay with me.
How can we convince Plansix to stop his Trumphobia?
On September 20 2016 03:58 Plansix wrote: The reasons I dislike him are unchanged. He is still uninformed, deeply stupid and a man-baby that is unfit for office. Even if I ignore all the populist non-sense, he is still a garbage candidate due to his lack of knowledge and complete distain for people with knowledge.
I don't think he is uninformed though.
Yes, he is tough on immigration but that's due to all those reported incidence from Europe and of course 911.
Yes, he is right that illegal immigrants needs to turn up and sign up for legal residency and whoever that isn't qualified needs to be kicked out.
That's actually really anti corporate and would grant the one that deserves it minimum wage and other social benefit.
He is doing a lot of goods for the people.
The only people that hates on him are masochist, they know that there are some undeserved illegals here and of course they do exist.
Yeah, I disagree on every level. He shows a basic lack of understanding on most international issues. His plan to make Mexico pay for the wall was comical at best, tragically uninformed at worst. His talk about dealing with ISIS can be described as that of a middle school play ground bully or child attempting to sound tough. His distain for the press, political process and judicial system have been evident throughout this election.
He is the very definition of the person I never want to see elected, a self aggrandizing blow hard who hates people who better informed than him. And he surrounds himself with yes-men and people who are willing to ride his coat tails for their own personal gain. I got through George W Bush. I’m not doing it again, especially with someone even dumber than Bush. And somehow worse at public speaking.
He is not ACTUALLY thinking that Mexico will pay for the wall? Are you THIS naive for real? I don't believe that you are.
Its an intimidating tactics, his point is that Mexico is getting the better deal out of the US-Mexico relationship.
So he wants to set new tone with Mexico and the quickest way to get Mexico's attention is to go an outrageous deal then to negotiate afterward.
You are definitely not thinking out of the box here.
While I don't agree with you, since Mexico is going to pay for the wall, but simply through Tariffs or some other trade means, not a hey, give us $1 billion dollars a year for the next while so we can build a wall...
Plansix does take most things at absurdly face value, and hence it can be difficult to discuss anything politics with him.
On September 20 2016 04:26 TheYango wrote:
On September 20 2016 04:23 RealityIsKing wrote: He is not ACTUALLY thinking that Mexico will pay for the wall? Are you THIS naive for real? I don't believe that you are.
Its an intimidating tactics, his point is that Mexico is getting the better deal out of the US-Mexico relationship.
So he wants to set new tone with Mexico and the quickest way to get Mexico's attention is to go an outrageous deal then to negotiate afterward.
You are definitely not thinking out of the box here.
The problem isn't whether or not Mexico will pay for the wall. The problem is that suggesting that a new wall will actually significantly impact illegal immigration in a productive way deeply misunderstands how illegal immigrants end up becoming illegal immigrants, and what effects putting up a wall would actually have.
The wall is synonymous with increased border security. Anyone who imagines any kind of wall being erected and everything else staying the same is wrong. Trump and his advisors aren't/won't be stupid enough to spend billions of dollars for no reason whatsoever.
So that part of his plan he is selling is flawed, but we should trust that the rest of it is fine because reasons.
Also, this is the guy who lied to people attending his university, claiming the classes would help them make more money or provide education. But we should believe this guy, with a decades long history of defrauding to people to make a quick buck.
Well way better than Hillary with so many more dirt on her. And she ACTUALLY costed people's lives in the Middle East.
On September 20 2016 04:35 TheYango wrote: Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
What about Hillary though?
She have more chance of not following up than Trump.
At least with Trump on the helm, he doesn't have as much favors to pay for since they are funded differently.
I don't see a functional difference between a business as usual politician, like Hillary, who is at least partially beholden to special interests, and Donald Trump, who is beholden only to his giant ego. I have to wonder what people have been smoking if they think Donald Trump is some sort of patriot or American hero. He is a powerful man who wants to become the most powerful man, nothing more and nothing less.
Well right now, Trump is doing the right thing for Americans and if he can follow it, then great.
And let's be honest, congress have the power to stop wars so let's face it, any president's power is severely limited in that regard and Trump knows this.
Trump isn't really doing the right thing for america or americans, and there's ample evidence of harm. Spreading massive amounts of lies isn't really a positive thing; nor is encouraging the breaking of one's word.
Saying there is ample of evidence without stating a single one.
On September 20 2016 04:35 TheYango wrote: Generally politicians fuck things up more than they say they will, not less. I don't know where this blind optimism that Trump will be better than his rhetoric portrays comes from.
What about Hillary though?
She have more chance of not following up than Trump.
At least with Trump on the helm, he doesn't have as much favors to pay for since they are funded differently.
You do know that Trump is a private business owner and he says his children will be in charge of his company while he serves? If you think there will be less pay for play under Trump, you might be in for an amazing surprise.
There is nothing wrong with letting your children taking care of your company while you are away.
Its totally legal.
Previous presidents have handed their businesses over to third parties for their terms and placed their investments in blind trusts to assure no corruption would take place. Trump will not be doing that. He is keeping the business in the control of his family who he will be talking with directly about police and other issues.
If you believe there will be no pay for play with Trump, you are naïve. That is how that man operates.
EPT
