Who Will Be the LAST Trump Supporting Poster to Be Banned?

[PDH]

Mart, shut up.

[Valmy]

yes, you disagree with their reasoning. if you agreed with their reasoning, you wouldn't be posting that their reasoning is bad. it's bad because you're placing emphasis on different factors than they emphasize.

Ok. I just don't understand your point. So? People had reasons to vote for Trump. I find those reasons unconvincing and wrong-headed, so the fact they had reasons does not do much for me.

you would never have voted for a communist over a perfectly normal republican, but many, many people would disagree (in their actions voting democrat more than anything).

Well I would disagree with those people.

they all didn't nominate trump, but they were stuck with him, so they voted for him over hillary.

Yes but many of them did.

trump got around 30% -- because he was willing to attack immigration, which is an issue a lot of republicans people care about, and other things that the republican establishment has tried to move away from

Which is a very misguided thing. IMO. In any case the impractical nature of this plan was pointed out over and over. So when it fails they have nobody to blame but themselves.

Oh and he got 45%.

if america wants a president who will value the same things you value, it will vote for that president. last year, america tried different values for a change -- it didn't want the status quo, it wanted something different. so, it's getting something different.

Yes. I believe I stated that that election was a pretty big denouncement of me and everything I stand for. I am well aware. It does not mean I find their bad ideas good just because they got votes.

Your point is...what exactly? That people voted for Trump for reasons?

[Valmy]

Also nobody forced them to nominate Trump in the first place. They had tons of options and none of them were Democrats. They decided to put in there a deeply flawed incompetent just because he was a reality TV star who knew how to put on a show.

I think the media was complicit in this. The barrage of stories about Trump and hardly anything about his opponents made him look like a "winner".

He knows how to play the media. They were his campaign team the whole time.

[LaCroix]

valmy, my point is "you can support trump with rational, objective reasoning for supporting him."

you can have rational, objective reasoning for wanting to ban immigrants, and you can have rational, objective reasoning for not wanting to ban immigrants. you can think the former is terrible and be right, and someone else can think the latter is terrible and be right.

two different positions can be supported by "rational, objective reasoning," yet only one actually makes a situation better. for example, banning immigrants from these seven countries increases job availability for americans and safety for americans. both are true. the extent of (1) jobs becoming available for americans and (2) increased safety for americans might be minimal, but the rational, objective reasoning still exists.

people use the facts available to them to reason all sorts of things. look at some people here who think america is actually becoming totalitarian -- I don't think their thought process is wrong, even if they are wrong. I don't think failing to consider certain factors or having too few facts available means the reasoning is irrational

[LaCroix]

a lot of people who hate trump seem to be literally unable to see why people support him, so they wave their hands at it and call it irrational, insane, etc. this inability to empathize is naturally expected of internet posters, but it doesn't make their points true

[mongers]

I am not a Democrat though, and the people who despise Trump for the reason I do do so for completely non-partisan reasons.

I am sure there are Dems out there who would hate any Republican who got elected. If Kasich or Bush was President right now, there would be Dems hating on them. That is perfectly normal.

And if Trump was a Democrat, there would be plenty of Dems who would be defending him.

But we aren't talking about that. He is a man worthy of contempt because of reasons that have nothing to do with the fake (R) after his name. He is not even an actual Republican in any meaningful sense.

So no, your attempt to troll some more and claim that the insane disgust people have with Trump is just normal partisan politics is complete bullshit. It says much more about you than it does anyone else.

Trump is not the anti-Hillary.

sure you are. you're one of small group of former republicans (independents?) who migrated over to the democrat side. a few other posters here have done so as well. you and a few others don't like the direction the republicans are headed. but the majority of states chose that direction for lots of different reasons. so far, trump has been true to those reasons.

at least half the country, probably far more than that, doesn't actually care about foreign policy. they care about America, because we're an exceptional country full of exceptional people, and trump is putting America first.

Those 'exceptional people' voted for Trump.

Or are you suggesting many were democrats and back Clinton?

[garbon]

Reading, let alone trying to understand his posts is a terrible waste of time.

[LaCroix]

at the end of the day, trump made people believe he was going to help them. lots of those shy trump voters were people who didn't like his views or his personality but were worried about not being able to put food on the table. that's why the democrats should pick someone better next time. when you ignore these people and their concerns, disregarding their views as stemming from irrational reasoning, insanity, etc., then you're just asking to get trumped again

[LaCroix]

Reading, let alone trying to understand his posts is a terrible waste of time.

and yet you waste time continuing to post about me

[Berkut]

valmy, my point is "you can support trump with rational, objective reasoning for supporting him."

This is only true to the extent that it is generically true when stated in the most general of terms.

It is like saying that it is true that you can subtract any number from any other number, and the result might be greater than zero.

It is true, but that doesn't mean that if you start getting into particulars, it will turn out to be the case necessarily.

You can, in theory, support Trump for rational reasons.

The reality however, is that those rational reasons almost never withstand actual, rational discourse. And when taken as a whole, the idea that a rational, reasonable person could take all the bad of Trump along with whatever good might be there, and then still say "I am a Trump supporter" is not rationally tenable.

So you are left with either vague generalities, or straight out trolling. Both of which you have done and admirable job of mastering, so kudos on that.

[Berkut]

at the end of the day, trump made people believe he was going to help them. lots of those shy trump voters were people who didn't like his views or his personality but were worried about not being able to put food on the table. that's why the democrats should pick someone better next time. when you ignore these people and their concerns, disregarding their views as stemming from irrational reasoning, insanity, etc., then you're just asking to get trumped again

That is certainly true, but it doesn't explain why YOU are his #1 cheerleader.

Do YOU believe he is going to help you? Of course not. Does spicey? Of course not.

You like him because he shits on the people you like to shit on. The "others" the Muslims, or immigrants, or brown people, or intellectuals.

Because once you strip away the rational reasons, that is all that is left - the irrational bigotry. I can believe that there are plenty of people who might support him because on the surface he claims they will help them, and they don't look any further than that. That clearly does not apply to anyone spending any effort at all to understand the election, so that out is not available to you and your Trumpenfuhrer friends.

[LaCroix]

a lot of the people who voted trump won't get into rational discourse with people who have more knowledges or books than them. because lots of these people don't visit internet message boards or hang out IRL with the above

[Valmy]

valmy, my point is "you can support trump with rational, objective reasoning for supporting him."

I suppose one might have bad information and your rational analysis just leads to wrong results

And I hope that the results will vindicate me. I doubt it though. Most people will blame anybody and everything for the failure of their ideas besides the ideas. But I just hope that there are enough fair-minded people around that they will come back to us and reject these crazy extreme right and left wing ideas that seem to be gaining traction.

you can have rational, objective reasoning for wanting to ban immigrants, and you can have rational, objective reasoning for not wanting to ban immigrants. you can think the former is terrible and be right, and someone else can think the latter is terrible and be right.

What reason might that be? I think any objective study of the data shows how vitally important labor movement is to our economic well being. I do not really subscribe to this squishy post-modernism when it comes to determining good vs. bad policies that everybody is right. No, some ideas are just bad. Some ideas do not work and result in bad results.

two different positions can be supported by "rational, objective reasoning," yet only one actually makes a situation better. for example, banning immigrants from these seven countries increases job availability for americans and safety for americans. both are true. the extent of (1) jobs becoming available for americans and (2) increased safety for americans might be minimal, but the rational, objective reasoning still exists.

Clearly that is how that works. We should just ban all unemployed people. Then everybody has a job and less crime. Therefore it is a good policy by rational objective reasoning. So yeah it doesn't work. Labor does not work that way.

people use the facts available to them to reason all sorts of things. look at some people here who think america is actually becoming totalitarian -- I don't think their thought process is wrong, even if they are wrong. I don't think failing to consider certain factors or having too few facts available means the reasoning is irrational

We are concentrating too much power in the hands of the executive and the legislature is voluntarily giving up their authority. That is dangerous. Particularly because other countries adopting versions of our Constitution tend to result in Presidential dictatorships. But that has been going on for decades. They also see the comparison between right wing demagogues that have been taking over governments in other parts of the world. Personally the attacks on the press by Trump are particularly worrisome, that is a very dangerous for a President to do.

Now I get it to some extent, the press really sucks and it always has. But the President should not be doing that. Our Constitution requires a strong press and congress.

Now those are concerning but what did people say when guys like Obama and Dubya were putting all this power in the hands of the Executive? Someday we might have a dangerous President. What then? Well Trump might be that guy. I don't think he is, I think he is an incompetent egotistical blowhard. But we are setting ourselves up here. We have a guy who is taking advice from people like Bannon. Well the next guy might be Bannon.

So to that extent I get it.

But it is like you said. Hard for reasonable people to agree if people cannot agree with the facts to base their reason on. So the fact so many seem to get their shit from propaganda outlets (and satirical outlets) these days is a problem.

[LaCroix]

That is certainly true, but it doesn't explain why YOU are his #1 cheerleader.

Do YOU believe he is going to help you? Of course not. Does spicey? Of course not.

You like him because he shits on the people you like to shit on. The "others" the Muslims, or immigrants, or brown people, or intellectuals.

Because once you strip away the rational reasons, that is all that is left - the irrational bigotry. I can believe that there are plenty of people who might support him because on the surface he claims they will help them, and they don't look any further than that. That clearly does not apply to anyone spending any effort at all to understand the election, so that out is not available to you and your Trumpenfuhrer friends.

I support the President of these United States, because I love America. my question to you is why don't you support trump?

[garbon]

Reading, let alone trying to understand his posts is a terrible waste of time.

and yet you waste time continuing to post about me

Completely different. Isn't a terrible waste of time, just a waste.