Putting aside his beliefs on immigration, what are the specific qualities of Trump (other than that he represents the GOP) that you admire? This is a safe space so you will not be attacked.

bearister said:

---

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

.... This is a safe space so you will not be attacked.

---

Speak for yourself. Anyone that would vote for him again is either a f#*ckng moron, a racist, a selfish rich person or a traitor (or a combination of two ore more of those traits. Members of the tRump Crime Family nail all four).

---

Sorry, Bearister, but none of what you claim is true. It's still too early to say, but come 2020, you may be placing 50% of the voters in the category of f#*ckng morons, racists, selfish rich persons, or a traitor. That's pretty arrogant of you.

Golden One said:

---

bearister said:

---

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

.... This is a safe space so you will not be attacked.

---

Speak for yourself. Anyone that would vote for him again is either a f#*ckng moron, a racist, a selfish rich person or a traitor (or a combination of two ore more of those traits. Members of the tRump Crime Family nail all four).

---

Sorry, Bearister, but none of what you claim is true. It's still too early to say, but come 2020, you may be placing 50% of the voters in the category of f#*ckng morons, racists, selfish rich persons, or a traitor. That's pretty arrogant of you.

---

There should be a basic Civics test you have to pass before you are allowed to vote. Based on my observations of Jay Leno's bit where he stops people on the street and asks basic general knowledge questions and on the stats referenced below probably more than 50% of Americans are f%*cking morons and shouldn't be allowed to vote. Call it arrogant but the facts are the facts:

1. A majority of Americans cannot name a single branch of government or explain what the Bill of Rights is;

2. 24% can't name the country that the U.S. fought in the Revolutionary War;

3. 2/3 don't know what the holding of Roe v. Wade is;

4. 2/3 don't know what the Food and Drug Administration does;

5. 50% don't know each state has two senators;

6. More than 50% can't name their congressman;

7. The average voter thinks 24% of the U.S. budget goes to foreign aid (less than 1% does);

8. 18% thinks the sun revolves around the earth;

9. 50% don't know that Judaism predates Christianity

...and that boys and girls is part of the reason why a failed businessman and game show host who is morally, psychologically, ethically and intellectually unfit to be POTUS became POTUS.

bearister said:

---

Golden One said:

---

bearister said:

---

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

.... This is a safe space so you will not be attacked.

---

Speak for yourself. Anyone that would vote for him again is either a f#*ckng moron, a racist, a selfish rich person or a traitor (or a combination of two ore more of those traits. Members of the tRump Crime Family nail all four).

---

Sorry, Bearister, but none of what you claim is true. It's still too early to say, but come 2020, you may be placing 50% of the voters in the category of f#*ckng morons, racists, selfish rich persons, or a traitor. That's pretty arrogant of you.

---

There should be a basic Civics test you have to pass before you are allowed to vote. Based on my observations of Jay Leno's bit where he stops people on the street and asks basic general knowledge questions and on the stats referenced below probably more than 50% of Americans are f%*cking morons and shouldn't be allowed to vote. Call it arrogant but the facts are the facts:

1. A majority of Americans cannot name a single branch of government or explain what the Bill of Rights is;

2. 24% can't name the country that the U.S. fought in the Revolutionary War;

3. 2/3 don't know what the holding of Roe v. Wade is;

4. 2/3 don't know what the Food and Drug Administration does;

5. 50% don't know each state has two senators;

6. More than 50% can't name their congressman;

7. The average voter thinks 24% of the U.S. budget goes to foreign aid (less than 1% does);

8. 18% thinks the sun revolves around the earth;

9. 50% don't know that Judaism predates Christianity

...and that boys and girls is part of the reason why a failed businessman and game show host who is morally, psychologically, ethically and intellectually unfit to be POTUS became POTUS.

---

I completely agree with you that all citizens should have to pass a basic civics test before being allowed to vote. However, I strongly disagree that people who voted for Trump would be the ones to fail such a test. In fact, I think a higher percentage of people who voted for Hillary would flunk such a test. The makeup of that group would largely be the millenials, hispanics, and African Americans. Many of the latter are the victims of poor schools and the millenials are the victims of a curriculum that no longer includes basic civics.

To answer your question, it depends on whom the Democrats or Libertarians nominate.

I haven't voted for a Republican presidential candidate in three decades, but I can't say that I disagree with all of Trump's policies. The man-child himself is a different issue. That's why I want to see what characters will be put up by the other parties.

Bearister- do you have a problem with our democratic voting system? Why do you think sone citizen should have less than a vote or no vote at all?

I'm not saying I disagree with that sentiment. Rather, I disagree that the Trump voters fall in the categories you describe. I've seen my share of way too many idiotic Democrate voters.

Golden One said:

---

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

Putting aside his beliefs on immigration, what are the specific qualities of Trump (other than that he represents the GOP) that you admire? This is a safe space so you will not be attacked.

---

There is no safe space on BI, and I fully expect to be attached for this post. However, since you asked, here goes.

(1) Trump is not politically correct, which is a refreshing change for Washington, D.C. politicians.
(2) He is willing to challenge the "conventional wisdom" in Washington.
(3) He has demonstrated an unusual willingness and ability to reduce burdensome and unnecessary
federal regulations.
(4) He values manufacturing jobs.
(5) He realizes that high taxes discourage business growth.
(6) He is not afraid to challenge foreign leaders.
(7) His "America first" philosophy is a welcome change from his predecessor and many other President
wannabes.
(8) He provides a needed balance to the environmental zealots that seem to dominate the current political
climate.
(9) Although you said to put aside his beliefs on immigration, these beliefs are the main reason I admire
him. Our immigration policies, particularly those regarding illegal immigrants, are completely broken.
I totally support the proposal he made regarding immigration in his State of the Union address.
(10) He's a capitalist, and there are few of those left in the Democratic party.
(11) Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer don't agree with him.

Having said the above, there are a number of Trump's qualities that I don't admire and, in fact, sharply disagree with.

There you have it. Now, let the attacks begin!

---

I have a series of questions, and I don't mean this in a combative way, but because I am legitimately curious:

1. Did you consider his comments regarding ****hole countries and the 'blame on many sides', racist or simply not PC?
2. How exactly is he challenging conventional wisdom in Washington? From my seat, all he seems to be doing is getting into twitter wars with people and having the house and senate do all the hard work rather than providing leadership and a vision.
3. I disagree with regulations being burdensome, and would prefer clean air and water, but I understand your point of view.
4. What has he done to value and cater to manufacturing jobs? He talks about caring about them, but to my knowledge he hasn't really done anything to aide them. He's cut regulations and given tax breaks, but he gave that to everyone, not specifically to manufacturing.
5. Again, I understand the point, though I'd rather not have my generation be wracked with future debt.
6. He has challenged the leader of North Korea, but what has it accomplished? Also, although no set findings have been found regarding Trump colluding with Russia, all intelligence agencies and investigations agree that Russia meddled in the US elections and will do so again, yet Trump has not stood up to Putin, so I disagree with the notion Trump has been standing up to foreign leaders.
7. This is another one, where I understand the mindset but disagree with it.
8. Warning, I'm going on a tangent here. But, I've always wanted strong environmental regulations, not because of global warming, but because I am selfish. I want to breath clean air, drink clean water, and play outdoors in non-toxic environments. If a business can't make money without endangering my health, **** em, my health is more important.
9. I'm going to skip immigration, simply because the issue is complex and I personally am all over the place meaning to describe my point of view would require far more time than I want to commit tonight.
10. If he is a capitalist, why is he trying to save coal, even though the market has been saying coal is obsolete?
11. This really wasn't a point other than to say you don't like people that aren't conservative.

The most interesting comments on this thread will be later tonight when the Saturday night cocktails and the anger from the undoubted Utah clown stomping combine to form the perfect storm.

I think who passes the test depends on whether or not the test is available in Russian

I went to a dinner party a few weeks ago with some very rich folks. Most of them were positively giddy about Trump.

Clinton 48%
Trump 46%
3rd party or didn't vote, 46%

Perhaps the third group passed this mythical intelligence test.

golden sloth said:

---

I have a series of questions, and I don't mean this in a combative way, but because I am legitimately curious:

1. Did you consider his comments regarding ****hole countries and the 'blame on many sides', racist or simply not PC?
In both cases, his comments were not PC. Although not PC, his comment about sh*t countries
was
2. How exactly is he challenging conventional wisdom in Washington? From my seat, all he seems to be doing is getting into twitter wars with people and having the house and senate do all the hard work rather than providing leadership and a vision.
3. I disagree with regulations being burdensome, and would prefer clean air and water, but I understand your point of view.
4. What has he done to value and cater to manufacturing jobs? He talks about caring about them, but to my knowledge he hasn't really done anything to aide them. He's cut regulations and given tax breaks, but he gave that to everyone, not specifically to manufacturing.
5. Again, I understand the point, though I'd rather not have my generation be wracked with future debt.
6. He has challenged the leader of North Korea, but what has it accomplished? Also, although no set findings have been found regarding Trump colluding with Russia, all intelligence agencies and investigations agree that Russia meddled in the US elections and will do so again, yet Trump has not stood up to Putin, so I disagree with the notion Trump has been standing up to foreign leaders.
7. This is another one, where I understand the mindset but disagree with it.
8. Warning, I'm going on a tangent here. But, I've always wanted strong environmental regulations, not because of global warming, but because I am selfish. I want to breath clean air, drink clean water, and play outdoors in non-toxic environments. If a business can't make money without endangering my health, **** em, my health is more important.
9. I'm going to skip immigration, simply because the issue is complex and I personally am all over the place meaning to describe my point of view would require far more time than I want to commit tonight.
10. If he is a capitalist, why is he trying to save coal, even though the market has been saying coal is obsolete?
11. This really wasn't a point other than to say you don't like people that aren't conservative.

---

Quote:

---

My responses to you are indicated in bold below. Thank you for being respectful in your comments.

1. Did you consider his comments regarding ****hole countries and the 'blame on many sides', racist or simply not PC?
In both cases, his comments were not PC. Although not PC, his comment about sh*thole countries was accurate. I don't believe the comments were racist.
2. How exactly is he challenging conventional wisdom in Washington? From my seat, all he seems to be doing is getting into twitter wars with people and having the house and senate do all the hard work rather than providing leadership and a vision.
I think he has clearly challenged the status quo in Washington. Conventional wisdom
says that regulations need to be increased, we need to be less vocal on the world stage,
we should not challenge North Korea, we should stay in the TPP and Nafta, and climate
change is destroying the planet. Whether you agree with him or not, he is
defying the conventional wisdom.
3. I disagree with regulations being burdensome, and would prefer clean air and water, but I understand your point of view.
If you were running a business or trying to get permits from a governmental agency at
any level, you would understand why regulations are burdensome, and in many cases
nonsensical.
4. What has he done to value and cater to manufacturing jobs? He talks about caring about them, but to my knowledge he hasn't really done anything to aide them. He's cut regulations and given tax breaks, but he gave that to everyone, not specifically to manufacturing.
Reducing regulations has, indeed, helped many sectors of the economy, but it has
especially helped manufacturing, which has been significantly handicapped by many
environmental regulations. By eliminating some of these regulations, he has
provided significant relief to manufacturing industries. His tax reform has also helped
manufacturing in a major way.
5. Again, I understand the point, though I'd rather not have my generation be wracked with future debt.
You, obviously, believe that our debt problem is due to being undertaxed. I, however,
believe that it is primarily the result of wreckless spending. If our political leadership
had the courage to cut back on spending (both military and entitlement programs), we
could solve the deficit problem.
6. He has challenged the leader of North Korea, but what has it accomplished? Also, although no set findings have been found regarding Trump colluding with Russia, all intelligence agencies and investigations agree that Russia meddled in the US elections and will do so again, yet Trump has not stood up to Putin, so I disagree with the notion Trump has been standing up to foreign leaders.
I guess we will just have to disagree on this one. His willingness to exit the TPP and
NAFTA in my view is standing up to foreign leaders. He has clearly stood up to Kim, so
far with no apparent negative consequences and with possible future positive ones. I do
believe that Russia has meddled in the 2016 U.S. elections, but it's becoming increasingly
clear that this meddling was done in collusion with the Clilnton campaign. I expect that
a special prosecutor will soon be appointed to investigate this.
7. This is another one, where I understand the mindset but disagree with it.
We'll just agree to disagree. I view our President standing up for America first as a good
thing.
8. Warning, I'm going on a tangent here. But, I've always wanted strong environmental regulations, not because of global warming, but because I am selfish. I want to breath clean air, drink clean water, and play outdoors in non-toxic environments. If a business can't make money without endangering my health, **** em, my health is more important.
I completely agree with you. But the fact is that today's environmental zealots
(Communities for a Better Environment, Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, etc.) have a
very strong bias against business and capitalism. Our environment will never be
clean enough to satisfy them. We must recognize that business doesn't pay for any of
the environmental regulations; we do as consumers when we buy their products or
services.
9. I'm going to skip immigration, simply because the issue is complex and I personally am all over the place meaning to describe my point of view would require far more time than I want to commit tonight.
Fair enough.
10. If he is a capitalist, why is he trying to save coal, even though the market has been saying coal is obsolete?
The market isn't saying coal is obsolete, our regulations have declared this to be true.
Look around the world; there is still a huge market for coal. Long term, coal may indeed
be displaced by cleaner energy, but we're not there yet.
11. This really wasn't a point other than to say you don't like people that aren't conservative.
No, that's not really true. I dislike Pelosi because I think she is too radical and a bit
unstable. I dislike Schumer because he is too much of a hard liner who is unwilling to
compromise with those of differing views. It's true that I'm conservative, but I'm not
on the far left.

---

dajo9 said:

---

I went to a dinner party a few weeks ago with some very rich folks. Most of them were positively giddy about Trump.

---

George Soros, Tom Steyer, Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerburg, most Silicon Valley CEO's are pretty rich, and they didn't support Trump. They were giddy about Hillary.

Golden One said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

I have a series of questions, and I don't mean this in a combative way, but because I am legitimately curious:

1. Did you consider his comments regarding ****hole countries and the 'blame on many sides', racist or simply not PC?
In both cases, his comments were not PC. Although not PC, his comment about sh*t countries
was
2. How exactly is he challenging conventional wisdom in Washington? From my seat, all he seems to be doing is getting into twitter wars with people and having the house and senate do all the hard work rather than providing leadership and a vision.
3. I disagree with regulations being burdensome, and would prefer clean air and water, but I understand your point of view.
4. What has he done to value and cater to manufacturing jobs? He talks about caring about them, but to my knowledge he hasn't really done anything to aide them. He's cut regulations and given tax breaks, but he gave that to everyone, not specifically to manufacturing.
5. Again, I understand the point, though I'd rather not have my generation be wracked with future debt.
6. He has challenged the leader of North Korea, but what has it accomplished? Also, although no set findings have been found regarding Trump colluding with Russia, all intelligence agencies and investigations agree that Russia meddled in the US elections and will do so again, yet Trump has not stood up to Putin, so I disagree with the notion Trump has been standing up to foreign leaders.
7. This is another one, where I understand the mindset but disagree with it.
8. Warning, I'm going on a tangent here. But, I've always wanted strong environmental regulations, not because of global warming, but because I am selfish. I want to breath clean air, drink clean water, and play outdoors in non-toxic environments. If a business can't make money without endangering my health, **** em, my health is more important.
9. I'm going to skip immigration, simply because the issue is complex and I personally am all over the place meaning to describe my point of view would require far more time than I want to commit tonight.
10. If he is a capitalist, why is he trying to save coal, even though the market has been saying coal is obsolete?
11. This really wasn't a point other than to say you don't like people that aren't conservative.

---

Quote:

---

My responses to you are indicated in bold below. Thank you for being respectful in your comments.

1. Did you consider his comments regarding ****hole countries and the 'blame on many sides', racist or simply not PC?
In both cases, his comments were not PC. Although not PC, his comment about sh*thole countries was accurate. I don't believe the comments were racist.
2. How exactly is he challenging conventional wisdom in Washington? From my seat, all he seems to be doing is getting into twitter wars with people and having the house and senate do all the hard work rather than providing leadership and a vision.
I think he has clearly challenged the status quo in Washington. Conventional wisdom
says that regulations need to be increased, we need to be less vocal on the world stage,
we should not challenge North Korea, we should stay in the TPP and Nafta, and climate
change is destroying the planet. Whether you agree with him or not, he is
defying the conventional wisdom.
I guess I would consider those simple policy shifts, and nothing to do with challenging conventional wisdom. I mean with exception to the TPP and NAFTA notes, this is standard republican policy.
3. I disagree with regulations being burdensome, and would prefer clean air and water, but I understand your point of view.
If you were running a business or trying to get permits from a governmental agency at
any level, you would understand why regulations are burdensome, and in many cases
nonsensical.
I design and build hospitals in California, so I deal with an obscene amount of government oversight, and although it makes my job difficult and irritating, I do believe it is ultimately in the best interest of the public.
4. What has he done to value and cater to manufacturing jobs? He talks about caring about them, but to my knowledge he hasn't really done anything to aide them. He's cut regulations and given tax breaks, but he gave that to everyone, not specifically to manufacturing.
Reducing regulations has, indeed, helped many sectors of the economy, but it has
especially helped manufacturing, which has been significantly handicapped by many
environmental regulations. By eliminating some of these regulations, he has
provided significant relief to manufacturing industries. His tax reform has also helped
manufacturing in a major way.
5. Again, I understand the point, though I'd rather not have my generation be wracked with future debt.
You, obviously, believe that our debt problem is due to being undertaxed. I, however,
believe that it is primarily the result of wreckless spending. If our political leadership
had the courage to cut back on spending (both military and entitlement programs), we
could solve the deficit problem.
6. He has challenged the leader of North Korea, but what has it accomplished? Also, although no set findings have been found regarding Trump colluding with Russia, all intelligence agencies and investigations agree that Russia meddled in the US elections and will do so again, yet Trump has not stood up to Putin, so I disagree with the notion Trump has been standing up to foreign leaders.
I guess we will just have to disagree on this one. His willingness to exit the TPP and
NAFTA in my view is standing up to foreign leaders. He has clearly stood up to Kim, so
far with no apparent negative consequences and with possible future positive ones. I do
believe that Russia has meddled in the 2016 U.S. elections, but it's becoming increasingly
clear that this meddling was done in collusion with the Clilnton campaign. I expect that
a special prosecutor will soon be appointed to investigate this.
Again, I think this is more of a policy shift, than any grand change. And I don't think we can say the administration stands up for America on the global stage, when Russia did interfere with our elections, and will interfere with our elections in 2018, and our Secretary of State basically says, 'Yea, they are going to, and there is nothing we can do about it, and we shouldn't even try.'
7. This is another one, where I understand the mindset but disagree with it.
We'll just agree to disagree. I view our President standing up for America first as a good
thing.
8. Warning, I'm going on a tangent here. But, I've always wanted strong environmental regulations, not because of global warming, but because I am selfish. I want to breath clean air, drink clean water, and play outdoors in non-toxic environments. If a business can't make money without endangering my health, **** em, my health is more important.
I completely agree with you. But the fact is that today's environmental zealots
(Communities for a Better Environment, Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, etc.) have a
very strong bias against business and capitalism. Our environment will never be
clean enough to satisfy them. We must recognize that business doesn't pay for any of
the environmental regulations; we do as consumers when we buy their products or
services.
9. I'm going to skip immigration, simply because the issue is complex and I personally am all over the place meaning to describe my point of view would require far more time than I want to commit tonight.
Fair enough.
10. If he is a capitalist, why is he trying to save coal, even though the market has been saying coal is obsolete?
The market isn't saying coal is obsolete, our regulations have declared this to be true.
Look around the world; there is still a huge market for coal. Long term, coal may indeed
be displaced by cleaner energy, but we're not there yet.
I was being a bit hyperbolic, Coal isn't completely obsolete, it is just very nearly obsolete, Natural Gas kicked its ass and stole apporx. 50% of its market. Reduced demand killed another 26% (primarily by China reducing demand), Renewable Energy took 18%, and Regulations account for 5% of the coal decline.
11. This really wasn't a point other than to say you don't like people that aren't conservative.
No, that's not really true. I dislike Pelosi because I think she is too radical and a bit
unstable. I dislike Schumer because he is too much of a hard liner who is unwilling to
compromise with those of differing views. It's true that I'm conservative, but I'm not
on the far left.

---

---

Golden One, thanks for offering your thoughts. This thread is evolving the way it will, but my original question was not about policy, but about the personal qualities of Trump -- the man and leader -- that you admire.

Sounds like you admire his willingness to be unconventional and aggressive (with foreign leaders).

Let me reframe my original question. How would you complete the following: of the qualities every president should have, Trump possesses these qualities, which I admire: [your answer here].

Examples of ways to fill in the blanks:
- honesty
- intelligence
- discipline
- doesn't act out of rage
- unites people instead of divides them
- isn't petty and doesn't resort to personal attacks against those who disagree with him
- respects the rule of law, the fourth estate, and separation of powers
- respects women
- respects science
- isn't bigoted
- recognizes that he is a servant of the people
- deep understanding of and respect for the Constitution
- hires or nominates highly qualified people
- isn't leveraging his presidency to profit financially while in office
- releases his tax returns for the public good
- places the good of the country over personal ambition or financial gain
- reads

"How many more disgraceful public feuds with Gold Star families can we witness in silence before we ourselves are disgraced?
How many more times will we see moral ambiguity in the face of shocking bigotry and shrug it off?
How many more childish insults do we need to see hurled at a hostile foreign power before we acknowledge the senseless danger of it?
How much more damage to our democracy and to the institutions of American liberty do we need to witness in silence before we count ourselves as complicit in that damage? "
-Jeff Flake

"It's what Trump believes but is provably wrong that scares me.
Like that imports from Mexico and China not robots, software and automation are the big culprit in taking middle-class jobs; that we are being swamped by immigrants from Mexico, when immigration from Mexico today is really net zero (most migrants are coming from failed states in Central America, which Mexico, the second-largest source of paying tourists to our country, plays a key role in preventing); that climate change is a hoax and we should lower emission rules on coal-fired power plants to restore coal jobs and ignore the long-term health implications and the impact on better-paying clean-power jobs; that the key to restoring middle-class jobs is not by investing in people, health care, infrastructure and lifelong learning, but rather by imposing a border tax. And that the E.U., NATO, the Trans-Pacific Partnership and Nafta are just outdated pillars of a global, oppressive "administrative state" that needs deconstructing rather than pillars of a liberal democratic order that have globalized our values and our rules and our standards to our great benefit."
/Thomas Friedman

Flake voted with Trump 90% of the time. I hope he kills himself falling off his high horse.

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

Golden One, thanks for offering your thoughts. This thread is evolving the way it will, but my original question was not about policy, but about the personal qualities of Trump -- the man and leader -- that you admire.

Sounds like you admire his willingness to be unconventional and aggressive (with foreign leaders).

Let me reframe my original question. How would you complete the following: of the qualities every president should have, Trump possesses these qualities, which I admire: [your answer here].

Examples of ways to fill in the blanks:
- honesty
- intelligence
- discipline
- doesn't act out of rage
- unites people instead of divide them
- isn't petty and doesn't resort to personal attacks against those who disagree with him
- respects the rule of law, the fourth estate, and separation of powers
- respects women
- respects science
- isn't bigoted
- recognizes that he is a servant of the people
- deep understanding and respect for the Constitution
- hires or nominates highly qualified people
- isn't leveraging his presidency to profit financially while in office
- releases his tax returns for the public good
- places the good of the country over personal ambition or financial gain
- reads

---

B.A., frankly, I don't admire many of Trump's personal qualities, other than his willingness to be unconventional and aggressive with foreign leaders.

Unconventional and aggressive... sounds like the new DC of Alabama.

Golden One said:

---

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

Putting aside his beliefs on immigration, what are the specific qualities of Trump (other than that he represents the GOP) that you admire? This is a safe space so you will not be attacked.

---

There is no safe space on BI, and I fully expect to be attached for this post. However, since you asked, here goes.

(1) Trump is not politically correct, which is a refreshing change for Washington, D.C. politicians.
(2) He is willing to challenge the "conventional wisdom" in Washington.
(3) He has demonstrated an unusual willingness and ability to reduce burdensome and unnecessary
federal regulations.
(4) He values manufacturing jobs.
(5) He realizes that high taxes discourage business growth.
(6) He is not afraid to challenge foreign leaders.
(7) His "America first" philosophy is a welcome change from his predecessor and many other President
wannabes.
(8) He provides a needed balance to the environmental zealots that seem to dominate the current political
climate.
(9) Although you said to put aside his beliefs on immigration, these beliefs are the main reason I admire
him. Our immigration policies, particularly those regarding illegal immigrants, are completely broken.
I totally support the proposal he made regarding immigration in his State of the Union address.
(10) He's a capitalist, and there are few of those left in the Democratic party.
(11) Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer don't agree with him.

Having said the above, there are a number of Trump's qualities that I don't admire and, in fact, sharply disagree with.

There you have it. Now, let the attacks begin!

---

Many, if not most or all, of your points refute themselves. So, I, for one, am more interested in Trump's qualities that you don't admire and, in fact, sharply disagree with.

Golden One said:

---

bearister said:

---

Golden One said:

---

bearister said:

---

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

.... This is a safe space so you will not be attacked.

---

Speak for yourself. Anyone that would vote for him again is either a f#*ckng moron, a racist, a selfish rich person or a traitor (or a combination of two ore more of those traits. Members of the tRump Crime Family nail all four).

---

Sorry, Bearister, but none of what you claim is true. It's still too early to say, but come 2020, you may be placing 50% of the voters in the category of f#*ckng morons, racists, selfish rich persons, or a traitor. That's pretty arrogant of you.

---

There should be a basic Civics test you have to pass before you are allowed to vote. Based on my observations of Jay Leno's bit where he stops people on the street and asks basic general knowledge questions and on the stats referenced below probably more than 50% of Americans are f%*cking morons and shouldn't be allowed to vote. Call it arrogant but the facts are the facts:

1. A majority of Americans cannot name a single branch of government or explain what the Bill of Rights is;

2. 24% can't name the country that the U.S. fought in the Revolutionary War;

3. 2/3 don't know what the holding of Roe v. Wade is;

4. 2/3 don't know what the Food and Drug Administration does;

5. 50% don't know each state has two senators;

6. More than 50% can't name their congressman;

7. The average voter thinks 24% of the U.S. budget goes to foreign aid (less than 1% does);

8. 18% thinks the sun revolves around the earth;

9. 50% don't know that Judaism predates Christianity

...and that boys and girls is part of the reason why a failed businessman and game show host who is morally, psychologically, ethically and intellectually unfit to be POTUS became POTUS.

---

I completely agree with you that all citizens should have to pass a basic civics test before being allowed to vote. However, I strongly disagree that people who voted for Trump would be the ones to fail such a test. In fact, I think a higher percentage of people who voted for Hillary would flunk such a test. The makeup of that group would largely be the millenials, hispanics, and African Americans. Many of the latter are the victims of poor schools and the millenials are the victims of a curriculum that no longer includes basic civics.

---

Oh Boy: Racist on its face - despite its faux plea to poor schools, which rather are much more prevalent in Red States that voted Trump

Golden One said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

I have a series of questions, and I don't mean this in a combative way, but because I am legitimately curious:

1. Did you consider his comments regarding ****hole countries and the 'blame on many sides', racist or simply not PC?
In both cases, his comments were not PC. Although not PC, his comment about sh*t countries
was
2. How exactly is he challenging conventional wisdom in Washington? From my seat, all he seems to be doing is getting into twitter wars with people and having the house and senate do all the hard work rather than providing leadership and a vision.
3. I disagree with regulations being burdensome, and would prefer clean air and water, but I understand your point of view.
4. What has he done to value and cater to manufacturing jobs? He talks about caring about them, but to my knowledge he hasn't really done anything to aide them. He's cut regulations and given tax breaks, but he gave that to everyone, not specifically to manufacturing.
5. Again, I understand the point, though I'd rather not have my generation be wracked with future debt.
6. He has challenged the leader of North Korea, but what has it accomplished? Also, although no set findings have been found regarding Trump colluding with Russia, all intelligence agencies and investigations agree that Russia meddled in the US elections and will do so again, yet Trump has not stood up to Putin, so I disagree with the notion Trump has been standing up to foreign leaders.
7. This is another one, where I understand the mindset but disagree with it.
8. Warning, I'm going on a tangent here. But, I've always wanted strong environmental regulations, not because of global warming, but because I am selfish. I want to breath clean air, drink clean water, and play outdoors in non-toxic environments. If a business can't make money without endangering my health, **** em, my health is more important.
9. I'm going to skip immigration, simply because the issue is complex and I personally am all over the place meaning to describe my point of view would require far more time than I want to commit tonight.
10. If he is a capitalist, why is he trying to save coal, even though the market has been saying coal is obsolete?
11. This really wasn't a point other than to say you don't like people that aren't conservative.

---

Quote:

---

My responses to you are indicated in bold below. Thank you for being respectful in your comments.

1. Did you consider his comments regarding ****hole countries and the 'blame on many sides', racist or simply not PC?
In both cases, his comments were not PC. Although not PC, his comment about sh*thole countries was accurate. I don't believe the comments were racist.
2. How exactly is he challenging conventional wisdom in Washington? From my seat, all he seems to be doing is getting into twitter wars with people and having the house and senate do all the hard work rather than providing leadership and a vision.
I think he has clearly challenged the status quo in Washington. Conventional wisdom
says that regulations need to be increased, we need to be less vocal on the world stage,
we should not challenge North Korea, we should stay in the TPP and Nafta, and climate
change is destroying the planet. Whether you agree with him or not, he is
defying the conventional wisdom.
3. I disagree with regulations being burdensome, and would prefer clean air and water, but I understand your point of view.
If you were running a business or trying to get permits from a governmental agency at
any level, you would understand why regulations are burdensome, and in many cases
nonsensical.
4. What has he done to value and cater to manufacturing jobs? He talks about caring about them, but to my knowledge he hasn't really done anything to aide them. He's cut regulations and given tax breaks, but he gave that to everyone, not specifically to manufacturing.
Reducing regulations has, indeed, helped many sectors of the economy, but it has
especially helped manufacturing, which has been significantly handicapped by many
environmental regulations. By eliminating some of these regulations, he has
provided significant relief to manufacturing industries. His tax reform has also helped
manufacturing in a major way.
5. Again, I understand the point, though I'd rather not have my generation be wracked with future debt.
You, obviously, believe that our debt problem is due to being undertaxed. I, however,
believe that it is primarily the result of wreckless spending. If our political leadership
had the courage to cut back on spending (both military and entitlement programs), we
could solve the deficit problem.
6. He has challenged the leader of North Korea, but what has it accomplished? Also, although no set findings have been found regarding Trump colluding with Russia, all intelligence agencies and investigations agree that Russia meddled in the US elections and will do so again, yet Trump has not stood up to Putin, so I disagree with the notion Trump has been standing up to foreign leaders.
I guess we will just have to disagree on this one. His willingness to exit the TPP and
NAFTA in my view is standing up to foreign leaders. He has clearly stood up to Kim, so
far with no apparent negative consequences and with possible future positive ones. I do
believe that Russia has meddled in the 2016 U.S. elections, but it's becoming increasingly
clear that this meddling was done in collusion with the Clilnton campaign. I expect that
a special prosecutor will soon be appointed to investigate this.
7. This is another one, where I understand the mindset but disagree with it.
We'll just agree to disagree. I view our President standing up for America first as a good
thing.
8. Warning, I'm going on a tangent here. But, I've always wanted strong environmental regulations, not because of global warming, but because I am selfish. I want to breath clean air, drink clean water, and play outdoors in non-toxic environments. If a business can't make money without endangering my health, **** em, my health is more important.
I completely agree with you. But the fact is that today's environmental zealots
(Communities for a Better Environment, Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, etc.) have a
very strong bias against business and capitalism. Our environment will never be
clean enough to satisfy them. We must recognize that business doesn't pay for any of
the environmental regulations; we do as consumers when we buy their products or
services.
9. I'm going to skip immigration, simply because the issue is complex and I personally am all over the place meaning to describe my point of view would require far more time than I want to commit tonight.
Fair enough.
10. If he is a capitalist, why is he trying to save coal, even though the market has been saying coal is obsolete?
The market isn't saying coal is obsolete, our regulations have declared this to be true.
Look around the world; there is still a huge market for coal. Long term, coal may indeed
be displaced by cleaner energy, but we're not there yet.
11. This really wasn't a point other than to say you don't like people that aren't conservative.
No, that's not really true. I dislike Pelosi because I think she is too radical and a bit
unstable. I dislike Schumer because he is too much of a hard liner who is unwilling to
compromise with those of differing views. It's true that I'm conservative, but I'm not
on the far left.

---

---

Appreciate your willingness to be clear about who you are.

mikecohen said:

---

Golden One said:

---

bearister said:

---

Golden One said:

---

bearister said:

---

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

.... This is a safe space so you will not be attacked.

---

Speak for yourself. Anyone that would vote for him again is either a f#*ckng moron, a racist, a selfish rich person or a traitor (or a combination of two ore more of those traits. Members of the tRump Crime Family nail all four).

---

Sorry, Bearister, but none of what you claim is true. It's still too early to say, but come 2020, you may be placing 50% of the voters in the category of f#*ckng morons, racists, selfish rich persons, or a traitor. That's pretty arrogant of you.

---

There should be a basic Civics test you have to pass before you are allowed to vote. Based on my observations of Jay Leno's bit where he stops people on the street and asks basic general knowledge questions and on the stats referenced below probably more than 50% of Americans are f%*cking morons and shouldn't be allowed to vote. Call it arrogant but the facts are the facts:

1. A majority of Americans cannot name a single branch of government or explain what the Bill of Rights is;

2. 24% can't name the country that the U.S. fought in the Revolutionary War;

3. 2/3 don't know what the holding of Roe v. Wade is;

4. 2/3 don't know what the Food and Drug Administration does;

5. 50% don't know each state has two senators;

6. More than 50% can't name their congressman;

7. The average voter thinks 24% of the U.S. budget goes to foreign aid (less than 1% does);

8. 18% thinks the sun revolves around the earth;

9. 50% don't know that Judaism predates Christianity

...and that boys and girls is part of the reason why a failed businessman and game show host who is morally, psychologically, ethically and intellectually unfit to be POTUS became POTUS.

---

I completely agree with you that all citizens should have to pass a basic civics test before being allowed to vote. However, I strongly disagree that people who voted for Trump would be the ones to fail such a test. In fact, I think a higher percentage of people who voted for Hillary would flunk such a test. The makeup of that group would largely be the millenials, hispanics, and African Americans. Many of the latter are the victims of poor schools and the millenials are the victims of a curriculum that no longer includes basic civics.

---

Oh Boy: Racist on its face - despite its faux plea to poor schools, which rather are much more prevalent in Red States that voted Trump

---

Yeah, sure. Everything is racist to many libs. Give it a rest. Hate to break it to you, but many of the worst performing schools in the country are in big cities, most of which voted for Hillary and are run by libs.

By the way, by attacking me as a racist you have violated the OP's pledge that respondents in this thread wouldn't be attacked. Nice going.

I didn't attack you for calling Nancy Pelosi "unstable" but I definitely learned a lot about you

OP had no authority to dictate the Rules of Engagement for anyone but himself. tRump is an aggressive disciple of Roy Cohn which justifies a full no holds barred counterattack against him. tRump wouldn't be a bully today if enough guys had called his bluff when he was growing up and stomped him. At the end of the day all bullies have a heart the size of a pea. Mueller is a combat tested Marine that knows a coward when he sees one. tRump better get the puzzle pieces in place to remove him. At least that way he can postpone the inevitable Day of Reckoning.

OK. Consider yourself attacked on items 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10.
Item 11 is irrelevant.

"Candidate Donald Trump used, more than any other issue, Hillary Clinton's home email server to argue that she was unfit for office and, moreover, that there were grounds for sending her to jail. The eerie chants, more common in banana republics, to imprison his opponent ("Lock her up!") would thrill his crowds and reignite the anti-Clinton anger that had gripped Republicans for decades. For less crazed voters, it was an effective reminder of the Clintons's proclivity to break the rules, to disregard conflicts of interest and to only grudgingly come clean when caught misbehaving. Her offense, in retrospect, seems small and innocuous, in large part because Trump's defiance of rules, indulgence in massive conflicts of interest and habitual lying in just one year in office dwarf anything (and everything) both Clintons have done in a lifetime in the public eye."
WaPo

I'll save Golden Onenote the bandwidth:
"Libtard fake news! Illegals! Hillary! Obama! Leftist lib pinko commie fascists!" [repeat ad naseum]

AunBear89 said:

---

I'll save Golden Onenote the bandwidth:
"Libtard fake news! Illegals! Hillary! Obama! Leftist lib pinko commie fascists!" [repeat ad naseum]

---

If nothing else, you're very predictable.

joe amos yaks said:

---

OK. Consider yourself attacked on items 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10.
Item 11 is irrelevant.

---

Thanks for your irrelevant post.

bearister said:

---

OP had no authority to dictate the Rules of Engagement for anyone but himself. tRump is an aggressive disciple of Roy Cohn which justifies a full no holds barred counteract against him. tRump wouldn't be a bully today if enough guys had called his bluff when he was growing up and stomped him. At the end of the day all bullies have a heart the size of a pea. Mueller is a combat tested Marine that knows a coward when he sees one. tRump better get the puzzle pieces in place to remove him. At least that way he can postpone the inevitable Day of Reckoning.

---

I'm afraid that your day of reckoning came on November 8, 2016. You obviously don't take losing well.

Golden One said:

---

bearister said:

---

OP had no authority to dictate the Rules of Engagement for anyone but himself. tRump is an aggressive disciple of Roy Cohn which justifies a full no holds barred counterattack against him. tRump wouldn't be a bully today if enough guys had called his bluff when he was growing up and stomped him. At the end of the day all bullies have a heart the size of a pea. Mueller is a combat tested Marine that knows a coward when he sees one. tRump better get the puzzle pieces in place to remove him. At least that way he can postpone the inevitable Day of Reckoning.

---

I'm afraid that your day of reckoning came on November 8, 2016. You obviously don't take losing well.

---

I'm benefitting financially from tRump's polices so it was a no lose situation for me. I just happen to be altruistic and have always voted against my best financial interests. With regard to The Day of Reckoning, have you ever asked yourself why early last year tRump had his attorneys looking into the extent of his pardon power? I suppose your only response to that question is that it is Fake News that tRump ever made such an inquiry. You can be rest assured Mueller knows he did. Semper Fi! Oorah!

I know you are, but what am I?

(Just trying to keep the discourse on your level)