Trump third term

[Desk trauma]

Trumps method of trolling gullible liberals is not the pressing problem of this nation

His “trolling” about ignoring the 22nd amendment is however the topic of this thread. Unlike the laundry list of talking points that comprise the rest of your post.

 

[Postvieww]

His “trolling” about ignoring the 22nd amendment is however the topic of this thread. Unlike the laundry list of talking points that comprise the rest of your post.

Yes it is and I made my point about that topic. In the larger scheme of things it is irrelevant. Have fun with the Trump bashing. There will be no third term!

 

[Desk trauma]

Yes it is and I made my point about that topic.

Yet will not say what other constitutional limits it’s funny to troll about ignoring for some reason.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

IMHO too many liberals are focusing on the wrong things. Trumps method of trolling gullible liberals is not the pressing problem of this nation. Democrat senators holding this nation hostage by not voting for the same CLEAN CR they voted for 13 times before all to get 1.5 trillion in new spending PART of which WILL pay for illegals health care. Part of which they claim is for subsidies for Obama care which they set to expire. Many liberal leaders endorsing a communist con man in New York is far more concerning than any of Trumps trolls. Liberal run cites have leaders fighting the rule of law by refusing to do their jobs and up hold federal law and federal law enforcement officers. We are now learning how bad the criminal Jack Smith was violating rights and laws by illegally spying on sitting Republican Senators and conservative organizations. I could go on and on but the liberal supporters on this forum will just have to forgive me for my lack of concern for Trumps trolling of gullible liberals.

That’s because you have low expectations for national leadership.

 

[Postvieww]

That’s because you have low expectations for national leadership.

Better than no expectations as shown by many.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Better than no expectations as shown by many.

No it isn’t. Do all your principles depend on what others do?

 

[Landon Caeli]

I'd say we're verging closer to a novel form of feudalism, rather than a socialist government. The crony capitalism facilitated with the revolving door of corporate lobbyists to government positions is quickly creating a situation where we have a landed caste and a growing peasantry who are being stretched thin just to get by. I am guessing its just a matter of time before we go from an unofficial neo-feudalism to it becoming an official designation.

When I was referring to the U.S. accelerating in the direction of socialism, my reasoning was based on generative AI replacing basic service jobs - which increases unemployment... Adding to that, is the problem of outsourced jobs not returning, which compounds the problem..

...When all the jobs are gone, and nobody has income, we'll need to survive somehow, and so basic income checks (socialism) from the government, paid through the taxation of big businesses, will be the only way for a time... Until all the businesses leave. At which time, our economy will collapse.

...That is unless Trump succeeds in bringing the jobs back home to us. With the tariffs, and through negotiations, he clearly sees the problem at hand, and we should all be supporting his efforts.

 

[Landon Caeli]

I don't view the future through the lens of political *fear*, but rather through the realization of our changing environment - outside of politics.

 

[Desk trauma]

When I was referring to the U.S. accelerating in the direction of socialism, my reasoning was based on generative AI replacing basic service jobs - which increases unemployment... Adding to that, is the problem of outsourced jobs not returning, which compounds the problem..

...When all the jobs are gone, and nobody has income, we'll need to survive somehow, and so basic income checks (socialism) from the government, paid through the taxation of big businesses, will be the only way for a time... Until all the businesses leave. At which time, our economy will collapse.

...That is unless Trump succeeds in bringing the jobs back home to us. With the tariffs, and through negotiations, he clearly sees the problem at hand, and we should all be supporting his efforts.

If you think jobs will be automated away, what use is bringing them back?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

When I was referring to the U.S. accelerating in the direction of socialism, my reasoning was based on generative AI replacing basic service jobs - which increases unemployment... Adding to that, is the problem of outsourced jobs not returning, which compounds the problem..

...When all the jobs are gone, and nobody has income, we'll need to survive somehow, and so basic income checks (socialism) from the government, paid through the taxation of big businesses, will be the only way for a time... Until all the businesses leave. At which time, our economy will collapse.

...That is unless Trump succeeds in bringing the jobs back home to us. With the tariffs, and through negotiations, he clearly sees the problem at hand, and we should all be supporting his efforts.

Where I would push back a little bit...

UBI, by itself, isn't socialism because it's just a cash transfer and has nothing to do with the government owning the business or means of production.

I'd go as far to say that the government controlling AI outlets and intentionally hamstringing their full potential, as a means of artificially protecting jobs for humans, would actually be more socialistic by the true definition.


Even Milton Friedman (a libertarian-leaning supply-side economist) advocated for a form of UBI called "The Negative Income Tax".


While safety nets are a common feature of (and ubiquitous in) socialistic system, the safety nets alone, even if redistributive in nature, don't satisfy the full definition of the world. Without the aspect of state/collective control over the means of production, you don't have socialism.

 

[Postvieww]

No it isn’t. Do all your principles depend on what others do?

You have no standing to question my principles.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

You have no standing to question my principles.

I’m just going by what you share here.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Does anyone here actually admire Trump? Would want their children to imitate him?

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Trump news at a glance: president floats a third term as Democrats vow ‘no way in hell’

President has not definitively ruled out seeking to extend time in office. Key US politics stories from Monday 27 October at a glance

www.theguardian.com

“I would love to do it: I have my best numbers ever,” the 79-year-old told reporters on Air Force One during a trip to Asia. Pressed on whether he was not ruling out a third term, he said, “Am I not ruling it out? I mean, you’ll have to tell me.”

Apart from him lying yet again about his numbers (they are in the toilet), how about we get a consensus on this?

I guess Obama could run against Trump since he only ran for two terms. . .

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Does anyone here actually admire Trump?

In a purely objective sense... No

Would want their children to imitate him?

No...

But people don't get elected based on whether or not they're someone people would want their kids to emulate. They're elected in a 2-person competition where people are often times forced to go with "lesser of two evils" based on their current priority list.

If I had kids, I wouldn't want them to imitate George W Bush or Bill Clinton either. I certainly wouldn't want kids to lie to start wars, nor would I want them to cheat on their wives with interns at the office.

 

[Bradskii]

In a purely objective sense... No

No...

But people don't get elected based on whether or not they're someone people would want their kids to emulate. They're elected in a 2-person competition where people are often times forced to go with "lesser of two evils" based on their current priority list.

It's not argument with which I agree. But...

...maybe you can explain why so many excuse his total lack of moral character, his mysogeny, his almost pathological lying, his denial of basic human rights, his lack of care for others...the list goes on and on. He represents your country for heaven's sake and you really would struggle to find someone worse to do it.

Why is there any support for the man?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

It's not argument with which I agree. But...

...maybe you can explain why so many excuse his total lack of moral character, his mysogeny, his almost pathological lying, his denial of basic human rights, his lack of care for others...the list goes on and on. He represents your country for heaven's sake and you really would struggle to find someone worse to do it.

Why is there any support for the man?

While I can't speak for anyone who voted for him, the basic gist I get from talking with people who did, would indicate that they viewed what the left was selling as a bigger stray from American societal norms. (particularly on some of the social issues)

On a recent episode of The Young Turks (a progressive show), they delved into the topic a bit. They were reporting on these findings

Left-wing ideas have wrecked Democrats’ brand, new report warns

The center-left group Welcome relied on polling of hundreds of thousands of voters over six months for its findings, shared first with Semafor.

www.semafor.com

The group called "Welcome" (and the guy who ran Biden's 2020 campaign) surveyed hundreds of thousands of people over six months (quite a robust sample), and found that the Democratic party messaging and alignment on certain social issues were only gaining traction with one particular demographic, affluent white liberals.

Obviously you can read the report for yourself, but the general summary is, the Democrats have an economic message that resonates, but their alignments on the social issues are putting people off.

Left-leaning economic populism is pretty popular, but not when it's bundled as a package deal with "shout your abortion", the modern form of LGBTQ activism, "Climate justice", and left-wing philosophical viewpoints about the "patriarchy"


Basically what the report highlights is that
- Paid family leave
- Stronger unions
- Expanding Medicaid
- Increasing the minimum wage

....all popular ideas among a plurality of people in the US, but not at the expense of having to go along with the precepts of "abortion rocks!", "drag queen story hour is completely normal", "men suck", "capitalism sucks" (basically, bending a knee to the multi-colored hair college philosophy majors)

And they highlight the Democrats' critical mistake, the establishment democrats and DNC strategists opted to forego the ideas that were actually popular (they've pounced on Bernie and AOC for the economic policies that most people actually seem to like), but decided to keep the aforementioned things that were unpopular.

IE: They'll bash AOC for supporting paid family leave, but then try to compensate for that by giving lip service to furthest left position on the social issues that aren't popular...when they should probably be doing the inverse purely in a strategic sense.

They should be saying "we agree with AOC on paid family leave and Medicaid, but we disagree with her on the trans and abortion stuff", but instead, the establishment democrats did the opposite.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Constitution.

That old thing? Who needs it.?

Our glorious president certainly doesn't. Neither do the masked thugs illegally detaining people have any use for it. And certainly not the Republican-owned Congress who are content to let Boss Baby have his way.

He's been president since January. It's not even November yet.

Everything that's been going on, that's all been in just the last 9 months. Nine. Months.

There's still over three more years to endure. That's assuming there'll even be an America three years from now.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[FireDragon76]

While I can't speak for anyone who voted for him, the basic gist I get from talking with people who did, would indicate that they viewed what the left was selling as a bigger stray from American societal norms. (particularly on some of the social issues)

On a recent episode of The Young Turks (a progressive show), they delved into the topic a bit. They were reporting on these findings

Left-wing ideas have wrecked Democrats’ brand, new report warns

The center-left group Welcome relied on polling of hundreds of thousands of voters over six months for its findings, shared first with Semafor.

www.semafor.com

The group called "Welcome" (and the guy who ran Biden's 2020 campaign) surveyed hundreds of thousands of people over six months (quite a robust sample), and found that the Democratic party messaging and alignment on certain social issues were only gaining traction with one particular demographic, affluent white liberals.

Obviously you can read the report for yourself, but the general summary is, the Democrats have an economic message that resonates, but their alignments on the social issues are putting people off.

Left-leaning economic populism is pretty popular, but not when it's bundled as a package deal with "shout your abortion", the modern form of LGBTQ activism, "Climate justice", and left-wing philosophical viewpoints about the "patriarchy"


Basically what the report highlights is that
- Paid family leave
- Stronger unions
- Expanding Medicaid
- Increasing the minimum wage

....all popular ideas among a plurality of people in the US, but not at the expense of having to go along with the precepts of "abortion rocks!", "drag queen story hour is completely normal", "men suck", "capitalism sucks" (basically, bending a knee to the multi-colored hair college philosophy majors)

Except Democrat politicians didn't generally run on those issues. Kamala Harris' policy positions, such as they were, were almost all about "kitchen table issues" such as what you mentioned.

It's really down to the fact that the Right has been able to harness grievance through various media channels, and to shape a narrative that's portrayed Democrats as being more extreme than they actually are.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Trump news at a glance: president floats a third term as Democrats vow ‘no way in hell’

President has not definitively ruled out seeking to extend time in office. Key US politics stories from Monday 27 October at a glance

www.theguardian.com

“I would love to do it: I have my best numbers ever,” the 79-year-old told reporters on Air Force One during a trip to Asia. Pressed on whether he was not ruling out a third term, he said, “Am I not ruling it out? I mean, you’ll have to tell me.”

Apart from him lying yet again about his numbers (they are in the toilet), how about we get a consensus on this?

I love the optimism that there'll even be a USA in 2028 to have an election. I wish I had that level of optimism.

-CryptoLutheran