What if "the wrong person" wins in November?

[Tony Stark]

Like what for instance?

Start WW3, leave NATO, kill NAFTA, slap tariffs on China, and I'm sure lots more that I can't think of.

 

[Tony Stark]

When you've blown your credibility with half the population by nattering on about a war on women, you can't get it back by sputtering, "But, but, World War III!"

But Republicans do want to remove rights from women. Donald even said they should be punished for exercising a constitutional right (and then changed his position like five times within a day).

 

[Spindrift]

When you've blown your credibility with half the population by nattering on about a war on women, you can't get it back by sputtering, "But, but, World War III!"

Half the population? Which half would that be?

 

[phiwum]

The notion that Republicans in Congress would stand up to him is absurd and there are all kinds of things he could do without consulting them or anyone.

Like what for instance?

The very same executive orders that people fear Clinton will overdo, for instance.

 

[ponderingturtle]

He could...but he won't. He could do something very stupid that results in people getting killed, but I don't see nuclear annihilation in our near future.

Just minor first nuclear strikes against Iran.

I think he is too in bed with Putin to go WWIII.

 

[uke2se]

Just minor first nuclear strikes against Iran.

I think he is too in bed with Putin to go WWIII.

He's in bed with Putin until he's no longer useful for Putin. More likely than WWIII is multiple wars in Europe as Russia expands its influence.

 

[ponderingturtle]

The lesson that the boy who cried wolf learned too late.

I still remember the horror around here over John McCain and Mitt Romney. Does make the swooning over Trump seem like more of the same.

Not at all. I wouldn't have wanted them president but I never thought it seriously likely they would use a nuclear first strike either.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Your party nominated by far the worst candidate ever thus proving beyond question what total garbage it is. Simply a fact.

Or the best one ever, who else could brag so much about sexually assaulting women and it not destroy them?

 

[ponderingturtle]

He's in bed with Putin until he's no longer useful for Putin. More likely than WWIII is multiple wars in Europe as Russia expands its influence.

Yep.

 

[Tony Stark]

He's in bed with Putin until he's no longer useful for Putin. More likely than WWIII is multiple wars in Europe as Russia expands its influence.

Donald could leave NATO (or just signal he wouldn't honor the treaty) thus giving Putin the green light and there is really nothing anyone could do about it.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I recall hearing exactly the same rhetoric over Obama. I got into my police car one morning and whoever had been on the night shift had been listening to Glen Beck. The guy was literally sobbing... "We have to take our country back from Obama!"
That was just prior to the last election...And they didn't.

This is the kind of stuff these people spew all the time....It's what their fans want to hear.

And does it mean anything that Beck is thinking of backing Clinton now? Certainly seems to think she is better than trump.

 

[ZiprHead]

Ironically, from the perspective of balance of power, Hillary is a far greater threat to the Constitutional order than Trump.

Could you elaborate more on this, please?

 

[TragicMonkey]

I'm mostly worried about the economy. It's one of those things that is affected by people's beliefs about it. If too many people expect an economic disaster under Trump, they'll move their money in such a way to cause an economic disaster. Nobody wants to be left holding the bag so everyone drops it. A self-fulfilling prophecy. And there's no way for regular people to mitigate- if the dollar falls it takes us all with it. The middle class can't hedge their bets with gold reserves or foreign accounts or vast tracts of land.

 

[Darat]

Absolutely. Even Johnson and Stein are the wrong people.

But as an additional note, if you think that having the wrong person as president will be apocalyptic, then the obvious logical conclusion is that the presidency has far too much power. Funny how few of the chicken littles can put 2 and 2 together on that note.

Baloney. Yes that could be one way to address the problem but it depends on your starting premise, something being a logical argument doesn't mean the result is correct.

 

[pgwenthold]

I'm mostly worried about the economy. It's one of those things that is affected by people's beliefs about it. If too many people expect an economic disaster under Trump, they'll move their money in such a way to cause an economic disaster. Nobody wants to be left holding the bag so everyone drops it. A self-fulfilling prophecy. And there's no way for regular people to mitigate- if the dollar falls it takes us all with it. The middle class can't hedge their bets with gold reserves or foreign accounts or vast tracts of land.

I'm not concerned about what Trump is going to do, it's what he's NOT going to do. He's so completely disengaged with most of the operation of government that he's not going to provide any leadership in any way, and all he will be is a puppet of whatever the right wing throws at him.

Kind of George W Bush without the savvy.

 

[Mumbles]

I'm not concerned about what Trump is going to do, it's what he's NOT going to do. He's so completely disengaged with most of the operation of government that he's not going to provide any leadership in any way, and all he will be is a puppet of whatever the right wing throws at him.

Kind of George W Bush without the savvy.

Well, let's be honest - Pence looks like he'd just introduce the Mutant Registration Act, and then have no idea what to do after.

So we're left to his surrogates - who are grifters, neo-nazis, and other random idiots.

 

[Mader Levap]

(fervent downplaying Trump's presidency)

Yes, we know that your wonderful argument for Trump is "he cant do anything and we can do Totally-Not-A-Coup-I-Swear anyway". Great endorsement. It is almost like you don't care for Trump and care only for preserving your values a little longer (SCOTUS), taking enormous risk (access to nuclear button by insane fascist clown).

It should be obvious that I consider those conservative, republican values as something that should land on trashheap on history already - immoral, evil, deplorable and hypocritical. Hillary may replace up to four judges and I couldn't be happier.

Hillary will surround herself with her cronies and run a fairly insular administration, like Obama did. She will have a much better relationship with the Democrats in Congress than Obama did, however, and probably be much more effective in enacting liberal legislation. Despite this, she will still be very aggressive with unilateral executive action, and will probably expand the power of the Presidency materially. Any opposition will be deemed sexist, and she will have the protection of her Democratic allies in Congress, as well as most of the mainstream media.

Reality: Hillary will be permaobstructed, like Obama was. Instead of uppity n*** we will have b*** that should've stay in kitchen.

Many of her initiatives, both domestic and foreign (but particularly foreign) will be hidden from the public, as her level of transparency will be even worse than Obama's (and far worse than Trump's would be).

Your claim that presidence of pathological liar would be more transparent than Hillary's mildly amuses me. This is, gentlemans and ladies, level of reality detachment typical for republicans.

There will be much expansion of domestic monitoring for terrorists (both of the Islamic jihadist variety, as well as the right-wing variety, but not the left wing variety).

It is almost like left-wing loons arent much active (relatively) in last decades. I guess it is related to what happened in my country some time ago or something.

There will be many covert operations abroad, as well as aggressive containment of Russia and China.

Yep, I know that Putin is lately authoritanian friend of republicans. I dunno why you cry crocodile tears over China, though.

She will raise taxes on the wealthy and enact a minimum wage hike. The economy will underperform as a result.

I am aware about Republican's drivel that lower taxes for richest and f*** over proles are panacea for all economic woes. Protip: not everyone share these delusions and many of countries ranking very highly on various "best country to live in" has high or very high taxes.

 

[Meadmaker]

It is the constitution that gives the President the power to start WW3. Though the founders obviously didn't consider nuclear weapons. Nor did they consider that a major party would go insane and nominate a deranged idiot.

Of course they did. That's why the Constitution constrains the power of the executive branch through balance of powers and provides a lawful mechanism for the removal of a President by the legislative branch.

Sunmaster is right here. Also, the Constitution doesn't give the President the power to start any war. That power is given to Congress.

What the founders did not anticipate was a war that could start, and indeed finish, in the space of an hour. Because that is a real possibility, the President has to be able to use his Commander in Chief power to act quickly, but in so doing he could take actions that are, for all practical purposes, declarations of war.

I think the real danger, that Sunmaster is alluding to, is that the executive authority has grown too much. On a related note, the power of the Supreme Court has grown way too much, which means the President can influence, although not actually direct, power in this country for many years beyond the length of his term.


But I don't know what to do about all that. What I do know is that I don't want to enable a man like Trump to exercise that kind of power.

 

[Tony Stark]

I am aware about Republican's drivel that lower taxes for richest and f*** over proles are panacea for all economic woes. Protip: not everyone share these delusions and many of countries ranking very highly on various "best country to live in" has high or very high taxes.

I'm not even convinced that Republicans even believe that slashing taxes for the rich and cutting social services will make the country better for everyone. They simply do not give a **** if people suffer due to their policies.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Sunmaster is right here. Also, the Constitution doesn't give the President the power to start any war. That power is given to Congress.

Sure but we are not talking about starting a war we are talking about launching a preemtive nuclear strike against Iran. That the president has the power to do.