What if "the wrong person" wins in November?

[phiwum]

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.

Right. Because they're all evil. We get it.

Even the Republicans in the lower class want to stick it to the poor. Very good.

So long as we understand our opponents are evil, it makes it much easier to (not) deal with them. We're all sold.

 

[Tony Stark]

Right. Because they're all evil. We get it.

Even the Republicans in the lower class want to stick it to the poor. Very good.

So long as we understand our opponents are evil, it makes it much easier to (not) deal with them. We're all sold.

Yeah, they're cool with sticking it to themselves as long as they stick it to minorities too. Seriously.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Right. Because they're all evil. We get it.

Even the Republicans in the lower class want to stick it to the poor. Very good.

So long as we understand our opponents are evil, it makes it much easier to (not) deal with them. We're all sold.

At least they are focused on a properly christian form of health care, much like mother teresa gave. We are to rejoice in how the suffering of the poor brings them closer to god and then they die often of preventable diseases but that is better than keeping any of obamacare.

 

[phiwum]

Yeah, they're cool with sticking it to themselves as long as they stick it to minorities too. Seriously.

Seriously, ********.

People in each party have different priorities and values. There are decent Republicans. There are even decent Trump voters, though I think they're seriously misguided or ignorant.

Please, let's stop demonizing the opposition. It does no one any good, aside from the illusory ego-trip of being on the side of good vs. evil.

As far as I'm concerned, the attitudes you display are honestly just as bad as what the worst Trump supporters say, just directed in the opposite way. Don't do this. Allow that even decent persons can disagree, so that we can at least discuss our issues rather than call for each others' heads.

 

[phiwum]

At least they are focused on a properly christian form of health care, much like mother teresa gave. We are to rejoice in how the suffering of the poor brings them closer to god and then they die often of preventable diseases but that is better than keeping any of obamacare.

Completely irrelevant to my point. Sorry, don't care about your bizarre interpretation.

I can agree that conservatives are on the wrong side of health care reform. Doesn't make them evil. Just means we have to convince them of the moral importance of subsistence health care.

 

[Tony Stark]

Seriously, ********.

People in each party have different priorities and values. There are decent Republicans. There are even decent Trump voters, though I think they're seriously misguided or ignorant.

Please, let's stop demonizing the opposition. It does no one any good, aside from the illusory ego-trip of being on the side of good vs. evil.

As far as I'm concerned, the attitudes you display are honestly just as bad as what the worst Trump supporters say, just directed in the opposite way. Don't do this. Allow that even decent persons can disagree, so that we can at least discuss our issues rather than call for each others' heads.

The GOP is a total trash party full of total trash people. As Donald Trump being their leader proves. I feel no need to pretend otherwise.

 

[Tony Stark]

Completely irrelevant to my point. Sorry, don't care about your bizarre interpretation.

I can agree that conservatives are on the wrong side of health care reform. Doesn't make them evil. Just means we have to convince them of the moral importance of subsistence health care.

I think them being fine with people dying so rich people can pay less taxes makes them total scum.

 

[phiwum]

The GOP is a total trash party full of total trash people. As Donald Trump being their leader proves. I feel no need to pretend otherwise.

A number of decent persons are Republicans.

Your claim is simply no better than the opposite claims that Democrats want Sharia law or some such. It's made up of whole cloth.

Don't you think that it would be better to be in a position to reason with one's opposition, rather than to demonize them? Don't you think that democracy requires such a willingness?

I think that almost everyone involved in the political process, and especially the political leaders, want what they think is best for the country. I'll admit that Trump is a special case, but I can believe that even he thinks that he would be best for the country. So let's focus on what is best for the country, and not on the supposed evil in the opposition.

 

[Tony Stark]

A number of decent persons are Republicans.

Your claim is simply no better than the opposite claims that Democrats want Sharia law or some such. It's made up of whole cloth.

Don't you think that it would be better to be in a position to reason with one's opposition, rather than to demonize them? Don't you think that democracy requires such a willingness?

I think that almost everyone involved in the political process, and especially the political leaders, want what they think is best for the country. I'll admit that Trump is a special case, but I can believe that even he thinks that he would be best for the country. So let's focus on what is best for the country, and not on the supposed evil in the opposition.

I don't think it is possible to reason with Republicans. They're not reasonable people and they are perfectly fine with *********** over the country to achieve their goals. What it is best for the country is crushing them.

 

[phiwum]

I think them being fine with people dying so rich people can pay less taxes makes them total scum.

I'm fine with people dying so that I can pay less taxes. There are some people who will die, although they could live (biologically speaking) if only the whole nation paid very large amounts of money for their lives. I'm not sure that we are obligated to do that. There must be some point, and I don't know where, that we say: it is not worth society paying this much money to keep you alive.

Am I therefore scum? Does it matter whether I'm rich or not?

I tend to think that your hatred is ill-thought. I don't believe you have any idea of what you're asking for. Should the "rich" pay for health care for a 70-year-old man who will die in one year of self-imposed illness so that he might live five years more? How much ought to be paid?

All this said, I'm seriously not opposed to single-payer health care, depending on the details. You've given no details. You've given mere vitriol.

 

[phiwum]

I don't think it is possible to reason with Republicans. They're not reasonable people and they are perfectly fine with *********** over the country to achieve their goals. What it is best for the country is crushing them.

You are not interested in democracy.

You are a greater threat than Republicans.

 

[Darat]

A number of decent persons are Republicans.


...snip...

Let me throw this out as a bit of a devil's advocate:
Devil's Advocate: "

Presumably those ones will simply not be voting this time around. Your presidential election is about electing a single person to be your president (OK and a backup). Since it is the individual you are voting for I would have thought any decent person would not want to vote for someone who has with impunity been sexually assaulting people for decades."

 

[Tony Stark]

I'm fine with people dying so that I can pay less taxes. There are some people who will die, although they could live (biologically speaking) if only the whole nation paid very large amounts of money for their lives. I'm not sure that we are obligated to do that. There must be some point, and I don't know where, that we say: it is not worth society paying this much money to keep you alive.

Am I therefore scum? Does it matter whether I'm rich or not?

I tend to think that your hatred is ill-thought. I don't believe you have any idea of what you're asking for. Should the "rich" pay for health care for a 70-year-old man who will die in one year of self-imposed illness so that he might live five years more? How much ought to be paid?

All this said, I'm seriously not opposed to single-payer health care, depending on the details. You've given no details. You've given mere vitriol.

*********** please. The Republicans are unanimously against universal health care like every other first world country has. Because their main concern is making sure that rich people pay as little taxes at possible. It doesn't even slightly concern them that people die as a result.

**** them.

 

[Tony Stark]

You are not interested in democracy.

You are a greater threat than Republicans.

Those total pieces of **** should be crushed at the ballot box and all possible legal power used against them (say stacking the federal courts with liberals). How is that not democracy?

 

[Darat]

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.

How? I thought it could just decide on matters of law/the constitution?

 

[ponderingturtle]

A number of decent persons are Republicans.

And they happily let the poor die of treatable diseases, so they can fight against Obamacare. That is the mark of a decent person. You can't make an omelet with out breaking a few eggs and all that.

Then there is how trickle down economics will finally start working any day now as the economy is great, it just seems to only be great for the ownership classes.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I'm fine with people dying so that I can pay less taxes. There are some people who will die, although they could live (biologically speaking) if only the whole nation paid very large amounts of money for their lives. I'm not sure that we are obligated to do that. There must be some point, and I don't know where, that we say: it is not worth society paying this much money to keep you alive.

Am I therefore scum? Does it matter whether I'm rich or not?

I tend to think that your hatred is ill-thought. I don't believe you have any idea of what you're asking for. Should the "rich" pay for health care for a 70-year-old man who will die in one year of self-imposed illness so that he might live five years more? How much ought to be paid?

All this said, I'm seriously not opposed to single-payer health care, depending on the details. You've given no details. You've given mere vitriol.

And you are abandoning cause number 1 of the republican party right there. Are you really a republican?

 

[Brainster]

Let me throw this out as a bit of a devil's advocate:
Devil's Advocate: "

Presumably those ones will simply not be voting this time around. Your presidential election is about electing a single person to be your president (OK and a backup). Since it is the individual you are voting for I would have thought any decent person would not want to vote for someone who has with impunity been sexually assaulting people for decades."

Yes, let's vote for his enabler, Hillary Clinton.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Let me throw this out as a bit of a devil's advocate:
Devil's Advocate: "

Presumably those ones will simply not be voting this time around. Your presidential election is about electing a single person to be your president (OK and a backup). Since it is the individual you are voting for I would have thought any decent person would not want to vote for someone who has with impunity been sexually assaulting people for decades."

Once again..not MY president. They are not my boss.

 

[dudalb]

This is pretty much the problem with moderates getting the nomination on both sides (and Trump is considered a squish on conservative talk radio). You can't rally the base of either party with half-a-loaf candidates, so you have to sell the notion that the other party's candidate is the second coming of Mao/Hitler.

It is amazing how many people buy into it every four years.

I overall agree, but I think you might have the exception with Trump. Neither party has, in a long time, nominated anybody with his emotional and psychological issues,and nobody who clearly has a authoritarian view of the world,and who seems to be so ignorant of the basics of American Government,and who has courted the White Nationalists element. I feel a lot of what went on at this forum in 2012 vis a vis Mitt Romney was really over the top, but with Trump, I am not so sure.
BTW, there are plenty of conservative writers who share my opinions of Trump as being the most dangerous nominee either party has had in a long,long,time.