Question for Trump supporters

[logger]

You two don't get it. There has never been a candidate like Trump. Every meaningful white-supremacist group is in his corner.

These are the dregs of society.

He lies like a rug - see his asinine "Medical Report" for that.

Yeah and every communists supports Hillary.

Do you think she wants their support?

Talking about lies without mentioning Hillary is just absurd.

 

[The Don]

Yeah and every communists supports Hillary.

I find that hard to believe, I would have thought that she would be far too corporatist for their tastes. Perhaps maybe Bernie but even he is far too right wing.

Do you have any evidence so support your claim ?

OTOH those white supremacists have endorsed Trump.

Do you think she wants their support?

Probably not, but do you have any evidence that she has it. Trump OTOH has been slow to distance himself from white supremacists.

Talking about lies without mentioning Hillary is just absurd.

According to fact check organisations Hillary is about average whereas Trump hardly utters a true statement.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Beneath me?
The guy who refers to Hillary Clinton as Killery is going to tell me what is mature and what is not [snerk]

Especially since what was being referenced is true. There is a twelve year old who's the co-chair of the Trump operation in Jefferson County, CO.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Yeah and every communists supports Hillary.

Do you think she wants their support?

Talking about lies without mentioning Hillary is just absurd.

Have you actually noted the thread title and OP? This is a thread for supporters of Trump, of which you are almost certainly one, to express which positions Trump holds that makes him worthy of your support.

So far, we've had one conservative give it a try. Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us with your particular reasons?

 

[NoahFence]

Yeah and every communists supports Hillary.

Lie.

Do you think she wants their support?

Hypothetical, no evidence she has their support.

 

[NoahFence]

What if one of the white supremacists is peaceful? Do you still want him to be executed in a gas chamber? Should you join him?

That's a contradiction.

And yes.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

According to fact check organisations Hillary is about average whereas Trump hardly utters a true statement.

They can also choose which statements out of the voluminous remarks that candidates make throughout their campaigns to include in their webpages in order to fit a narrative. While I take most of their assessments at face value based on their research into issues. One should bear in mind that fact checking sites are not always the most comprehensive studies

 

[The Don]

They can also choose which statements out of the voluminous remarks that candidates make throughout their campaigns to include in their webpages in order to fit a narrative. While I take most of their assessments at face value based on their research into issues. One should bear in mind that fact checking sites are not always the most comprehensive studies

That's true but when you consider they had to trawl through 40 years worth of Hillary "lies" to make a decent article whereas a single Trump speech yields far more.

Do you have an alternative, more comprehensive source ?

 

[Trebuchet]

So far, we've had one conservative give it a try. Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us with your particular reasons?

Exactly the same result as my previous attempt to do a thread asking this question.

 

[logger]

Have you actually noted the thread title and OP? This is a thread for supporters of Trump, of which you are almost certainly one, to express which positions Trump holds that makes him worthy of your support.

So far, we've had one conservative give it a try. Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us with your particular reasons?

Lol
You obviously haven't read the thread, otherwise you would have seen my posts about the OP.

 

[tyr_13]

I like his idea of lowering corporate taxes.

Isn't this nuclear snafu all hearsay?

He was against the Iraq war and thought it was a mistake. His policies on making war are going to be far more cautious than the current admin and certainly Killery.

Have you actually noted the thread title and OP? This is a thread for supporters of Trump, of which you are almost certainly one, to express which positions Trump holds that makes him worthy of your support.

So far, we've had one conservative give it a try. Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us with your particular reasons?

Lol
You obviously haven't read the thread, otherwise you would have seen my posts about the OP.

Logger did try. Only one of those is actually a true policy of Trump, but it is at least trying.

And it does help to understand Trump support.

 

[logger]

I also like that Trump is a fighter. Our party has never seen this before and it is sorely needed.

And this one.

 

[NoahFence]

And this one.

But he's not. He's a coward and a blowhard.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Logger did try.

And logger isn't the only person who has given reasons for supporting Trump.

The collection that follows includes several reasons given by people who don't actually support Trump themselves, but appear to be stating (usually but not always in good faith) reasons that do appear to motivate at least some Trump supporters.

Mostly it's about immigration for me.

I like his promise to build a wall on the Mexican border....

I like his still-evolving ideas to curb immigration of people who likely don't share our values. Our immigration policies, by accident and by design, favor people who are low-skilled, uneducated, and culturally backward. I'd like to favor people who are highly skilled, educated, and culturally compatible with our pluralistic society. I think Trump represents the best chance for fundamentally changing our immigration system....

Just to give an example, I think that Trump has the highest probability of any Presidential candidate to say "Screw it; we're getting rid of most of the drug laws." That would be a good thing in my opinion. He probably also has the highest probability of any Presidential candidate to say "Screw it; I'm nuking Mexico." That would be a bad thing in my opinion, but I don't think he'll be able to do that.

Trump, at least, is content to simply tell me what he thinks. He doesn't presume to tell me what I should think. And he certainly doesn't do me the incivility of telling me what I do think.

Donald Trump seems authentic.

I have said for years that the biggest problem with illegal immigration from Mexico is that there is not enough legal immigration. But that certainly does not mean poorly controlled immigration, which is what we are facing now.

Thanks, Obama!

I would think one of the problems with illegal immigration is that illegal immigrants undercut (union bargained) wages, thus putting pressure on the wages of ordinary Americans or of legal immigrants.

It's not like there is a button he can push that directly fires off ballistic missiles. He has the codes, without which launches cannot happen, but there is a crapload of in between stuff that has to happen too. In theory, he could surround himself with like-minded sycophants, who will do his bidding, but I think the probability of that is extremely low.

Furthermore, even Trump seems to have a level of restraint in the normal range. There is little filter between his brain and his mouth in real-time, but he's not really an out of control crazy person. There is no history of violence that I know of, nor even illegal conduct, except perhaps at the boundaries of subjective areas of the law. In matters of war and peace, he might easily be more restrained and less ruthless than Hillary Clinton, frankly. And he certainly will get more pushback from the media on anything he does that they see as bad.

We can let in immigrants who make a huge positive contribution, or we can let in immigrants who make a small positive contribution, or we can let in immigrants who are a wash, or we can let in immigrants who contribute negatively. Given that there are effectively an unlimited number of potential immigrants in each category, I choose the first. Even better, by giving preference to the first category, we will probably increase our capacity to let in immigrants from other categories.

At worst, Trump asked why he couldn't use nuclear weapons, and he was given an answer. Is that better or worse than not asking at all?

In my assessment, I do not believe that Trump is crazy enough to use nukes inappropriately. I think he is crazy enough to take policy positions which are politically risky, but not which put the continued existence of humanity in mortal danger. He does have a five children, by the way, including a 10 year old son, as well as five grandchildren.

Trump has a lot of flaws, but I think he has no greater chance of blowing up the world than anybody else. To be honest, I would be more concerned about a President succumbing to apocalyptic sentiments if he were very religious, as Trump is not, but as many Presidents, including Dwight Eisenhower, Jimmy Carter, and George W. Bush, were.

And Clinton is.

If I were a betting man - and I am - I'd lay odds that both Hillary and Bill, and Obama too, are agnostics at best, and probably atheists.

If I was choosing a President based on religious beliefs closes to my own, Trump might be it....

Religion, is of course the reason I'd take Trump over Cruz in a heartbeat. Somehow I find it better to think you ARE God than to think you are God's Chosen One.

That being said, we are just one or two Supreme Court nominations from a court which might overturn Heller and McDonald, which would allow local jurisdictions to ban handguns.

I refer you to the 25th Amendment, Section 4. It was actually used to remove President David Palmer from office during Season 2 of 24.

I like his idea of lowering corporate taxes.

Isn't this nuclear snafu all hearsay?

He was against the Iraq war and thought it was a mistake. His policies on making war are going to be far more cautious than the current admin and certainly Killery.

My darwiness! What do you chose? fish or chicken? there's no caviare in the menu.

Look, there would be a power struggle. Other Cabinet members would push back and warn the President that he was acting in such a way that he could be removed from office. Ultimately, the guys with guns will have to make a decision. I have confidence that a crazy President would be restrained.

He has a kind of Tourette's syndrome, when it comes to speaking, and he can be somewhat ruthless in business, but he hasn't had anybody killed as far as I know. To tell you the truth, I'm less sure about Hillary and Bill in that respect.

people need to stop fear mongering as if Trump will actually get the wall built. Both sides of congress hate him to the core. Given obamas trouble despite having a super majority at one point, i believe its safe to say that even if Trump literally pushed for it... it wouldnt happen

Don't ignore their speeches. But be realistic in what policy proposals they make and what you expect that they will actually accomplish. He may well be much stricter with immigration as he proposes. But building a wall? You're talking about a man that is a master media manipulator for free publicity. While i'm hesitant to underestimate what he might pursue i think it unrealistic you'll see a wall get erected... unless you expect him to get sufficient blessing from congress which... judging by Obama's experience appears unlikely.

If he attempts to circumvent congress using executive action thats one issue almost guarenteed to reach the SCOTUS so far as i can tell.

No just advice stating that campaign promises and reality are two different things. Or did we already forget how some of Obama's big promises turn out? People voted for Obama based on promises that never got implemented. Others fear mongered as if he was going to end America.

Yes, he speaks nonsense from time to time, as do all politicians, but he is less articulate than most (not quite down to the level of Sarah Palin, but almost).

Vote Trump. He is not Hillary Clinton.

When trump gets elected it will be good to have adults in charge again.

Well, I've yet to see any evidence that is stronger than the evidence with respect to Clinton's declining health. She's had three blood clots since 1998, and she has hypothyroidism. Also, she doesn't seem to be taking the most advanced medicines for her health problems.

While I cannot answer the question for myself since I am not a Trump supporter, a coworker/drinking buddy of mine who enthusiastically supports Trump gave a reason that was neither incoherent nor racist. He supports Trump's plan to limit the immigration of Muslims, especially Muslim refugees. He's not indifferent to the plight of the refugees, he just fears that they could include ISIS infiltrators that could be difficult to detect in any vetting process. He also worries that the genuine refugees, many of them being angry young males whose whole lives have just been turned upside-down, could be ripe prospects for radicalization after they arrive.

Yes, 24 is fiction. It does, however, illustrate how the 25th Amendment might be invoked. It can happen very quickly, and I have no doubt that a President going half-cocked and seriously considering first use of nuclear weapons would have everybody in the Cabinet paying close attention.

I read Drew Pinsky's analysis of her medical records, checked up with Google, and found it to be reasonable. I only said what he did.

I, personally, think the issue is silly. Not only do I see Trump as having no higher probability of triggering a nuclear conflict than any other President (including Hillary), but I believe in our institutional constraints. Despite what phiwum claims about authority to "push the button," it simply is not the case that the President has the operational ability to instigate a nuclear war all by himself, without many people along the chain having to agree with such a decision, either tacitly or explicitly. In a time when nuclear threats make no sense, I am confident that such a seemingly crazy order will not be implemented.

I also like that Trump is a fighter. Our party has never seen this before and it is sorely needed.

I wasn't making a joke about the right being the adults in the room, you can come on here and clearly see they're the more serious adults.

The question is, if Trump is so stupid, why does he gather such amazing support?

 

[Foolmewunz]

Lol
You obviously haven't read the thread, otherwise you would have seen my posts about the OP.

Those one-liners. How about his specific policies? Every Republican is going to lower taxes and every Republican is "a fighter". Those are platitudes.

 

[logger]

Those one-liners. How about his specific policies? Every Republican is going to lower taxes and every Republican is "a fighter". Those are platitudes.

You just can't admit you were wrong.

Bedsides you're also wrong on both points. Not every repub wants to lower the corporate tax and most republican in government are complete wimps and the exact opposite of a fighter.

 

[tyr_13]

And this one.

And logger isn't the only person who has given reasons for supporting Trump.

The collection that follows includes several reasons given by people who don't actually support Trump themselves, but appear to be stating (usually but not always in good faith) reasons that do appear to motivate at least some Trump supporters.

While those are useful for finding why people support Trump, or at least why they believe they do, the question from the OP specifically asked what policies of Trumps they support and why.

Being 'a fighter' isn't a policy.

 

[Segnosaur]

He was against the Iraq war and thought it was a mistake. His policies on making war are going to be far more cautious than the current admin and certainly Killery.

3. He wasn't a vocal opponent of the war until a couple of years after it had started.

Even more than that, he actually expressed support for the war before the invasion....

From: http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-war/
Donald Trump has repeated throughout his presidential campaign that he opposed the Iraq war before the March 19, 2003 invasion, often taking credit for his judgement and vision — claiming he knew it would destabilize the Middle East.
...
Others have looked, but no one else — including PolitiFact and the Washington Post Fact Checker — has been able to find any evidence to support his claims, either. Now, BuzzFeed reports that Trump indicated his support for war in a radio interview with shock jock Howard Stern on Sept. 11, 2002 — a little more than six months before the war started.

As for Trump being "cautious", remember that he is the candidate who actually stated that he would go after the families of terrorists, something that would be considered a war crime by many/most. (He also called for the bombing of Libya.)

 

[Stacko]

(He also called for the bombing of Libya.)

More than that. The Facebook post of him calling for the invasion of Libya is still up. There's also this video he made about it.

 

[Ladewig]

Reagan certainly knew more, can you guess why?

OK, I have narrowed it down to a few.....
Because he served as governor?
Because he understood his limitations and surrounded himself with experts?
Because he was willing to study for the debates?
Because he understood that the Republican party was not his enemy and understood he was part of a team?

I bet it was the governor thing. Was it the governor thing? It's the governor thing.

I also never compared him to Reagan, I only mentioned him. Your knee jerk reaction was also not wanted but expected.

Yes. I know you didn't compare them. I was the one who compared them.

A liberal spent several paragraphs praising a Republican president and you described it as a knee-jerk reaction.

It is almost as if you yourself were making a knee-jerk reaction to my post. Hey, that applies to some of your other posts. You sometimes seem to be accusing others of the very things you are doing.

I'm not concerned with who you respect and it's telling that you think I'm taunting you.

ETA: I want to keep this thread on track so instead of bickering, I will withdraw all my accusations of you taunting liberals. Let's get back to Trump. Please disregard the stricken text. You win.
Logger, if you are going to say something in this thread, then own it. The Republicans bill themselves as the party of honor.

............
Oh, and when you have a moment feel free to point out any errors I made in comparing Trump to Reagan. I do want to be factual when I talk about Trump. I am open-minded enough to change my mind when I am shown evidence. No hurry. Whenever you can.

I do want to hear more about your perspective on Trump. That is the point of the thread.

MORE ETA
I bet is was the governor thing.