Why I should vote for Trump?

[ahhell]

I have skepticism about some of your assumptions.

Why do you think Trump would support Russia? I could see it if you believed Trump would remove any tine vestiges of support we've provided to Ukraine, but actually switching sides to support one of the US's largest and longest-lasting threats is extremely far-fetched.

Why do you think Trump would bomb Mexico - an ally? Let alone any South American countries with which we are not currently at war, nor engaged in substantial conflict? And why do you think congress would support it, and why would the US military follow such a clearly unconstitutional order?

Why do you think Trump would ignore China's aggression toward Taiwan, given that Trump has been the only president in my memory to literally recognize Taiwan as an independent entity, and to actually place significant tariffs and trade consequences on China?

I get that Trump is a wild card, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them engage in some crazy aggressions... but the ones you've selected seem extremely unlikely. Do you think Trump is actually The Joker, wanting to watch the world burn? Because "literal crazy person who genuinely wants to genocide the entire human species" is about the only explanation for the items you chose.

What I think Trump would be likely to do is
1) to massively increase US engagement as an ally to Ukraine, disregarding the consequences of that to our NATO Allies, and increasing Russian aggression in response - possibly pulling in China as a semi-ally of Russia
2) Drone assassinate military generals (even if they're "rebels) and heads of state for many Middle Eastern countries, including Syria, Yemen, and Iran
3) Actively engage against Hamas alongside Israel
4) Massively increase border patrol staff, and increase actions against illegal border crossers, and probably just start closing our southern border completely.

All of those come with consequences, many of which are likely to be serious problems for stability in the world... But those are all (imo) more likely given Trump's platform and past actions.

1. What? He certainly hasn't said anything that would reasonably lead to that conclusion.
2. probably more than biden.
3. Maybe, maybe not.
4. He could only do that if congress authorizes the money, there's no reason to believe they will.

 

[tyr_13]

He filled the courts, including the Supreme Court, with unqualified jurists and right wingers who have upended many long standing ideas and ended Roe. He almost removed the ACA (and my source of medical insurance, which would have forced me to stop taking care of my older brother with brain cancer which would have forced him into a care home, ironically costing the state more money). He removed many environment protections. He ****** up OSHA. He ****** up the Department of Education. He allowed more fraud from for-profit schools. He set the precedent for ignoring subpoena. He ****** up SNAP. He ****** up the Department of Labor, even less protection for workers. He ****** up a TON of environmental initiatives and kicked scientists out of DC. He pulled back on banking regulations, which, that's never caused any harm right? He increased the violence against journalists. He's eroded democracy in the US.

There's more. What are you all on about?

 

[Emily's Cat]

That is true but some of that is because he had enough responsible people around him saying no and slow walking some of his ideas. His administration was a lot better than I expected right up until Jan 6th. There will be a lot fewer of those folks working for him if he's elected this time.

Trumps direct administration still can't get things accomplished without support from Congress. And realistically, even if Trump were to get re-elected, which I don't particularly want, they're going to be tied u pin never-ending investigations, scrutiny, and challenges to every single action they take for the whole time. I expect that even *less* would be effectively accomplished than the first time around.

I mean, seriously - were Trump to get in office again... do you think Democrats and the general public are going to just step back and let Trump do stuff?

I wouldn't rely in incompetence as a bulwark against authoritarianism. For christ's sake, he's basically claiming a president can never be prosecuted for crimes committed while in office. Basically. literally saying he could shoot someone on Broadway and nobody could do anything about it.

Trump can make whatever idiotic claims they want - at the end of the day, their beliefs are irrelevant to whether or not they would be able to actually accomplish anything.

It's not a reliance on Trump's incompetence - it's a reliance on the desire of Democrats, the Press, and half the US population to oppose Trump's every move at every step.

 

[ahhell]

Trumps direct administration still can't get things accomplished without support from Congress. And realistically, even if Trump were to get re-elected, which I don't particularly want, they're going to be tied u pin never-ending investigations, scrutiny, and challenges to every single action they take for the whole time. I expect that even *less* would be effectively accomplished than the first time around.

I mean, seriously - were Trump to get in office again... do you think Democrats and the general public are going to just step back and let Trump do stuff?


Trump can make whatever idiotic claims they want - at the end of the day, their beliefs are irrelevant to whether or not they would be able to actually accomplish anything.

It's not a reliance on Trump's incompetence - it's a reliance on the desire of Democrats, the Press, and half the US population to oppose Trump's every move at every step.

At least 40% of the electorat seems like they would be willing to let him do what ever the hell he wants along with the press they listen to.

 

[Emily's Cat]

1. What? He certainly hasn't said anything that would reasonably lead to that conclusion.

Trump certainly hasn't said anything that would reasonably lead anyone to the conclusion that they would order the US to decide Russia is an ally and start supporting Putin either though.

2. probably more than biden.
3. Maybe, maybe not.
4. He could only do that if congress authorizes the money, there's no reason to believe they will.

That inability to get things done... I consider that a benefit.

Anyway, I don't think these are all necessarily likely, just that these are things that would not surprise me given Trump's prior actions... and they are things that would be overall destabilizing to the world. It was a follow on from Mike!'s post - basically me saying "Nah, that's not how Trump would screw things up, Trump would screw things up in this totally different way"

 

[Emily's Cat]

At least 40% of the electorat seems like they would be willing to let him do what ever the hell he wants along with the press they listen to.

Sure, but the other 60% are likely to block Trump's requests for a cup of tea. Point being, there are enough people - both in political office, in the press, and overall, to effectively blockade Trump from using the toilet if they so desire.

 

[ahhell]

Trump certainly hasn't said anything that would reasonably lead anyone to the conclusion that they would order the US to decide Russia is an ally and start supporting Putin either though.

That inability to get things done... I consider that a benefit.

Anyway, I don't think these are all necessarily likely, just that these are things that would not surprise me given Trump's prior actions... and they are things that would be overall destabilizing to the world. It was a follow on from Mike!'s post - basically me saying "Nah, that's not how Trump would screw things up, Trump would screw things up in this totally different way"

Give me one quote that would lead me to believe he'd push for an ounce of aid to Ukraine?

Sure, but the other 60% are likely to block Trump's requests for a cup of tea. Point being, there are enough people - both in political office, in the press, and overall, to effectively blockade Trump from using the toilet if they so desire.

Once he's ellected, that 60% can't do **** but protest. There's not a thing we could do to stop him if is staff goes along with it.

Now I think the career types in the federal government and even the military would likely stall or disobey him as much as possible but I don't want them to have to.

I forget who said it but, Biden is bad within normal parameters, Trump is bad well outside of normal parameters. Jan 6 disqualifies him from office, even joking about being a dictator for a day disqualifies him from office, claiming absolute immunity from prosecution as the president makes disqualifies him from office.

That being said, I think he should have been impeached and I don't think anyone should vote for him, but I don't think he should be barred from running in the republican primary by a partisan elected official or in a narrow vote by a state supreme court.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Give me one quote that would lead me to believe he'd push for an ounce of aid to Ukraine?

I don't have one? I also don't have any that would lead me to believe Trump would make the US a Russian ally in a war of conquest. I have confusion here - I have a slight belief that Trump would go toward Ukraine rather than Russia, based solely on their desire to be "popular"... but it's not like it's a super strong opinion that I'm going to fight at the bike rack about.

Once he's ellected, that 60% can't do **** but protest. There's not a thing we could do to stop him if is staff goes along with it.

I think you're giving the executive branch more power than it actually has by itself. Last time around, congress blocked pretty much everything Trump tried to do - do you think they would do differently now? The press spent 4 years writing non-stop about every bad thing Trump had ever done in their life - why do you think they'd stop now? The FBI took a position against Trump. Trump's staff can't enact law, they can't declare war, aside from some EOs (which can be challenged, and also delayed in implementation by any number of means), Trump and their staff can't just unilaterally take over everything.

Don't get me wrong, I'm on board with your feelings here. It's just that the application isn't well-founded.

Now I think the career types in the federal government and even the military would likely stall or disobey him as much as possible but I don't want them to have to.

I forget who said it but, Biden is bad within normal parameters, Trump is bad well outside of normal parameters. Jan 6 disqualifies him from office, even joking about being a dictator for a day disqualifies him from office, claiming absolute immunity from prosecution as the president makes disqualifies him from office.

That being said, I think he should have been impeached and I don't think anyone should vote for him, but I don't think he should be barred from running in the republican primary by a partisan elected official or in a narrow vote by a state supreme court.

I just want two new choices. It doesn't seem like too much to ask for at this stage.

 

[Donal]

Sure, but the other 60% are likely to block Trump's requests for a cup of tea. Point being, there are enough people - both in political office, in the press, and overall, to effectively blockade Trump from using the toilet if they so desire.

The entire GQP mantra over the last few years has become "**** what anyone says, we're doing it".

 

[lobosrul5]

EC: Trump is blocking aide to Ukraine. RIGHT NOW, WITHOUT EVEN BEING PRESIDENT.

https://www.france24.com/en/america...ct-senate-deal-on-border-measures-ukraine-aid

That he would do a 180 when he becomes president is sooooo bizarrely. thickheaded* it beggars believe! Do you remember his vendetta with Zelensky and the Ukrainians for not helping him find dirt on Hunter Biden? Are you not aware that Trump holds grudges... have you not listened to the almost insanely damning things that his former CABINENT MEMBERS have said about him?!

*I don't intend to insult but... I'm struggling with ways to say this

 

[dirtywick]

the guy wants to pull out of nato

 

[Paul2]

I don't have one? I also don't have any that would lead me to believe Trump would make the US a Russian ally in a war of conquest. I have confusion here - I have a slight belief that Trump would go toward Ukraine rather than Russia, based solely on their desire to be "popular"... but it's not like it's a super strong opinion that I'm going to fight at the bike rack about.


I think you're giving the executive branch more power than it actually has by itself. Last time around, congress blocked pretty much everything Trump tried to do - do you think they would do differently now? The press spent 4 years writing non-stop about every bad thing Trump had ever done in their life - why do you think they'd stop now? The FBI took a position against Trump. Trump's staff can't enact law, they can't declare war, aside from some EOs (which can be challenged, and also delayed in implementation by any number of means), Trump and their staff can't just unilaterally take over everything.

Don't get me wrong, I'm on board with your feelings here. It's just that the application isn't well-founded.


I just want two new choices. It doesn't seem like too much to ask for at this stage.

Given that Dem control of one chamber of Congress would be determinative, the big difference between then and now is that Trump has utter control of the party. If the Repubs control both chambers, and Trump snaps his fingers on the 1st beat, they'll snap their fingers on the 3rd beat.*




*I couldn't say they'd snap their fingers on 2 & 4 for obvious reasons.

 

[lobosrul5]

Given that Dem control of one chamber of Congress would be determinative, the big difference between then and now is that Trump has utter control of the party. If the Repubs control both chambers, and Trump snaps his fingers on the 1st beat, they'll snap their fingers on the 3rd beat.*




*I couldn't say they'd snap their fingers on 2 & 4 for obvious reasons.

I'd add that if Trump were to win the EC, the odds of the GOP also gaining the Senate would be very close to 100%.

 

[Emily's Cat]

EC: Trump is blocking aide to Ukraine. RIGHT NOW, WITHOUT EVEN BEING PRESIDENT.

https://www.france24.com/en/america...ct-senate-deal-on-border-measures-ukraine-aid

That he would do a 180 when he becomes president is sooooo bizarrely. thickheaded* it beggars believe! Do you remember his vendetta with Zelensky and the Ukrainians for not helping him find dirt on Hunter Biden? Are you not aware that Trump holds grudges... have you not listened to the almost insanely damning things that his former CABINENT MEMBERS have said about him?!

I hear what you're saying. I don't think Trump is the only reason Republicans are blocking this.

I don't want to get into weeds on this - I don't like Trump, I don't support Trump. At the same time, I personally have an incredibly strong dislike of bills that make completely unrelated things dependent on each other, even if I agree with each of the things themselves. But that's waaaaay out of scope here.

*I don't intend to insult but... I'm struggling with ways to say this

S'okay, I'm not insulted. This is a difference of opinion on what the likely actions of Trump would be, but it was mostly just in response to Mike!'s list. I don't have any particularly strong feelings about any of them, and I don't particularly care if anyone disagrees with me. This is 100% speculation, I don't have any emotional investment.

 

[Tero]

And what, pray tell, did Trump get done last time he was President?

He got a tax break (mostly for the wealthy, it actually increased my taxes) enacted. That is literally it.

ETA: or did I read that wrong and you meant the highlighted as Trump?

He claims to have ended abortion.

 

[Mike!]

As requested...

Far and away more likely than not.
Even now we're only a few steps away from always being at war with Eastasia as it is, so he'll be happy to go all in.

Stir up the hornets nest that is Iran and it's proxies as much as possible.
https://www.google.com/search?q=tru...ome..69i57.6445j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Send U.S. troops to Ukraine, to fight on the side of Russia, in order to 'establish peace between them like only he can.'
https://www.google.com/search?q=tru...AQzIAQD4AQHiAwQYASBBiAYB&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

Bomb Mexico and select South American countries.
https://www.google.com/search?q=tru...BxAAGIAEGAriAwQYASBBiAYB&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

Ignore China's advance on Taiwan.
https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-pr...n-against-an-invasion-from-china-193143877586

Wage actual outright war on anything even remotely referred to as, "green energy",
https://www.google.com/search?q=tru...BBAjGCfiAwQYACBBiAYBkAYH&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

starting with that pesky windmill in Scotland.
https://www.google.com/search?q=tru...YgAQYCuIDBBgAIEGIBgGQBgQ&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

Those are just off the top of my head, I'm sure I've missed something.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Not really.

Sure, if you say so.

One stands in awe at the marvel of your thoroughly-compelling rebuttal.