fishmike wrote:

gr33d wrote:

Rookie wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Rookie wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Rookie wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Rookie wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Rookie wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Rookie wrote:In answer to the Op's thread title. I couldn't stomach voting for either presidential candidate but I tried to remain causiously optomistic on Trump. Now, I just hope we can survive his presidency

My questions would be optimistic based on what? What qualities did Trump display in his past that indicated he could be a good president? The honest answer for most folks is they voted for him because he wasn't Hillary.

why do you feel qualified to answer honestly for most folks. Classic overeach here thinking your own opinion is the only one that is correct.

Both candidates suffered from lack of charector. I won't elaborate since you can answer that yourself if you care to even try and be open mided. Trump is easily the dumbest guy in the room. Bush II atleast had moral values and depended on those around him to advise, even if he chose poorly occasionally on whom to listen to. He atleast always meant well even though he was poorly suited for the job.

Trump is still Trump and has more of a wall street morality. I guess my hope was that he could grow into the job but he won't ever shut up long enough to listen and learn from those around him who are smarter, better educated in the world and more experienced. This guy truly has serious issues.

There really is no point in discussing Hillary since she is not President and never will be. The old guard of the DNC will over time be ousted and replaced with new younger, highly educated and more progressive young people. Lets just hope we all survive long enough to seee it happen.

I just don't understand the basis for "optimism?"

If someone said they thought both Hillary and Trump would be horrible but they thought Trump would be the less horrible of the two, whether I agree or not I could at least understand the rationale. But anybody who says they were "optimistic" that Trump wasn't going to be a train wreck, I'm still waiting for a rational explanation to justify that thought process. You can accuse me of not being "open minded" but I think that's just a camouflage to deflect not having a reasonable answer to the question.

To bring this back to sports, it's like expecting Charles Oakley in the latter stages of his career to begin playing like Charles Barkley. He couldn't do it when he was young, suddenly he's gonna do it when he's old? Trump just continued to do what he's has done best throughout his whole life, conning people. I'm not sure if you're a New Yorker, but if there's any group of people who shouldn't have fallen for the con it's a New Yorker. We know Trump better and for longer than anybody in the world.

What are you basing your knowledge of Trump on, page 6 of the post or personal experience from direct dealings? Also, how do you know Hillary? Answer me that mr new yalkah.

Maybe we can get to follow up questions if you would answer my initial question. What did Trump ever do prior to running for president that would make someone optimistic he would be an effective president and grow into the position? It's totally fine to admit blind optimism. I would just love to hear something tangible.

Ok so this is just an internet forum circle jerk, got it.

Translation: you can't explain why you were "optimistic" about Trump as president. Perhaps you should've given this more thought before casting your voting regardless of who you ultimately ended up supporting.

You're still over reaching, claiming to speak for others to make your argument in some childish internet forum victory lap now. Stop trolling and get into a conversation. Take a position, make an informed argument or just say something worth debating. Express a concern relevant to current events. Just saying 'Trump sucks, I told you so' isn't a position worthy of discussing. Trump is dangerous, so why? Just look at Gustavballer's post above. In one paragraph he spoke volumes. He consolidated all of his thoughts into one coherent paragraph we can all understand and it is clear he could say a whole lot more if he felt like it. You my friend have said nothing, you are just trolling

Dude, I spent darn near a 7-8 months debating why Trump would be a horrible president. It's over, he's in office. No use debating a campaign that already took place.

But 7 months in I think it's very reasonable to ask the people responsible for this presidency to explain why they put the country in this situation. Why you take offense to such a simple question is revealing. I didn't help put Trump in office so I have nothing to explain.

You said you were "optimistic" about a Trump presidency but can't reference a single tangible point to justify your optimism. Pretty simple question. Not sure why it's like pulling teeth to get you to explain what Trump did before or during his campaign that made you "optimistic" about him being president. I'm not asking your to dissect his agenda or actions.

I didn't think asking someone to explain their own statement was so difficult.

First off, like I said orininally I did not vote for Trump so you can get off of that.

I never thought he would get the nomination. I was baffled by his daily stupidity and his increasing popularity. I was certain eventually many things would come out under the scrutiny of a long campaign and he would go down in flames, but they didn't and he didn't.

Towards the end of the race my thinking changed more to 'well he's an idiot but alot of his talking points are important for our country'. Maybe he won't completely screw it up.

When I say cautiously optomistic I mean that he would have to become less extreme to get anything accomplished, more Presidential.

And then there's I'm an American so I will support my president, bitching about it won't change anything.

This guy though, he is worse then a disaster, he is dangerous.

I've heard quite a bit in the debate on both sides...

One of the many talking points for Trump supporters has been; we haven't seen enough progress in the last 20 years by experienced politicians. Perhaps it's time for a change?

Right time, maybe the wrong guy... But I get it and some of his talking points resonated with middle and lower class America, as well as others.

Ridiculous insurance premiums, border security, lost jobs and stagnant wages, drain the swamp, etc... He also positioned himself well in the polls by backing our military and supporting law enforcement.

He ran against a candidate who's blamed for killing soldiers, having a scummy husband, mishandling classified information and being generally perceived as corrupt/untrustworthy.

Everyone knew Trumps flaws by the time this was over and some of you guys still don't get it. It wasn't a matter of being conned be Trump, it was a matter of not being conned by another Clinton.

this is just not right, because it implies a similar outcome with both candidates, which would not have been the case.

Trump ran on a campaign that McDonalds was bad, failing, disgusting and terrible for you. That part I agree with. But he wasnt offering Whoppers instead. He was offering cat food. Now you get comments like Rookie above saying this is just an I told you so. Its not really the case. Everyone knew Trump's flaws? Not really. They just knew they were sticking it too McDonalds and werent really banking on how nasty the cat food was going to be to eat. Some people knew he was selling cat food all along and no matter how you dressed it up it was going to taste nasty. Guess what.. it tastes nasty.

The best outcome would have been for Hillary to be POTUS. It would have been organized and non embarrassing if nothing else. It also most likely would have been a 4 year and done term. Failing behind Trump would be been a real blow to that party and forced the GOP to do what the Dems are doing now, rethink and remake what you are all about.

Now we ALL have to eat cat food. The best part is when guys like Guns come around tell us how good the cat food tastes. This will end in war for the US. We will attack NKorea or rattle some can loud enough to distract.

Cat food.

Dissagree. The best outcome would have been for neither of them (Hillary or Trump) to become POTUS.

Trump said it himself, it doesnt matter if he shoots someone in broad daylight, his supporters will still support him. Proving he was a criminal, committed treason, obstruction of justice, or even getting caught lying daily, doesn't take away from his ability to play into the anger, greed and fear of his supporters. As long as those emotions are fed, his supporters don't care. It's their drug of choice.

toodarkmark wrote:Trump was elected by people who play into their greed, anger and fear. Is he still playing to all of those? Yes. Does the GOP do everything in their power to protect him? Yes. Is Fox News a state run propaganda channel that coordinates stories with the Trump Admin? Yes. None of that matters to his supporters.

Trump said it himself, it doesnt matter if he shoots someone in broad daylight, his supporters will still support him. Proving he was a criminal, committed treason, obstruction of justice, or even getting caught lying daily, doesn't take away from his ability to play into the anger, greed and fear of his supporters. As long as those emotions are fed, his supporters don't care. It's their drug of choice.

I think it's easy to oversimplify things at times. Yes he played on greed, fear and anger but there's more than that. Large swathes of people absolutely hate the Clintons. I mean if you think about it fooling around with interns is just as embarrassing to the country and made us the butt of all jokes for a long time. A lot of these people had years of built up hatred on one side and a insecure Playboy bully who comes off as a jerk but is basically a unknown on the other side. The distinction I am trying to make is these people weren't afraid of Clinton they just hated everything she did for. It's the people who probably would find eating a pile of hot mess more appetizing than voting for Clinton that elected him, and they haven't changed their position because the history of the Clintons still hasn't changed. There just isn't enough history in this Presidency to write off this yet unknown quantity.

To the rest of us we are seeing the danger of choosing rat poison over embarrassment and getting unlimited quantities of both. We are also seeing the clear and present warning signs but no real actual major harm has been done yet, and not for lack of trying. Unfortunately to people who are still too happy celebrating Clinton's defeat (not Trump's victory) that's only a minor sidenote.

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:

Rookie wrote:First off, like I said orininally I did not vote for Trump so you can get off of that.

I never thought he would get the nomination. I was baffled by his daily stupidity and his increasing popularity. I was certain eventually many things would come out under the scrutiny of a long campaign and he would go down in flames, but they didn't and he didn't.

Towards the end of the race my thinking changed more to 'well he's an idiot but alot of his talking points are important for our country'. Maybe he won't completely screw it up.

When I say cautiously optomistic I mean that he would have to become less extreme to get anything accomplished, more Presidential.

And then there's I'm an American so I will support my president, bitching about it won't change anything.

This guy though, he is worse then a disaster, he is dangerous.

Voting for him or not, you acknowledge that he was stupid and an idiot and extreme; your words exactly. And yet you also felt let maybe he wouldn't screw it up.

You were somehow conned into thinking that maybe he wouldn't screw things up. There was ZERO basis for thinking he would or could accomplish anything.

And this is how a lot of people felt and why they voted for Trump.

I get it now, this thread is really about liberals calling out conservatives for an I told you so. Whenever you have two distict groups on opposites sides of every issue there needs to be compromise to get anything done. We have entered an era where both sides refuse to compromise at all, zero cooperation. The sytem is broken and I don't know how it gets fixed.

When you make a decision that has grave implications, you need to do it judiciously and with sound reason. This is not like choosing between McDonalds and Burger King for dinner and you just throw your hands up in the air and decide BK because you've been to McDonalds for the last 3 straight times and were like "well it was just eh so we went with the other"

Your assumption is that there were 2 district groups on opposite sides of every issue, that assumptions was a completely inept one.

I'm guessing that you have never heard of the Democratic or Republican party. But to use your analogy, Trump is one frie short of a happy meal and Hillary is the hamburgler

That's it on the surface, but if that's as deep as you go we are all in trouble. And thus Trump

That's the mentality though right? Both parties have some good and some back so we might as well try to other for a while? I've had McDonalds for a while so go for BK? But really it's cat food?

Your analogy sucks.

Trump for years was a known con man. Failed at business. Known sexist, treats women like trash. Took our nation down a path of blatant racism with the Obama birther thing. Cheated thousands out of money. Least transparent candidate ever.

You lowered the bar so low and then made everyone else come down to it. That's an awful way to make a decision.

meloshouldgo wrote:

toodarkmark wrote:Trump was elected by people who play into their greed, anger and fear. Is he still playing to all of those? Yes. Does the GOP do everything in their power to protect him? Yes. Is Fox News a state run propaganda channel that coordinates stories with the Trump Admin? Yes. None of that matters to his supporters.

Trump said it himself, it doesnt matter if he shoots someone in broad daylight, his supporters will still support him. Proving he was a criminal, committed treason, obstruction of justice, or even getting caught lying daily, doesn't take away from his ability to play into the anger, greed and fear of his supporters. As long as those emotions are fed, his supporters don't care. It's their drug of choice.

I think it's easy to oversimplify things at times. Yes he played on greed, fear and anger but there's more than that. Large swathes of people absolutely hate the Clintons. I mean if you think about it fooling around with interns is just as embarrassing to the country and made us the butt of all jokes for a long time. A lot of these people had years of built up hatred on one side and a insecure Playboy bully who comes off as a jerk but is basically a unknown on the other side. The distinction I am trying to make is these people weren't afraid of Clinton they just hated everything she did for. It's the people who probably would find eating a pile of hot mess more appetizing than voting for Clinton that elected him, and they haven't changed their position because the history of the Clintons still hasn't changed. There just isn't enough history in this Presidency to write off this yet unknown quantity.

To the rest of us we are seeing the danger of choosing rat poison over embarrassment and getting unlimited quantities of both. We are also seeing the clear and present warning signs but no real actual major harm has been done yet, and not for lack of trying. Unfortunately to people who are still too happy celebrating Clinton's defeat (not Trump's victory) that's only a minor sidenote.

Though I generally do not like nor trust either Hillary or Trump I think the cat food analogy is spot on. I would have preferred having someone with at least an understanding of how government works and foreign affairs as opposed to a con artist who's greatest skill is self-promotion. Trump is a silver spooned Richie Rich who's greatest attribute (his wealth) is largely the result of his already wealthy father. How working class people fell for the con is beyond me other than Trump brilliantly catering to this underground dark side of Americans most wanted to pretend no longer existed.

I generally feel Trump supporters fall into one of two categories: 1) people who know exactly what he is but don't care as long as they get their tax cuts and he drops the hammer on people who aren't them or 2) people who don't look beyond slogans and tweets and fell for the con that he is actually what he's projecting himself to be, a 2017 version of the Fonz from the show Happy Days. Everything about the guy is phony but people want to believe he can bang his fist on the jukebox and music automatically plays.

fishmike wrote:

Rookie wrote:

fishmike wrote:

gr33d wrote:

Rookie wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Rookie wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Rookie wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Rookie wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Rookie wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Rookie wrote:In answer to the Op's thread title. I couldn't stomach voting for either presidential candidate but I tried to remain causiously optomistic on Trump. Now, I just hope we can survive his presidency

My questions would be optimistic based on what? What qualities did Trump display in his past that indicated he could be a good president? The honest answer for most folks is they voted for him because he wasn't Hillary.

why do you feel qualified to answer honestly for most folks. Classic overeach here thinking your own opinion is the only one that is correct.

Both candidates suffered from lack of charector. I won't elaborate since you can answer that yourself if you care to even try and be open mided. Trump is easily the dumbest guy in the room. Bush II atleast had moral values and depended on those around him to advise, even if he chose poorly occasionally on whom to listen to. He atleast always meant well even though he was poorly suited for the job.

Trump is still Trump and has more of a wall street morality. I guess my hope was that he could grow into the job but he won't ever shut up long enough to listen and learn from those around him who are smarter, better educated in the world and more experienced. This guy truly has serious issues.

There really is no point in discussing Hillary since she is not President and never will be. The old guard of the DNC will over time be ousted and replaced with new younger, highly educated and more progressive young people. Lets just hope we all survive long enough to seee it happen.

I just don't understand the basis for "optimism?"

If someone said they thought both Hillary and Trump would be horrible but they thought Trump would be the less horrible of the two, whether I agree or not I could at least understand the rationale. But anybody who says they were "optimistic" that Trump wasn't going to be a train wreck, I'm still waiting for a rational explanation to justify that thought process. You can accuse me of not being "open minded" but I think that's just a camouflage to deflect not having a reasonable answer to the question.

To bring this back to sports, it's like expecting Charles Oakley in the latter stages of his career to begin playing like Charles Barkley. He couldn't do it when he was young, suddenly he's gonna do it when he's old? Trump just continued to do what he's has done best throughout his whole life, conning people. I'm not sure if you're a New Yorker, but if there's any group of people who shouldn't have fallen for the con it's a New Yorker. We know Trump better and for longer than anybody in the world.

What are you basing your knowledge of Trump on, page 6 of the post or personal experience from direct dealings? Also, how do you know Hillary? Answer me that mr new yalkah.

Maybe we can get to follow up questions if you would answer my initial question. What did Trump ever do prior to running for president that would make someone optimistic he would be an effective president and grow into the position? It's totally fine to admit blind optimism. I would just love to hear something tangible.

Ok so this is just an internet forum circle jerk, got it.

Translation: you can't explain why you were "optimistic" about Trump as president. Perhaps you should've given this more thought before casting your voting regardless of who you ultimately ended up supporting.

You're still over reaching, claiming to speak for others to make your argument in some childish internet forum victory lap now. Stop trolling and get into a conversation. Take a position, make an informed argument or just say something worth debating. Express a concern relevant to current events. Just saying 'Trump sucks, I told you so' isn't a position worthy of discussing. Trump is dangerous, so why? Just look at Gustavballer's post above. In one paragraph he spoke volumes. He consolidated all of his thoughts into one coherent paragraph we can all understand and it is clear he could say a whole lot more if he felt like it. You my friend have said nothing, you are just trolling

Dude, I spent darn near a 7-8 months debating why Trump would be a horrible president. It's over, he's in office. No use debating a campaign that already took place.

But 7 months in I think it's very reasonable to ask the people responsible for this presidency to explain why they put the country in this situation. Why you take offense to such a simple question is revealing. I didn't help put Trump in office so I have nothing to explain.

You said you were "optimistic" about a Trump presidency but can't reference a single tangible point to justify your optimism. Pretty simple question. Not sure why it's like pulling teeth to get you to explain what Trump did before or during his campaign that made you "optimistic" about him being president. I'm not asking your to dissect his agenda or actions.

I didn't think asking someone to explain their own statement was so difficult.

First off, like I said orininally I did not vote for Trump so you can get off of that.

I never thought he would get the nomination. I was baffled by his daily stupidity and his increasing popularity. I was certain eventually many things would come out under the scrutiny of a long campaign and he would go down in flames, but they didn't and he didn't.

Towards the end of the race my thinking changed more to 'well he's an idiot but alot of his talking points are important for our country'. Maybe he won't completely screw it up.

When I say cautiously optomistic I mean that he would have to become less extreme to get anything accomplished, more Presidential.

And then there's I'm an American so I will support my president, bitching about it won't change anything.

This guy though, he is worse then a disaster, he is dangerous.

I've heard quite a bit in the debate on both sides...

One of the many talking points for Trump supporters has been; we haven't seen enough progress in the last 20 years by experienced politicians. Perhaps it's time for a change?

Right time, maybe the wrong guy... But I get it and some of his talking points resonated with middle and lower class America, as well as others.

Ridiculous insurance premiums, border security, lost jobs and stagnant wages, drain the swamp, etc... He also positioned himself well in the polls by backing our military and supporting law enforcement.

He ran against a candidate who's blamed for killing soldiers, having a scummy husband, mishandling classified information and being generally perceived as corrupt/untrustworthy.

Everyone knew Trumps flaws by the time this was over and some of you guys still don't get it. It wasn't a matter of being conned be Trump, it was a matter of not being conned by another Clinton.

this is just not right, because it implies a similar outcome with both candidates, which would not have been the case.

Trump ran on a campaign that McDonalds was bad, failing, disgusting and terrible for you. That part I agree with. But he wasnt offering Whoppers instead. He was offering cat food. Now you get comments like Rookie above saying this is just an I told you so. Its not really the case. Everyone knew Trump's flaws? Not really. They just knew they were sticking it too McDonalds and werent really banking on how nasty the cat food was going to be to eat. Some people knew he was selling cat food all along and no matter how you dressed it up it was going to taste nasty. Guess what.. it tastes nasty.

The best outcome would have been for Hillary to be POTUS. It would have been organized and non embarrassing if nothing else. It also most likely would have been a 4 year and done term. Failing behind Trump would be been a real blow to that party and forced the GOP to do what the Dems are doing now, rethink and remake what you are all about.

Now we ALL have to eat cat food. The best part is when guys like Guns come around tell us how good the cat food tastes. This will end in war for the US. We will attack NKorea or rattle some can loud enough to distract.

Cat food.

Dissagree. The best outcome would have been for neither of them (Hillary or Trump) to become POTUS.

Right. So instead of McDonalds or cat food you opt to starve to death. Thanks for playing.

I would choose a healthier diet myself. Asking me to choose between McDonalds or cat food isn't much of a choice. Neither will nourish the mind, body or soul.

By Karen Freifeld | NEW YORK
(Reuters) - Grand jury subpoenas have been issued in connection with the June 2016 meeting between Donald Trump Jr., a Russian lawyer and others, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters on Thursday.

The sources also said special counsel Robert Mueller had convened a grand jury in Washington to investigate allegations of Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections

GustavBahler wrote:Picking up steam....

By Karen Freifeld | NEW YORK
(Reuters) - Grand jury subpoenas have been issued in connection with the June 2016 meeting between Donald Trump Jr., a Russian lawyer and others, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters on Thursday.

The sources also said special counsel Robert Mueller had convened a grand jury in Washington to investigate allegations of Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections

Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up!

I do find it hilarious when he cries about fake news and it being a witch hunt when he is the king of witch hunts and fake news- the whole Obama birth certificate thing, the Hilary emails, the 'Obama spied on me and I have proof which I won't share'.

smackeddog wrote:Just in case there were any people still thinking Trump is just acting- here is the proof that he is genuinely THAT dumb:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/08/australias-pm-slowly-realizes-trump-is-a-complete-idiot.html

here's a secretly recorded video of it:

OMG - that transcript is hilarious. Make America Dumb Again. Forget critical thinking, understanding basic English is a stretch goal for President Chump

smackeddog wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Picking up steam....

By Karen Freifeld | NEW YORK
(Reuters) - Grand jury subpoenas have been issued in connection with the June 2016 meeting between Donald Trump Jr., a Russian lawyer and others, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters on Thursday.

The sources also said special counsel Robert Mueller had convened a grand jury in Washington to investigate allegations of Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections

Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up!

I do find it hilarious when he cries about fake news and it being a witch hunt when he is the king of witch hunts and fake news- the whole Obama birth certificate thing, the Hilary emails, the 'Obama spied on me and I have proof which I won't share'.

meloshouldgo wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Just in case there were any people still thinking Trump is just acting- here is the proof that he is genuinely THAT dumb:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/08/australias-pm-slowly-realizes-trump-is-a-complete-idiot.html

here's a secretly recorded video of it:

OMG - that transcript is hilarious. Make America Dumb Again. Forget critical thinking, understanding basic English is a stretch goal for President Chump

Yet another bias article, what a surprise.

So because Australia has laws it would like to enforce (not allowing refugees via boat)- the alternative (or "deal" struck by Obama) is the US now accepting responsibility? How exactly is this our problem and why would we volunteer to once again take on another countries issues?

We can't even address our own laws relating to immigration/refugees without it being a headache...