As many of you probably know, Donald Trump wants to become president. And, unfortunately, he's doing quite well. Which is worrying, because he's a vile, offensive psychopath. And that's something not even his supporters can dispute. But what really confuses me isn't why people are voting for him, it's why they think it'll benefit them.
I see a lot of people online saying "Donald Trump is gud businessy men, he fix Uhmerica now" and blithely assuming that his wealth will translate into economic success for the USA in general. The problem is... that's not really true. It's a pretty widely-accepted fact that treating people horribly is a fast-track to financial success.
Seeing the problem here? Is that really who you want in charge?
Apparently, it is for Trump's supporters. Why? Because they think it won't affect them. It's like assuming a burglar won't rob you because you picked everyone else's locks for him. It's narcissistic. And yes, this applies to the wall as well. Everyone seems to assume that the costs of the wall won't affect them, that it's going to be fine because Mexico will pay (lolno).
It's stupid. It's thinking that despite Trump's history of bankruptcies, screwing people over and the usual businessy sort of thing, he's going to do what he did for himself, only for America. He won't. He'll do what he did for himself, for himself again, only more so. Also, a wall? Really? Have you heard of "tunnels"?
This angry rant was brought to you by sleep deprivation.
That someone who was affiliated with the CIA. Who was then murdered soon after he assassinated JFK. Suspicious much?
You do know what "republic" means, don't you?
yes I do.
a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch
but what we really have as i said is an oligarchy.
Not enough to push under the rug. Now: What is your proposed alternative?
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch
but what we really have as i said is an oligarchy.
Therefore, you do not understand the meaning of the term "oligarchy". Otherwise, you would realize that the terms are not mutually exclusive.
[something quoted out of context from a person of no actual authority on the matter]
It would seem that you have not yet thought out any kind of solution to the present situation. That's okay, I can wait.
Oswald was a former U.S. Marine who defected to the Soviet Union in October 1959. He lived in the Soviet Union until June 1962, at which time he returned to the United States. Oswald was initially arrested for the murder of police officer J. D. Tippit, who was killed on a Dallas street approximately 45 minutes after President Kennedy was shot. Oswald would later be charged with the murder of President Kennedy as well but denied shooting anybody, claiming he was a patsy.[1][2] Two days later, while being transferred from police headquarters to the county jail, Oswald was shot and mortally wounded by Dallas nightclub owner Jack Ruby in full view of television cameras broadcasting live.
if you really dive into all of this. it seems (nothing conclusive) that Oswald was working with the CIA during his time in the USSR( his own mother thought he was working with the CIA)
Therefore, you do not understand the meaning of the term "oligarchy". Otherwise, you would realize that the terms are not mutually exclusive.
They pretty much are. A republic implies that the populace has control over who are the elected officials are, and an oligarchy means the populace doesn't have any influence. So you can argue that you can have a republic that is controlled by and oligarchy, but that's not really a republic.
Well **** if I had a Solution to all the world's problems i probably wouldn't be posting in an armor games forum. But patient bear is pretty bad ***.
They pretty much are. A republic implies that the populace has control over who are the elected officials are, and an oligarchy means the populace doesn't have any influence. So you can argue that you can have a republic that is controlled by and oligarchy, but that's not really a republic.
An oligarchy can be democratically elected. This is technically what the electoral college is; a small controlling group elected by the parties of each state, who themselves were elected by the populace. Apparently it's lost much of its power due to recent court rulings, though.
So what the Republicans have to choose from are a racist who wants mass deportation (Trump), a traitor (Rubio) bought by America's no. 1 public enemy (the Koch brothers), and Cruz who's friend with those Evangelical Christian maniacs aka the American ISIS who wants to exterminate every gay and lesbian in the country.
I think he's being underestimated. Think about it. Here's a guy who says he'll build a wall - and a wall is incredibly racist against Hispanics. But he's still popular. So something is going on.
I think people often accuse conservatives of being racist nut jobs, but sometimes you have to dig deeper into a candidate's past, or examine their policies more carefully.
Trump has many supporters not because ALL of them are racist, gun-totting, vitriolic, jingoistic conservatives. Some of them are, the ones who need an anger outlet, who want to channel their despair into the following of a strong leader who promises to make America great.
But he appeals to an audience that is more far spanning then that. Whilst he's not going to endear himself to Muslims for sure, his supporters come from a spectrum. He used to be a Republican, then a Democrat, then an Independant, then a Republican. So he's built a base for himself. His views tend to flip-flop alot.
Honestly I don't think the man's racist at all. He's just doing it to whip up support from frightened people.
So I don't detest him blindly, but I am still very curious as to how it'll pan out.
Trump has many supporters not because ALL of them are racist, gun-totting, vitriolic, jingoistic conservatives. Some of them are, the ones who need an anger outlet, who want to channel their despair into the following of a strong leader who promises to make America great.
Many of his supporters are fed up with the rich criminals who control the Republican party and a big part of the Democratic one as well.
Even though I don't care about the guy and his gigantic ego, I enjoy watching him insulting everyone from both parties and spit on the establishment.
I still have my doubts about him becoming the Republican candidate in the coming elections because the criminals who own the Congress won't allow Trump to win because they won't be able to use him as a puppet.
But really tho? How can he even hope to win? US citizens can't be that desperate. Who is he running against? Wait what? Hillary Clinton? Really? Again? Obama seems like a saint now.
It seems we only have a few choices in the upcoming election. Elect an arrogant, racist, deluded tycoon who will ruin the economy, all foreign relationships, and the livelihoods of every citizen (Donald Trump). Elect a woman who is so corrupt that she could be a doppelganger for President Nixon (Hilary Clinton). Vote for a republican (every single republican running is an unbelievably huge moron. The pyramids were used as grain silos, we should monitor mosques, etc.)
Or we could vote for another Democrat that isn't Hilary. Bernie Sanders comes to mind, he wants nothing to do with fighting ISIS, and he wants true income equality. I mean if you want the economy to improve, he's your guy. He even supports gun rights for those conservatives out there. (Because in Vermont the only gun violence is against deer). Sure, he's a socialist hippie, but he sincerely wants to make the United States a better place, not just fill his pockets with money like Hilary and Trump.
It just makes me think more about democracy being the least bad choice we have regarding political systems. Half the time the politicians are just arguing to get voted into office, the other half, they're trying to govern, but end up hamstrung with infighting.
Not a complete fan of Sanders. Same like how I don't fancy really extreme politicians. Sanders makes big business sound like the devil; they should be cut down, but they're not all complete cancers.
At least he is not a pathological liar like Hillary. Trump or Cruz are the only candidates that might give us REAL hope and change.
Hillary Clinton is the MOST corrupt politician in the history of the United States and that is saying a lot since politicians are viewed as corrupt in general.
