first things first, you should know about what you're talking about if you decide to enter an arguement. Nobody survives a battlefield without a weapon.
and funsubstance, correct me if I'm wrong, but people find Trump disagreeable because of his:
childish way of speaking (especially when criticizing or complaining)
his active attempts to stop investigators from doing their job
complexion (hence the orange man term)
his outstanding debt and tax fraud?
his outlandish plan to build a wall
people's low confidence in him to take the right actions when dealing internationally
his tendency to claim things that are false
covfefe
his sexual misconduct allegations
I would add the fact that he is utterly ignorant and too ? proud / stupid ? to believe competent people when they disagree with his childish views. Latest example : he is somehow convinced that China is paying the tarrifs he imposed when every economist will tell you that those tarifs are reflected in an increase cost of chinese consummer goods which is relegated to the american consummer.
I'm not american, but that's what would annoy me most : the man's morale could be discutable, if he at least was competent instead of screwing his country over...
Eloquently said @under_fire. If I may? Trump is alleged to have conducted himself illegally or at least immorally in business, personal finances, how he attained his office, and many other fields. He is surrounded by literal criminals in his “inner circle” of politics and business, and even where no specific wrong doing can be charged most agree that many of his dealings are questionable or unethical. He not only has harassment allegations, but there is a strong case he paid hush money from illegal funds on the issue.
He’s often held as dishonest and manipulative. He’s declared bankruptcy many times, was given a massive amount of wealth by his father and lost it, and repeatedly put his name to or entered deals which promised middle class investors give opportunities, and then failed completely or somehow he got out and made profit right before a string of them failed. Not only have his closest friends and associates been accused or convicted of crimes, but many business ventures he’s been associated with have been as well- so many do not think it’s a coincidence where he goes there is a cloud of corruption he is completely innocent of, but that instead he is very good at cover himself and hiding evidence of wrong doing, and appointing “fall guys” who actual do the things you can be criminally charged with while maintaining some form of “plausible deniability” that keeps him above legal action.
He tried to sponsor state events as his personally owned resort that requires an astronomical “membership” fee just to visit, which would then be paid for each dignitary in attendance by US tax payers. He is often considered a bully, a blow hard with a huge ego, and his behavior and actions are considered by many an embarrassment to the office he holds and not conduct befitting the prime representative of the United States.
His frequent misrepresentations, contradictions, outright lies or misdirection, or total lack of preparation, research, or knowledge on subjects he aims to influence- of himself and established fact also play in with his often ineloquent manner of conduct and speech as well. Choice quotes like an opposition to alternative energy like windmills because the “noise causes cancer...” his obvious limited grasp of issues like science and history, diplomacy, etc.
There’s also his generally nationalist or isolationist views and policies which many have issue with as well, his stance and actions with immigration and various issues of rights for women, LGBTQ+, etc. His promises of relief for middle class middle Americans and “small town blue collar” workers mimicking the “joe 6 pack” aims of the tea party, his general thoughts and attitudes that the rules that he would apply to others do not apply to him, or that no rules do..
Such as his early attempts to circumvent the democratic process and balance of power by forcing through his parties medical bill, his threats to declare a state of emergency in order to again seize unilateral veto and approval powers without oversight of congress, the senate, or democratic process, in order to get his way, and of course more recently- the election of a Supreme Court judge so close to a major election, when he himself and his party fought against allowing the former president to do the same so close to re election. It’s a long list.
Some of his statements towards women etc, his short sighted and simple minded policies to try and create “blue collar” jobs in America by pissing off foreign governments and restricting trade- in effect raising costs for many American made products and making finished goods less competitive, his repeated and dogged refusal to stand up for individual rights or the same people he promised to lookout for... the fact that he courted and largely won on the support of alt right and “neo Nazi” or white supremicist votes also makes many feel uneasy as there is a clear alignment between certain ideologies there.
There’s the frequent turn over of White House staff, the adoption of a stance of “fake news” “alternative facts” denial of sciences, selective bias, and censorship and control of media....
long long list. Pick a few and google up. But yeah- a lot of the hate he gets is because “Trumk bad.” Some People would blame Herpes or Tornados on him if they could. He’s not a devil as far as I know, just a man, a flawed man like any- but who some say is more flawed than most, and many say is too flawed to be president.
Oh- and like any president (it’s part of the job), he catches blame for things that are done by other people in his party, things that are inherited from previous administrations, things that no human however great a leader could actually control, and things that are inherent inadequacies in pre exists systems, staff, and infrastructure which have nothing to do with him except that he’s the “guy at the top” but those things are handled by people far below his level and the “top guy” usually delegates details to those responsible for those things and doesn’t make every little decision. Also- all politicians owe things and have to do certain things to get support for things they want to do.
That's a good point, but it doesn't really explain all of the other stuff you mentioned about him. IMO, he's not fit to be president, or in a leadership role anywhere. He has little to none of the qualifications that I would expect someone as important as the figurehead of the most famous country on Earth would have. Thanks for the info @guest_ I learned stuff today.
So if that was TL:DR- there are LOTS of legitimate reasons to criticize the man, the brand, and the administration that is Trump. LOTS. So making stuff up or bashing him because that’s “cool” or to push some agenda- it’s counter productive and lazy. Just watch a few speeches and read a few articles or watch interviews of the man- or just read his tweets- and you can find plenty of reasons to criticize him- but he’s also human, a politician, and has done some things that are good, so credit must be given where do, even if good and bad don’t erase each other, the sum total as we see it kind of determines an informed opinion about who a person is. But don’t jump on the “hate” bandwagon to fit in- find your own informed opinion.
@under_fire- my pleasure. In my personal opinion, the man is out for himself and always has been. The one person who seems to do any type of prospering in a deal with Donald Trump is Donald Trump. People want to believe that attitude will translate to a “trickle down” for them- ask the investors in his timeshares or other ventures how that “trickle down” worked out when the venture folded and he walked away bragging? He’s repeatedly used the presidency as a platform for or to attempt his own betterment and lifestyle, and I do not consider him a “leader” but I do think he has a talent for getting people to do what he wants them too. He’s a “survivor,” and survivors make poor leaders usually because you can always count on a survivor to be the last one standing no matter what or who that costs- the man will endured the world crumbled around him- it’s his gift and it makes people assume he can or will share that with them.
But that’s the thing- survivors only have need. They need you or they don’t, and anyone and anything is only useful until it isn’t, and the moment a former asset becomes a liability they escape before the ship sinks. I doubt this is the dark chapter of history people make it out to be. Even Nixon did some good. He was a survivor and opportunist too- and if it served his needs he would do seemingly noble things as well. So I think we are dealing more with a Nixon situation in which he won’t be remembered as one of the worst presidents, and this won’t be remembered as a truly horrible era to live through as some think- but likely his presidency will be remembered most for scandal and division.
Of course- that can work in his favor too- and survivors know how to seize opportunity from failure. There’s good odds that he won’t be remembered for the war he didn’t start but ran through his term, or even for many other things good or bad- but that the details of events in this administration will be glossed over because all people will focus on were the media circuses and surrounding legal battles and investigations, the discord between groups of people and the division- and so while many of his goods will be overlooked, so too will lost of his wrongs.
In the great sea of history, quotes like the windmill one and grab her by the p and all that are topical and will likely fade from mass consciousness over time- for many they already have and some happened just months ago. And if we get a war- a big war- especially one we win while he’s in office- that will more likely be the legacy to history. A “hard talking badass” like Churchill who wasn’t “PC” and would do what needed done. Without WW2 Churchill, if so remembered, likely would have been remembered as only “that one prick...” so, we shall see. But I’m hoping for pretty much anyone else in the next election because regardless of the man- I’m tired of what his presence has brought to media and general culture.
All men are “bad” and all are “good.” There isn’t anyone in accepted historical record we can point to and say they were completely good or bad. Not all people are well suited for all things either regardless of being “good” or “bad.” The best accountant in the world would likely not be the person you want to do your open heart surgery- does that make them “bad?” No. Just well suited for one thing and not another. But if you want to view the world in binary terms that’s your business. It’s a primitive human instinct to form ideas like “your with me or against me” without nuance in between. My hope is that someday we can overcome these primitive drives, but that day isn’t looking close.
I'm just jumping in to tell Underfire, that there's been a few people to survive on the battle fields , medics,chaplains, conscientious observers,ect. Not getting into an argument or anything, just wanted to point that out. Plus throw in a , Hi Guest. lol
guest, you are effective if not longwinded at communication, and you bring up a good point. trump's position of power makes him more likely to magnify any blunders he makes, and as you pointed out, he makes a lot of them.
and popsy, you also have a point. Maybe arena. No one survives an arena without a weapon.
Signs that you’re opinion should be strongly valued and considered educated:
- using the word: “libtard”
Oh wait. No. No. Generally quite the opposite. In fact... of one is accusing another of indoctrination by media and blindly following social trends of a subclass- perhaps one should refrain from outing themselves as the same by using words rooted in media indoctrination and the blind following of a “tribal group”? Just a thought. Kinda like calling out a plagiarist by using a notable quote on plagiarism and passing it off as your original quote. There’s a certain shameful joy in the lack of self awareness.
Hey @guest_, you by any chance think that the "OK" hand gesture is a white supremacy sign too? Because the left's logic in this regard seems remarkably the same. There are tribal dumbasses on both sides, so dismissing everyone using the term is basically the same as calling someone or something fascist these days. The word lost any colloquial meaning it had, and is just a slur at this point. Except the leftists call everyone on the right fascist, and the right calls them libtards or sjws. Productive discussion, ain't it?
If you're going dismiss people who call out morons on your own side as just the other side of the autism spectrum, you're not making yourself look any better. There is a reason why the modern left is full of commies, while actual neo-nazis have basically vanished. Because the right weeds out nutjobs, and the left doesn't.
I yearn for a time when we get back to governments that are run by people, not "the left" and "the right". It's so easy to just dismiss people's ideas because of those labels, and they are just so damn vague. Even above, vitklim claim that "the right weeds out nutjobs", like what the hell does that mean? Who's "the right?" What "nutjobs" have they weeded out exactly? Who's "the left" and what "commies" are they composed of? OOP is an idiot because he tried to argue without any facts, original commenter is an idiot because he jumped immediately to criticism instead of answering the damn question, guest brought up a good point that calling people libtards is stupid, and isnt dismissing anyone, s/he's pointing out the fact that using an insult like that to cheapen an opinion is cowardly and unproductive, and vitklim also brings up a good point that people with differing opinions both use cheapening words, and it's important to recognize when they are used. but "commies" is just as bad.
For real, OP wanted to learn something, and if anyone wanted to disagree with him, they could have said, "actually, Trump is great! Here's why:" or "I see your point, trump has done:... but he's also" instead of hurrdurr stupid libtard. It's lazy and arrogant.
Hey, I can clear this up for you if you want. The "right" I define as a combination of centre-right and conservative views, which I would say involve classical liberalism. The "nutjobs" are the neo-nazis, the alt-right, white identitarians, ethnostatists and anarchists. They are nowhere in the perview of the general political sphere, and are secluded in their own online spaces that keep shrinking. Richard Spencer, Jared Taylor, all these kinds of people are getting barely hundreds of views online, and nobody takes them seriously.
Next up, the "left" - And this has to be broken down, because the left used to be social-liberals and moderate progressives. Then they evolved into Neo-liberals, the corporate cesspool, basically the modern Democrats.
And then, in the past 10-20 years, other groups started popping up on the left and taking over the spotlight. Socialists, feminists, progressives, black identitarians (such as BLM), Antifa, started taking over the public dialogue, and disenfranchised all the moderate left-wing people who used to be mainstream. And because these people are basically forming their own ideological block now, and the oldschool left-wingers cannot extinguish them, they are making traditional liberals look awful. And nobody on the left is denouncing them. I can elaborate on this further if you want.
Next up, the "commies". That's what they are. Bernie Sanders ffs literally called himself a democratic socialist. Antifa is essentially a bunch of marxists who want to create a totalitarian system that would control everyone, and boy does that sound familiar.
.
I agree that the comment in the OP was not useful or wise, but the person wasn't even trying to have a discussion and was just being a dick.
I agree with a lot of your comments. I am an independent. I hate the party system, it was never ment to be. I think it was Jackson(could be wrong) that never wanted party politics or a federal debt. The bullshit pulled on both sides is out of hand. ANTIFA ,SJW , blacklives matter, shit ,they're making me lean towards Republican and after "weapons of mass distruction " I never thought I would vote,Republican again. Both sides suck, and the people are the victims.
@vitklim- sometimes an OK sign is just an OK sign. Sometimes a person raises their hand flat in front of them or is in a state of movement that a picture st an exact moment that one frame is captured- and sometimes people who know this might also use it as a way to be subversive. Fuck if I know or really care. I don’t have a political party. At all. I don’t believe in a 2 party system and I don’t believe in parties at all- there would need to be a million parties to reflect all combinations of values and views.
As I say above- I judge people as people. I judge them on what they do and say, but keep in mind that I’m not present for every moment of their life and things can be taken out of context. I am also aware that everyone can and does make mistakes or misspeaks. When one does so grossly and constantly though- they do tend to lose the benefit of the doubt and I just consider they are out of their element. That doesn’t mean they are not good within their element, just that they have growth to do in certain areas. I don’t like the man, I don’t think I’d enjoy hanging out with him or want him as a friend- but I can not like a person and still respect what they do or are capable of.
As I again, say above, he’s done some good things in my view. He has some ideas or feelings that I can understand and think are overall good ones, but I cannot agree with many of the ways he acts on those feelings or thinks is the best way to achieve certain goals. But I spoke facts- plain facts to a question asked. Did he not say the noise from windmills causes cancer? Is that something that science will back him up on? Are not a good deal of his current and former associates and businesses under investigation or conviction? Does he not have angry past investors who lost out on deals with him? When did facts become propaganda? I even go so far as to point out that many of these facts need to be viewed in context and say that people should do more research themselves to gain that context, and that many complaints against him apply to most people in power- so research and facts are leftist now in your view?
and funsubstance, correct me if I'm wrong, but people find Trump disagreeable because of his:
childish way of speaking (especially when criticizing or complaining)
his active attempts to stop investigators from doing their job
complexion (hence the orange man term)
his outstanding debt and tax fraud?
his outlandish plan to build a wall
people's low confidence in him to take the right actions when dealing internationally
his tendency to claim things that are false
covfefe
his sexual misconduct allegations
I'm not american, but that's what would annoy me most : the man's morale could be discutable, if he at least was competent instead of screwing his country over...
long long list. Pick a few and google up. But yeah- a lot of the hate he gets is because “Trumk bad.” Some People would blame Herpes or Tornados on him if they could. He’s not a devil as far as I know, just a man, a flawed man like any- but who some say is more flawed than most, and many say is too flawed to be president.
and popsy, you also have a point. Maybe arena. No one survives an arena without a weapon.
- using the word: “libtard”
Oh wait. No. No. Generally quite the opposite. In fact... of one is accusing another of indoctrination by media and blindly following social trends of a subclass- perhaps one should refrain from outing themselves as the same by using words rooted in media indoctrination and the blind following of a “tribal group”? Just a thought. Kinda like calling out a plagiarist by using a notable quote on plagiarism and passing it off as your original quote. There’s a certain shameful joy in the lack of self awareness.
If you're going dismiss people who call out morons on your own side as just the other side of the autism spectrum, you're not making yourself look any better. There is a reason why the modern left is full of commies, while actual neo-nazis have basically vanished. Because the right weeds out nutjobs, and the left doesn't.
Next up, the "left" - And this has to be broken down, because the left used to be social-liberals and moderate progressives. Then they evolved into Neo-liberals, the corporate cesspool, basically the modern Democrats.
Next up, the "commies". That's what they are. Bernie Sanders ffs literally called himself a democratic socialist. Antifa is essentially a bunch of marxists who want to create a totalitarian system that would control everyone, and boy does that sound familiar.
.
I agree that the comment in the OP was not useful or wise, but the person wasn't even trying to have a discussion and was just being a dick.