With All the Information out, Do you believe Trump should be President again?

So the discussion is changing from which party is worse, to "My party is good, yours ba'a'a'a'd" Sorry, but I don't tow a party line and you will not get the tired debate you are used to. (I worship the only true god, My party is the good one, etc)

1. Healthcare is better for the corporations and big pharma. Can you make the case that Americans are healthier? No, Americans are fatter and sicker than ever. The product being sold as "health care" is nothing more than rewarding big companies for their campaign contributions with access to tax money.
2. You may have some points on this issue, but overall, consumers are worse off with inflation after politicians dilute value with their irresponsible spending. Both parties do it, dems are just a little worse.
3. CA is the dems petri dish and is home to some of the most toxic cities and beaches. The regulations that send manufacturing to China pollute the environment far more than if we just left it here. The "save the planet" dems commute in their single occupancy vehicles and stop for some drive thru to consume some animal products that produce more greenhouse gases than cars.
4. This is a refreshing change from the standard racist chants coming from the left. You are correct and I admire your ability to go against your party's grain.
5. Are you referring to the soft on crime policies that have increased crime? I strongly oppose drug laws and putting people in the "system" for victimless crimes, but you will not be able to make a case that society is better off under Dem policies. (Unless, of course, you are referring to the criminals. They do enjoy an advantage in Dem controlled cities.
6. Same response as #4. Dems still owe reparations for slavery, but this is a good start.
7. Labor protections is from a position of good intentions. Workers should never have to work in an unsafe environment and risk their health. Today, it is used for extortion and the workers have become political pawns. Its about money and political power.

I will give you credit for any benefit to society, but it is rarely the result of what government does. It is more about government staying out of our business. If someone wants to smoke a plant or marry the same sex, no government interference should be tolerated. Of course, dems push their own brand of overreach.

Results speak for themselves and while both parties are awful, dems are just a little worse.

 

He's saying we forced Putin to invade. Yes, he's on Russia's side, just as he had been before. You have yet to reference ANY public statement or action from Trump, meanwhile, I've referenced several. You say I need to do better than "oh but he called Putin smart!" or "he wanted to build hotels in Russia!" when I stated NEITHER of those things and you have FAILED ENTIRELY to address ANY of Trump's actions with regards to Ukraine and Russia. I am not responsible for your refusal to read. Come back when you are willing and capable of doing so.

 

You work to change the election laws to prevent voter fraud. So far as the 2020 election is concerned, constantly harping about who you were robbed and should be reversed will lose you votes.

I would refer you to the 1824 election when Andrew Jackson lost to John Quincy Adams. Jackson came in first in the general election but failed to the required majority in the Electoral College. That threw the election into the House of Representatives. There Henry Clay, who had come in fourth in the general election and was out of the running, probably engineered a win for Adams. Clay was the Speaker of the House and had a lot of influence.

When Adams appointed Clay to be Secretary of State, which was a stepping stone to the presidency at that time, Jackson and his supporters cried, "foul!" The charged that there had been "a corrupt bargain" between Clay and Adams. "Corrupt Bargain" became their battle cry for the 1828 election, which Jackson won handily.

 

I'll ignore your inane ranting and just remind you that I never said anything about the unconstitutionality of the Jan 6 committee per se.

 

What a revolting idea!!!

 

Trump certainly thinks so.

 

not to mention their 6+ years of full out attempt to overturn the 2016 election and overthrow a president.

 

Trump and the rest of the world capitulated with Crimea. That was a mistake shared by everyone. Public states? You mean like the several clips I'v posted where Trump condemns Europe getting into energy dependance on Russia? Or Calling Russia an expansionist regime? Demanding NATO to strengthen itself by increasing spending?

Saying that Russia wouldn't invade under his watch?

Saying that Putin needs to stay out of US elections?

Crimea wouldn't have happened under his watch?

I think I'll stay awhile.

 

By the way, you are the one that changed the subject. This was your post I was responding to:

"Dems cause more damage than Reps. I defended my position with facts and data. You want to make this about the salesmen when its about the product they're selling. Of the two elderly sex offenders we are discussing here today, Bidens product is more inferior than Trumps."

You brought up the parties, not me.

 

As opposed to Hillary saying saying they’re a basket of deplorables? (Racists, xenophobes, sexists, Islamiphoves, misogynists)
You’re comparing calling half of a voting bloc a basket of deplorables to the gullible? Really???

Apples to oranges

 

I did not change the subject; results are the subject.

I never said inflation is the Dems fault. Both parties spend like thieves with stolen credit cards and dilute the value of the dollar. I said Dems are worse.

I use CA as an example because it is a preview of what to expect under dem control. Dems never controlled the country, but they do enjoy control in CA. Trump never had a voice here!

Discussing the damage politicians cause with devout partisans always ends up with the logical fallacies you resorted to because they only see the damage from the other side.

Like you, these Republicans believe their party helps society. If so many people can believe they are right, while being wrong, couldn't you be one of them?

I will give you credit for any positives, like legal pot, marriage equality, etc. I will also give you credit for the damage Reps cause. The total sum of our discussion will still end up the same:

Dem control combined with high taxes and abundant resources equals lower quality of life for those dems claim to care about. I grew up here and see the damage firsthand.
.

 

Haven’t read it but it sounds interesting. I still am going to say she was stupid for calling half of Trump’s base a basket of deplorables. It sure didn’t help her win the election.

 

Suppose the King of England instead of the King of Facebook bought into the election infrastructure and swung the swing states, would we still be America?

 

I don't exactly understand your question. The life history of King Charles III has been that of a left wing fool who has no idea how any sort of economic system works, capitalist or socialist. His main mission in life has been to father children so that the House of Winsor can keep the British crown.

 

Quality of life, eh?

I think that YOU (and Republicans) will be surprised here

SUMMARY OF 23 QUALITY OF LIFE INDICATORS — ARE RED OR BLUE STATES BETTER?

 

Just the facts.

 

Absolutely!!!
This is what I can’t stand about them the most. In almost everything they say and do they have no self awareness as to their own hypocrisy and double standards. If they only lived up to what they expect from others. I’ve come to the conclusion that they have no integrity at all and will say and do anything it takes to advance the Democratic Party’s quest for power.

 

No surprise here. If I were towing a party line, I would post from sites saying my party "won". Thats the difference between science and politics. A true scientists works to disprove their conclusions. I show California dead last on quality of life.

Results your party is producing makes trump look better. Personally, I voted for Jo.

 

I'll agree with that; it was a dumb mistake- she let her on-stage character slip for moment, and the real Hillary spoke up.
The book (Clinton Cash, author Peter Schweizer) covers a lot of things very successfully kept out of the spotlight. Also speaks to Hillary's real disposition, and this is a person who is nothing like the facade she maintains quite well. Some examples comes from the secret service and military details that protect them. The report quotes one secret service agent passing Hillary in the hall and saying "Good morning ma'am". Response- "F- -k off". Another statement- "If you see me coming, duck in a doorway and stay out of my sight". Military staff told to wear suits, because uniforms offend her. Numerous things like this.
Zero respect or gratitude in private. That's the least of it.

 

Shows the elitist entitlement some of us have studied through the years. I’ve never liked her though I voted for her husband.
She proved to be a phony while campaigning. When I was a Democrat I never bought the idea that she was a champion for women. Good she lets it out of the bag every so often, so people can see the real her.

 

This language of yours, suggests that your offer is disingenuously made. Only a trial, in which a defense has had a chance to cross-examine witnesses, and put forth counter narratives, could possibly determine someone's guilt, beyond any reasonable doubt. That is a different threshold, than there existing compelling evidence of a crime. Or is it now your stated position that no one should be brought to trial-- or even investigated?-- until after they have already been found guilty, by a jury/court trial?

Catch-22, much?



P.S.-- Your appearance of sincerity is only hurt by your blatantly bogus claims, that my link didn't work. I have used it, myself. And there is no difficulty, even if your assertion wasn't a complete fiction, for anyone to go online, and find the video of the 9th and final Jan. 6 Committee hearing. It doesn't matter which one, you use-- they're all the same!

 

Did I miss something with that? Were there court challenges to the 2016 election? Did Hillary refuse to concede? was there a disruption to the peaceful transfer of power?

 

Would she have been worse than Trump though?

 

You sure know how to spin a tale, don't you? Trump does the same thing. He has close to 70 million convinced his tale is to Make America Great Again and everyone in his cult believes it blindly. You seem to be among the cult members in that group.

There have been quite a few cults that have popped up in the U.S., most famous was the Jonestown cult. He had that group so convinced that there was a fantasy after life that everyone (913) in the cult committed suicide listening to him say it was "the right thing to do". I have to admit that Jones was good at leading as it takes a real leader to get that kind of commitment from his followers.

On the other side of the coin of being a leader, there is someone that is called a "Con Artist"

What makes someone a con artist?

By definition, a con artist is a manipulator who cheats, or tricks, others through persuading them to believe something that is not true. Through deception, they fool people into believing they can make easy money when, in fact, it is the con artist who ends up taking the victim's money.

The difference between a cult leader and a con artist is that the cult leader believes his own BS while a con artist believes in taking advantage for his own benefit. It is often difficult to see the difference between one or the other but then again, the end result is always bad for those involved.

There is one thing that does separate people between believing these leaders and not believing them and that is "knowledge and common sense".

For example, "Make America Great Again?

To do that, we first have to understand what made America great in the first place. Here is the definition most often seen and stated::

America became great because of the practices of our ancestors. Those whose blood we have in us were animated by a code of ethics that inspired them to endless economic inventiveness, regular civic participation, family solidarity, educational ambition and spiritual backbone.

Code of ethics?
Economic inventiveness?
Civic Participation?
Family solidarity?
Educational Ambition?
Spiritual backbone?

Trump was pushing for all of these? Not by a longshot!!!!

Trump never had a code of ethics.
Trump never had economic inventiveness. It was always "I know it all and you will do as I say or it is the highway"
Trump never showed and Civic participation to improve things. His participation was to destroy (break up) what had worked well for 245 years
Trump never showed any family solidarity as it was "my way or the highway" with everyone
Trump never had any educational ambition. He had no interest in learning anything as he already "knew it all"
Spiritual backbone? He never went to church and never gave a hoot about morals, ethics principles or humanity. He did not offer any spiritual advice other than "I am your God and you will do as I say"

as such, how can anyone with any intelligence think (much less believe) that this man could actually make America Great Again given that he practiced nothing of what made America Great?

It does seem to me that it is you that is incapable of making any "rational judgement". It seems this is all you actually know how to do:



I do have to admit though, that I am actually enjoying our conversations as it allows me to put my knowledge to use for a positive reason. Unlike you, who uses nothing but words and debasement of the opposition, I try to prove what I say with data and facts. That makes me do things well. I enjoy that. It keeps me mentally alert and busy. At age 77, one doesn't get that many chances to do that with anyone. You have my thanks for that.

Let's continue to do that. I have nothing but time on my hands.