Are you scared of Donald Trump?

Post Reply New Topic

If someone had one allegation, that would make them seem far more likely of being innocent than someone who has dozens of them, several of which have been substantiated to varying degrees. Someone who didn't pal around with Jeffrey Epstein would seem more likely of being innocent than someone who was friends with Epstein, knew of his activities and joked about how 'he liked 'em young'.

If Trump is the best that the right can do for leadership they might as well concede defeat and avoid the ongoing humiliation of being associated with the sociopathic charlatan. Even Richard Spencer has distanced himself from Trump; I won't be surprised if this becomes something that gets rubbed in the right's faces over and over again in the coming years.

I agree with you and take it even further.

As you know if you read my opinions I do hold some that are considered conservative. While Trump agreeing with some of them has not and will not change my agreeing with them I understand that the association with them will mean they will be seen as widely discredited outliers for the foreseeable future. It means I will like it or not I am going have to deal with both a lot of laws and changes in culture that I find an anathema, that I expect bad consequences from. This is aptly summed up in a Commentary magazine article that is unfortunately now behind a paywall "Trump Has Left the Conservative Movement Defenseless". Is this fair? No. Should it be about the merit of the positions, I agree with and not guilt by association. Yes. Merit and fairness are not how the world especially politics works.

If it was only Trump that would be one thing. The problem is that the Republican party and the "conservatives" behind Trump are behind his talking points lock, stock, and barrel. This is going to leave people that agree with any conservative opinions as disgraced outliers for quite some time if not forever. In my own case in a pre-Trump world, I would support a "Blue Lives Matter" movement, I think defunding the police is bad, making policy assuming they are all racist thugs is bad etc. All the "Blue Lives Matter" rallies I have seen are Trump rallies with Trump and American flags waving, and all sorts of garish political dress. These rallies are a pretext for something I am going to have nothing to do with.

The way I look this is Trumpism is cancer up the upcoming woke/progressive future is the chemo. Necessary but hell.

are the "good" cops still "good" if they do NOTHING about the BAD cops in their midst? the fact that they don't tells me that either the real good cops are hopelessly outnumbered by the bad, or that supervision is all bad, or that there aren't any in the first place.

Thank you Finally someone on here who makes sense!!

I would personally vote for an axe murderer before living in a country ruled by leftists.

1. Because I feel like it.
2. Removing illegal aliens and deporting them to their home country and preventing the slaughter of babies is not genocide. You must not know the meaning of the term "genocide".
3. Again, you must not know the definition of "bullying". A bully picks on others without provocation.
4. MANDATING by law that people wear something over their face is telling me what to do with my body and is against the constitution. I WOULD rather catch a dangerous infection. Said infection is only "dangerous" to a small minority of the population. They are not my concern. There are respirators, N95 masks, and other ways to protect these vulnerable people without taking away everyone else's rights.

Interesting set of priorities.
Makes me think of some historical events but I guess mentioning them would have been rather cliche.
There was a party that gained power because people feared communists... in some European country, 90 years ago.

There is the question, though, of whether that party was "left" or "right", given that policies it had came from both sides of the spectrum (it could be considered that they were suppressing competition for support from their "side", rather than opposition from the "other side" in suppressing the communist party), and the party was friendly with a nearby communist country, having various treaties and agreements in place... until they decided they needed something the communist country possessed.

I was only refering to the set of priorities that values a murderer over someone from the other party.

Well, as long as they are not currently murdering people of course... Perhaps I should have said "former axe murderer".

Last edited by AspiePrincess611 on 14 Oct 2020, 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

Myself, as well as millions of other true supporters of conservativism, do not feel that the left's policies are "necessary". We will fight the left with everything we have, and will never surrender or "concede defeat". A leftist future is one that I will never accept.

Only in their past and likely future?

True. National Socialism is in many ways socialist, and therefore left wing.
If the National Socialist Party had not pursued genocidal and racist policies, and had not invaded other nations, it would have actually been a good system. It pulled Germany out of a terrible economic depression.
I will admit that a few policies that are associated with the left, such as universal healthcare, might not be bad ideas. But most of the rest I can't justify.

Past tense only. "Former murderer" would have been more accurate, in retrospect.

How about a retired abortion doctor?

I oppose abortion. If done very very early in the pregnancy I can begrudgingly accept it, but I still don't like it. I am not opposed to birth control or "morning after" pills at all.
If a retired abortion doctor admitted that he/she had done abominable things in the past, apologized for his/her actions, showed true remorse, and was willing to promote right-wing policies, that candidate would be preferable to a leftist. In my opinion, anyway. There are many variables to consider here. With politics, as with the rest of life, you have to sometimes "take the bad with the good". If you feel that a person's potential to do good outweighs any past misdeeds, you are justified to support them. It does not mean you condone those misdeeds, just that you feel their policies are for the best. It does not make sense to me to support a political candidate whose ideology is wholly repugnant to you simply because they have a "cleaner" past or are a "nicer person". Particularly when that opposing candidate is not even competent.