• Donald Trump Presidency would be a top 10 world threat
    322 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Xanadu;49955097]At least Rochester's on a slow uphill. Still the 'poorest large NY city" but we got a massive photonics grant along with a few others for maintenance, upkeep and beautification. Real estate is looking better too. Kinda biased though...I wouldn't pick anywhere else in the US for the moment. Fascinating little city.[/QUOTE] Fellow Rochester user here, can confirm that it's such a nice area even though we're so poor. Buffalo's getting all the money lately.
[QUOTE=Durandal;49955083]One of the funnier things about this election is we're seeing similar rhetoric about Trump that we saw about Obama. Remember when we all had nice laughs about right-wing idiots calling Obama "King Obama" and when they said it was going to be the fucking end of america as we know it if he won? Now we're seeing it again. The fact that everyone actually thinks he'll get shit done is amusing, he's right-winged Obama, like Obama was the "change" everyone demanded at the time after Bush, Trump is the "change" people seem to be wanting after Obama (in the GOP anyway). Truth is he won't get any of his crazier shit passed that he wants, just like Obama didn't get a lot of what he wanted passed or done. Now I know right now Clintons favorability is higher than trump at this very moment and she's polling better at this given moment, but I'm not going write Donald off as defeated yet, because as history has shown polls don't mean shit this far out from the election when literally anything could happen and no one is talking about any of Clintons other scandalous behavior other than her wall-street speeches that she refuses to release and continues to shift the goal post on for when she'll release them. I'm also not willing to write off Bernie as defeated either though and best case scenario is he wins because all Trump can say is "HURR HE'S A COMMUNIST" and thats a pretty big lie.[/QUOTE] trump being a far right obama implies that obama is somehow far left. unless that's not at all what you're saying, i can't see how you'd get to that conclusion
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;49955251]trump being a far right obama implies that obama is somehow far left. unless that's not at all what you're saying, i can't see how you'd get to that conclusion[/QUOTE] The implication wasn't that he was far-left just that he was left-winged and wanted a lot of the shit Sanders wants now at the time he was running iirc (someone correct me if I am totally wrong), but he had to compromise on healthcare and since then has been pretty stonewalled by republicans.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49955214]Electing Trump is resigning yourself to the [B]worst America possible[/B].[/QUOTE] This is said every single fucking election about every big candidate and it never happens. Happened with Bush, happened with Obama, and now with Trump. Really putting the "Sensationalist" in Sensationalist Headlines. We get it, Trump sucks, but there's no need to be hyperbolic about it.
[QUOTE=Tsyolin;49955268]This is said every single fucking election about every big candidate and it never happens. Happened with Bush, happened with Obama, and now with Trump. Really putting the "Sensationalist" in Sensationalist Headlines. We get it, Trump sucks, but there's no need to be hyperbolic about it.[/QUOTE] To be fair, Bush left America in a pretty bad shape
[QUOTE=Tsyolin;49955268]This is said every single fucking election about every big candidate and it never happens. Happened with Bush, happened with Obama, and now with Trump. Really putting the "Sensationalist" in Sensationalist Headlines. We get it, Trump sucks, but there's no need to be hyperbolic about it.[/QUOTE] Happens a lot. Doesn't mean it's not grounded in reality
[QUOTE=Durandal;49955228]His crazy shit is the wall, deportation of undocumented workers which are easily exploitable by big agriculture, so thats not going through. His bust up of Obamacare would hurt the insurance industry because now all those people that where required to get insurance don't have to anymore, the only good thing for insurance companies from a bust up of Obamacare is no longer needing to care of pre-existing conditions, so that might not even go through. His anti-trade and high tarrif shit will also massively hurt big business and global corporations, so thats probably going to be lobbied against as well. What other crazy shit does he want that will destroy everything? Because thats all I can think of off the top of my head.[/QUOTE] He wants to commit war crimes. Killing relatives of combatants who are not themselves fighting is illegal under the Fourth Geneva Convention. Torturing prisoners of war is illegal under the First Geneva Convention. Both are classified as "grave breaches", meaning that every nation on Earth that is party to those treaties is [I]legally obligated[/I] to search for anyone who is alleged to have committed, or ordered to be committed, any such acts. Were he to carry out those plans, Trump would either be extradited to stand trial before any competent court (war crimes are subject to international jurisdiction, in a pinch any national supreme court would suffice, but I'd expect the International Criminal Court or International Court of Justice would be used), or would have to protect himself by waging war against the [I]entire United Nations[/I].
I love John, it's like having a real life Senator Armstrong on the forum
[QUOTE=Tsyolin;49955268]This is said every single fucking election about every big candidate and it never happens. Happened with Bush, happened with Obama, and now with Trump.[/QUOTE] Can you really compare it though? It's always difficult because yeah, presidential elections are few and far between, but the biggest criticism of Bush could be said about any of his party's compatriots for the most part. The same goes for Obama, with a bit of racially charged hatred. Donald is absolutely distinctively different from any candidate that has run in modern elections. I agree there's a hearty dose of sensationalism, but maybe this is the closest to earned sensationalism has ever been.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;49955318]He wants to commit war crimes. Killing relatives of combatants who are not themselves fighting is illegal under the Fourth Geneva Convention. Torturing prisoners of war is illegal under the First Geneva Convention. Both are classified as "grave breaches", meaning that every nation on Earth that is party to those treaties is [I]legally obligated[/I] to search for anyone who is alleged to have committed, or ordered to be committed, any such acts. Were he to carry out those plans, Trump would either be extradited to stand trial before any competent court (war crimes are subject to international jurisdiction, in a pinch any national supreme court would suffice, but I'd expect the International Criminal Court or International Court of Justice would be used), or would have to protect himself by waging war against the [I]entire United Nations[/I].[/QUOTE] Ah yes, I forgot about that one, if he's serious about that one he might pull that one off since Bush and Cheney got away with it. That is something to worry about. He keeps flip-flopping on it though so its hard to tell if he really is serious, but if he really wanted to do it he probably could unless doing something like that would need congressional approval (if it does the GOP hates that idea and so does the Democrats, the only people that like that idea are literally ignorant as fuck).
[QUOTE=Durandal;49955334]Ah yes, I forgot about that one, if he's serious about that one he might pull that one off since Bush and Cheney got away with it. That is something to worry about.[/QUOTE] Bush got away with the torture because it was "for intelligence" (although he shouldn't have), and did not specifically target families (it is not a war crime to accidentally kill civilians - extremely regrettable, but not criminal). Trump seems to want to torture prisoners as a goal in and of itself, and wants to specifically target noncombatants as a reprisal. If Trump can get away with that, we can basically throw away all the rules, because they clearly don't apply anymore. Honestly, if Trump gets elected and starts carrying out those plans, I think it would be both legally justified, and [I]ethically preferable[/I], for any country capable of doing so to assassinate him. If trying to bring him to trial risks a major war, the best option I can think of is to try him in absentia (the rules must be followed) and then eliminate him by any means necessary.
[QUOTE=Durandal;49955263]The implication wasn't that he was far-left just that he was left-winged and wanted a lot of the shit Sanders wants now at the time he was running iirc (someone correct me if I am totally wrong), but he had to compromise on healthcare and since then has been pretty stonewalled by republicans.[/QUOTE] he based his campaign on working together and rising above party lines (needless to say that didn't work out too well), but he was very much an establishment candidate and a pretty big moderate when compared to sanders (or by most standards outside of america really)
[QUOTE=gman003-main;49955389]Bush got away with the torture because it was "for intelligence" (although he shouldn't have), and did not specifically target families (it is not a war crime to accidentally kill civilians - extremely regrettable, but not criminal). Trump seems to want to torture prisoners as a goal in and of itself, and wants to specifically target noncombatants as a reprisal. If Trump can get away with that, we can basically throw away all the rules, because they clearly don't apply anymore. Honestly, if Trump gets elected and starts carrying out those plans, I think it would be both legally justified, and [I]ethically preferable[/I], for any country capable of doing so to assassinate him. If trying to bring him to trial risks a major war, the best option I can think of is to try him in absentia (the rules must be followed) and then eliminate him by any means necessary.[/QUOTE] Didn't he flip flop on it right after the debates in Michigan though? Unless he flip-flopped back to it after flip-flopping originally.
[QUOTE=Knurr;49953898]Guys where is this hate towards Trump from. He's smart, he's not politically correct, he's natural. I don't see it a a threat, but as a cure for our world. A new standard - telling like it is.[/QUOTE] He's a Republican, he's a CEO, and he's not PC. It's a perfect storm of things the left hates.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;49955409]he based his campaign on working together and rising above party lines (needless to say that didn't work out too well), but he was very much an establishment candidate and a pretty big moderate when compared to sanders (or by most standards outside of america really)[/QUOTE] This is very true, I had thought he had ran on some of the shit sanders wants now like socialized medicine, and affordable college no?
[QUOTE=Durandal;49955467]This is very true, I had thought he had ran on some of the shit sanders wants now like socialized medicine, and affordable college no?[/QUOTE] Obama wanted "healthcare reform". His specific plan was not especially socialized - it's basically what a few states already had - and he was willing to compromise from the beginning. Sanders wants federal single-payer, to replace Medicare/Medicaid and Obamacare, which is socialized but not particularly radical by international standards. It's less socialized than Britain's healthcare system.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;49955500]Obama wanted "healthcare reform". His specific plan was not especially socialized - it's basically what a few states already had - and he was willing to compromise from the beginning. Sanders wants federal single-payer, to replace Medicare/Medicaid and Obamacare, which is socialized but not particularly radical by international standards. It's less socialized than Britain's healthcare system.[/QUOTE] Count me as blown out of the water on this one then.
[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;49954514]We have some truly bizarre people on this forum[/QUOTE] man I agree, when your main concern on whether to vote for a candidate is their stance on how much to ban a luxury item then your priorities are pretty fucked up m8
Good god,I knew American politics are entertaining but goddamn has Fisher riled up the crowd in here without hardly trying :v:
[QUOTE=Durandal;49955467]This is very true, I had thought he had ran on some of the shit sanders wants now like socialized medicine, and affordable college no?[/QUOTE] I don't know if he was that big on affordable college, I know healthcare reform was one of his main platforms but not the kind he would've been remembered for until Obamacare started to materialize (though it's likely I'm just totally misremembering stuff). The big thing was, of course, pulling out of Iraq, and everything else sorta pales in comparison
I'm amazed at how many people on this forum seemingly support Trump based only off of the fact that other posters don't like him.
Trumps not dangerous at all.
[QUOTE=1nfiniteseed;49955759]I'm amazed at how many people on this forum seemingly support Trump based only off of the fact that other posters don't like him.[/QUOTE] There's a certain appeal to just supporting the guy with the strongest taglines and emotional outbursts. You don't need to research any subject, you don't need to study about the issues. Just take the guy's work as Gospel and you're good. If JohnFisher had actually studied his tax plan by looking at both sides of the argument (like you're supposed to do with every single point that your candidate wants to implement) then he'd realize that Trump's tax plan would be the worst plan out of all 2016 candidates. But no, it's easier to shout "make america great again" and ignore your opponents. I've consistently given him source after source, most of them full on scholarly papers detailing exactly how and why he's wrong in almost every conceivable way, but "Make america great again" I've not ever ignored a single point he's made, while he routinely cuts off half of my posts to respond to the other half with some political blogger's non-sourced ideas, "make america great again" Even when told about how Trump's business ventures are failures when it comes to profit margins. He's cumulatively loaned like 100 million dollars from his siblings and his fathers estate as well as the 'big government' that he likes to hate so much, and made that into a 500-600 million dollar empire. Good for him, he's made some money. Meanwhile Barbara Corcoran started a real estate firm with 1000 dollars and later sold it for 70 million, a profit margin of seventy thousand to one. But hey, "make america great again" "Torture the terrorists that hurt us" "Go after their families" "Global warming isnt real" "I'm highly educated" "I have the best words"
Did Trump actually say global warming isn't real? Cause shit like that should be all anyone needs to know that something ain't right with his head.
"Drumpf does not believe climate change is real, tweeting out his skepticism with strong language and calling it a hoax on Fox News in 2014. In a 2012 Twitter post which is no longer accessible, Drumpf charged that the concept of climate change was created by the Chinese to suppress the U.S. economy. In addition, Drumpf has expressed firm opposition to wind turbines, which he sees as an environmental and aesthetic problem." "Most recently, on Dec. 30, 2015, Drumpf told the crowd at a rally in Hilton Head, S.C., "Obama's talking about all of this with the global warming and … a lot of it's a hoax. It's a hoax. I mean, it's a money-making industry, OK? It's a hoax, a lot of it."" Sorry about my drumpf filter. Im only using it cause the guy is a jackass
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49954461]I agree that the Canadians made a mistake in the fact that half of them speak French (while the other half lets them), but even this serious transgression isn't as bad as what Trump will do in power.[/QUOTE] wtf. that's crazy rude
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49955314]Happens a lot. Doesn't mean it's not grounded in reality[/QUOTE] That's not really an argument. People seem unable to detect a smear campaign when it's about a candidate they don't like. Trump would not be the end of the world especially since GOP and Democrats don't agree with him. He could never get his ideas through parliament, even Obama couldn't with most of his.
[QUOTE=1nfiniteseed;49955759]I'm amazed at how many people on this forum seemingly support Trump based only off of the fact that other posters don't like him.[/QUOTE] To be honest it's happening everyone, not just on Facepunch. I see it a lot on Facebook. All the huge amount of anti-Trump shit that pops up everywhere doesn't really change much because anyone that already hated Trump is still gonna be hating Trump where as "on the fence" voters might be swayed towards Trump simply out of how childish and annoying some of those anti-Trump posts are. The problem in regards to Facepunch is that everyone is constantly giving Trump attention and it only really helps his cause at this point. Every day there's a new post or two about how shitty he is that I imagine some people are impressed by the amount of vitriol the guy can induce.
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;49956067]That's not really an argument. People seem unable to detect a smear campaign when it's about a candidate they don't like. Trump would not be the end of the world especially since GOP and Democrats don't agree with him. He could never get his ideas through parliament, even Obama couldn't with most of his.[/QUOTE] He's publicly campaigning on his intent to violate one of the most fundamental articles of the Geneva Convention and human rights law, principles of such patently obvious moral simplicity that they've been recognized since before the second world war, and as executive he would have the all the agency required act on that intent without congressional approval. This is no joke.
This isn't just left wing pundits saying this guy would be a disaster the best fucking thing other candidates supporting his bid can bring themselves to say is "at least he'll only be president for four years" this isn't a smear campaign, he [I]really is that terrible[/I]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.