Why did you vote for Trump?

[lwf]

Balance is key in every aspect of life.

Brought over to politics, that is why we should generally have a centrist president.

Vacillating between Republican and Democrat presidents is the next best thing to always having a centrist, as frustrating as it may be to both sides. When one takes things too far in one direction, we have the other to yank it back the other way.

 

[noonereal]

You have no clue what you are talking about. Democrats are pro-CHOICE, pro-SAFETY, pro-EQUALITY, and pro-AMERICA. They have always opposed giving stuff away to foreign countries and every type of violent crime.

No one gives away stuff to foreign countries.

Our foreign aid is strategic, not give aways.

 

[noonereal]

Vacillating between Republican and Democrat presidents is the next best thing to always having a centrist, as frustrating as it may be to both sides. When one takes things too far in one direction, we have the other to yank it back the other way.

Yes but TRump is not a republican. He simply hijacked the party.

 

[lwf]

Yes but TRump is not a republican. He simply hijacked the party.

But he was elected by Republicans. If nothing else, Donald Trump represents a clear message of existential fear among Republicans. Ultimately the only policy that really matters to them is the anti-Democrat policy. Everything else can be sacrificed if it means keeping liberal Democrats from being in power.

 

[noonereal]

But he was elected by Republicans. If nothing else, Donald Trump represents a clear message of existential fear among Republicans. Ultimately the only policy that really matters to them is the anti-Democrat policy. Everything else can be sacrificed if it means keeping liberal Democrats from being in power.

He represents Satan on earth.

 

[lwf]

He represents Satan on earth.

Is that existential dread I sense?

 

[jaypatriot]

I think you'll find people on the other side have similar fears about the politicians you prefer.

The truth is: Neither Democratic nor Republican economic polices are inherently bad for the economy. Broadly speaking, conservative economic policies work well especially in times of plenty, but if taken too far they result in a bubble followed by a destructive depression through lack of regulation. Liberal economic policies work well especially during lean times, but taken too far they can starve an otherwise healthy economy through missed opportunities.

The big disagreement results from not knowing what the future holds. Is our economy on the cusp of a bubble and therefore would it benefit from stricter regulation? Or is our economy on the brink of a surge and would it benefit from decreased regulation? In my opinion, like all things, balance is key. We just disagree on which way we are tipping, and this is a healthy disagreement.

Neither extreme can be tolerated by a society that wants to remain economically viable. We need to find a compromise between liberal economics and conservative economics.

Cannot disagree with you about the future.
But since I am a glass half full kind of guy, I want to see an economy with less regulation just like in 2017-2019 when we experienced continued economic growth and low unemployment. I can't trust Biden and his handlers to do the same thing.
They are already talking about higher taxes, banning fracking, climate change expenditures, and rolling back Trump's executive orders. That could hurt the economy.
I would rather go with the devil we already know as opposed to the devil who will be a puppet in the hands of Harris, AOC, Pelosi, and Bernie.

 

[jaypatriot]

We had this thing called the Iran Nuclear Deal, which was an international effort to prevent the terrorist nations from producing nuclear weapons and avoid a war. Is that what you are referring to?

Yes, Obama considered the $50 billion to be a signing bonus to Iran as part of the nuclear deal.
"U.S. administration officials are still defending the nuclear deal by assuring us that Iran will only use the $50 billion “signing bonus” they expect to receive on the country’s internal needs. "
We should have kept the $50 billion and used it to thwart Iran's plans to spread terrorism throughout the Middle East.

What Iran Will Buy With Obama’s $50 Billion - Tablet Magazine

 

[jaypatriot]

But he was elected by Republicans. If nothing else, Donald Trump represents a clear message of existential fear among Republicans. Ultimately the only policy that really matters to them is the anti-Democrat policy. Everything else can be sacrificed if it means keeping liberal Democrats from being in power.

I believe it is worth sacrificing a lot to keep Liberal Democrats from gaining more power.
Pelosi should always be reined in.

 

[Oborosen]

Yeah! My post you quoted above yours certainly reinforces your opinion, "...because Trump was the better choice at the time."

By what coherent metric, aside from some vague grievance against democrats you touched on,, can actually be supported by verifiable facts?
You voted for an infamous confidence man who promised to release his tax returns, just as every other major party candidate had for forty years.
After Trump did not deliver on that vital campaign promise, you voted for him anyway, still defend your vote, continue to apologize for his record level "short comings."

I presented some of the contrasts of character, respect, sincerity, and capability you reflexively chided me for putting up on this page.
Here is more. Which is more likely, Clinton was transformed, between 2006 and 2016 into the person you rejected, over Trump's empty theatrics, from birtherism
to pulling the stunts in debates (he featured four of Bill's accusers at one debate), to collaborating with Russian bots and Pecker's National Enquirer media blitz frothing
over their invention of "Clinton's poor health", despite her doctor's release and explanation of her health record, vs. Trump's stunting on Dr. Oz's show after the freak in the white jacket Trump had exploited, had revealed Trump had dictated the description of his own health that gastro specialist signed off on and initially claimed was his own professional assessment of Trump's state of health?



Above was how Hillary was viewed, as a centrist, hard working U.S. Senator convincingly rooted in her lifelong, Protestant faith, until republicans needed to dirty up
that image, during the 2008 presidential primary season, and ever since! Or, do you assert the republican senators who regularly shared prayer breakfasts with Hillary and respected her ability and sincerity, many the same senators who voted not to remove Trump, seven months ago, were fools?

Are they only fools when you've disagreed with their appraisal of Hillary Clinton?

Reply when you have an argument to make parallel to verifiable facts that will support it. Before Trump, conservatives claimed to be fiscal hawks with impeccaple
religious values. Trump exposed all that as empty..... the wealthiest political donors, then as now, are the only governing "principle"!

Trump uses your opinions against you in service to his wealthiest donors, as your opinons are of a suprisingly common, but still a minority variety, absent practical facts but immersed in feelings, the things Trump is best at spotting and exploiting by validating them for you, IOW flattering you, validating your core beliefs, more easily accomplished because they are not consistent with facts or with evolving majority public opinion.

1950s oriented Trump nets 1950s oriented, predominently caucasian supporters. Five years after this was ignored....



The bus filled with Trump's supporters was still, "idling at the curb", eagerly and predictably ready to vote for more of this!

...and for a freakish, dramatic increase in national debt increase rate, in the midst of Trump described, "best economy, ever"!

You're pretty much a living meme at this point.

No flavor, or substance.

 

[lwf]

Cannot disagree with you about the future.
But since I am a glass half full kind of guy, I want to see an economy with less regulation just like in 2017-2019 when we experienced continued economic growth and low unemployment. I can't trust Biden and his handlers to do the same thing.
They are already talking about higher taxes, banning fracking, climate change expenditures, and rolling back Trump's executive orders. That could hurt the economy.
I would rather go with the devil we already know as opposed to the devil who will be a puppet in the hands of Harris, AOC, Pelosi, and Bernie.

Barack Obama oversaw the longest period of economic growth and unemployment reduction this century, and Biden was vice president. The previous Republican president's policies led to the largest recession since the 1920's.

A Democrat is not necessarily going to tank the economy any more than a Republican will. Sometimes reducing regulations hurts the economy, and increasing them helps. Sometimes the opposite is true. It is just as likely that a Republican economy would blow into a big bubble until it bursts into a depression right when you need it most.

A regulated economy is safer and more stable.

 

[jaypatriot]

Barack Obama oversaw the longest period of economic growth and unemployment reduction this century, and Biden was vice president. The previous Republican president's policies led to the largest recession since the 1920's.

A Democrat is not necessarily going to tank the economy any more than a Republican will. Sometimes reducing regulations hurts the economy, and increasing them helps. Sometimes the opposite is true. It is just as likely that a Republican economy would blow into a big bubble until it bursts into a depression right when you need it most.

A regulated economy is safer and more stable.

In other words, taking a chance on Biden could be bigger risk than sticking with Trump who led us through a strong economy for over three years. Why take that additional risk with an unknown entity?

 

[antiquity]

A new concept that has never been seen before or at least in a long long time.....Promises made promises kept.

 

[lwf]

In other words, taking a chance on Biden could be bigger risk than sticking with Trump who led us through a strong economy for over three years. Why take that additional risk with an unknown entity?

If you trust Trump to do so. Yes, the economy continued to grow under Trump, but it did so more slowly than it did under Obama, and the best one can say is that he didn't screw up Obama's gains. And now the economy is back to recession levels. He also botched the US response to the pandemic, oversaw the longest government shutdown in US history, and got himself impeached all through his own stupidity carelessness. If the economy was his only plus and now it is flagging, what does he have left?

Trump does not have the temperament to survive as president, and his staff clearly has no control. He rode Obama's coattails for three years, and now he has nothing. Trump would be a disaster for another four years.

 

[Vadinho]

Trump voters felt Hillary would be more of the same. And more people disliked her than Trump.
In the voters' eyes she was more a crook than Trump. And people did not want her predator husband back in the White House.
And it was time to get rid of elitist bureaucratic control in D.C.
Why is that so hard for you to believe.?
The voters who elected Trump saw it.

Yet there was no crime was there? There was nothing but misogyny, right wing lies and ignorance. To believe in Trump, you had to either become a tribalist, a useful dunce or someone so uninformed that you just voted as if you were picking American Idol. Sorry but there is no mature excuse for voting for Trump, there is only shame and hopefully disgrace headed their way.

 

[2distracted]

Because democrats are pro abortion, anti gun, anti police, pro violence, anti america, pro high taxation, pro give aways to foriegn nations.

This sums up my response rather succinctly

 

[smallvoice]

Why did you vote for Trump?

Hillary Clinton


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk