Donald Trump: U.S. must "start thinking about" racial profiling
- Thread starter Saiyajin
- Start date
the thing with trump is, is that he's making comments that are so outlandish even republicans are distancing themselves from him.
its going to be politically harmful to appear to get along with someone with such extreme views....thats gonna make him a lame duck president who'll be done in 4 vs a more manipulative closet racist who'll get shyt done thats gonna make all our lives worse....for 8 years.
Republicans are already in bed with him. They won't get any flack from passing his legislation or Trump passing theirs. And he's the goddamn Republican nominee, you guys act like he's an Independent running for President. He already has an entire party willing to crash and burn for him.
1. I've never made a comparison between Trump and Sanders. I don't care which one of the two was more anti-war, because Bernie lost his primary. I'm judging Trump on his own merit.
2. Trump was a private citizen in 2002, so he wouldn't have been privy to the sort of information that a congressperson would have had. His statements on the war have to be analyzed through the lens of a private citizen. And remember, this was at a time when the war in Iraq had huge popular support.
3. Is this the smoking gun here? Because if so, that's the most tepid endorsement of a war i've ever heard. Saying an off the cuff "...yeah, I guess so" on Howard Stern a hawk does not make.
4. Trump's current anti-war stance has been fundamental to his campaign. It's an important part of his political ideology as an isolationist populist. Of course he'll have pressures in Washington to revert to the foreign policy status quo, but his political instinct isn't inclined towards war. Obama's administration has shown how important political instinct is, as he had to deal with the same pressures. Hillary pressured him to take military action in Libya, she pressured him to impose that idiotic red line in Syria, and then she tried to get him to take military action when Syria broke the red line. Hillary's instinct is hawkish. There's literally nothing to suggest Trump would be more hawkish than Hillary.
1. That's true, you didn't. I was responding to something JudgeJoeGorilla said earlier in this thread, and connecting it with the videos you posted.
2. So what? My contention is with Trump's statements in the last video you posted, in which he claims to have always been against the war.
3. Again so what? Hesitantly supporting something is still supporting it. I don't know how you or Trump gets from 'tepid endorsement' to 'vehement opposition'. He wasn't anti-Iraq war, and I don't know how anyone could make a case that he is anti-war in general. The language he uses is constantly contradicting. He shyts on the Iraq war now because it's incredibly unpopular now. But he also constantly talks about increasing military spending, to rebuild the military and defeating ISIS is his number one priority .... if he's this dove that you think he is, then why would we spend the money to increase an already bloated military budget?
4. You are probably right about Clinton being hawkish. The thing about Trump is he's a complete wild card. He's never had to make decisions of this magnitude, where literally thousands of lives are at risk. But he comes off as so petty, so vindictive, so narcissistic that any slight might set him off. Put it this way, could you see a President Trump backing down from a broken red line in Syria? You don't think he would take Assad's use of chemical weapons as personal disrespect, and respond militarily as a knee jerk reaction?
Be Strong Blackman
All Star
shut th
come on dawg. you're an idiot. you have a point.
did you write? I'll hook you up with some hooked on phonics.
Free White & 21
AAGang
Said by the nikka that got exposed for fukking white women after weeks of ranting about white supremacy and how evil and disgusting "cacs" are
Talking about some self hate nikka please
#Trumpset #UnrefinedRacism
Said by the nikka that got exposed for fukking white women after weeks of ranting about white supremacy and how evil and disgusting "cacs" are
Talking about some self hate nikka please
#Trumpset #UnrefinedRacism
AldavisAlbundyAllah!
All Star
King Kreole
natural blondie like goku
My claim of Trump's relative dovishness is not predicated on his stance a decade ago on the Iraq War. I posted like 5 videos on previous page of Trump displaying isolationist/dovish sentiments in the past year, since he's been politically relevant instead of a celebrity reality TV star. If Trump saying "yeah, I guess so" over 10 years ago on Howard Stern is enough to forever consider him a hawk, then I don't think there are many doves. Bernie supported the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, is he now barred from the dove camp?
Also, he didn't just say the Iraq War was a mistake, he blasted the shyt outta Bush. Even more than Hillary has. Remember, he ran for the Republican nomination. Anti-war stances aren't a given, if present at all. Rubio, Cruz, Jeb, and Kasich all tried to p*ssyfoot around it because the Republican base is generally hawkish. So I don't think Trump was just mirroring the status quo in his comments, he legitimately shifted the discourse.
I see his "big, beautiful" military spending thing as just another element of his domestic spending motif. If he was really about war, he'd be talking like Ted "make the sand glow" Cruz. Instead, he's usually speaking about taking care of the vets, and generalities about spending. When pressed on specifics regarding Syria, Israel-Palestine, Russia, NATO, etc, he's pretty reliably dovish. But I agree, his language is constantly contradicting, but it's because he's trying to walk the line between the cultural signifiers of right wingers "guns, god, military" and the historically leftist policies underlying his campaign "healthcare, anti-war, government spending". If he actually wants to spend more money on the military, that'd be stupid. It's like the one public institution that isn't underfunded
.Honestly, if Hillary didn't run, I think Trump might have gone for the Democratic nomination.
Yeah, this is true, he's a wild card. Never have I seen such a chaotic nominee. But for me, that's part of his appeal. I'm not enamoured with the Washington status quo in domestic or foreign policy. I think the latter is actually very fukked. I think at this point in American history, a chaotic President isn't necessarily a bad thing. Also, the reason America has been the most stable nation on the planet isn't because of the exceptionally moderate temperaments of the Presidents, it's because the levers of power are diversified and the founders made sure to implement rigorous checks and balances. So even if Trump wants to do some petty, vindictive, apocalyptic shyt, the chain of command won't allow him to.
As for your hypothetical, I don't think Trump would make the red line in the first place, because in his worldview, it really doesn't benefit America to even be meddling with this shyt. He doesn't care about Syria.
Copy Ninja
Superstar
Yall do know we will be at war with Hillary more so than Trump right? Other world leaders ain't gonna respect that lady who got absolutely no respect from her husband, fukking in hoes in their house
Trump don't wanna be president anyways. Saying everything possible to turn people off but he's getting more and more support
Trump don't wanna be president anyways. Saying everything possible to turn people off but he's getting more and more support
One, I'm not saying Trump is a hawk, I'm saying he's dishonest. Of course he's displaying isolationist sentiments to a war-weary electorate. His entire style is to speak in short and simple talking points that poll well. My question is, why anyone would believe he actually believes his rhetoric, and would or could keep to them? This is a person who will have to stand up to a lot of opposition if he hopes to keep isolationist foreign policy. But ultimately I question whether he has the temperament to keep cool when foreign agitators challenge him, and the fortitude to resist pressure to act militarily. You mentioned earlier that Trump has only spoken in the past as a private citizen. Well the Bush administration didn't just invade Iraq on a whim ... they thought they had relatively good intelligence that WMD's were in Iraq. I'm not convinced Trump would keep to his isolationist sentiments with that type of information.
Okay, I don't know why blasting Bush, one of the most unpopular presidents of our lifetime, is so admirable... especially considering Clinton supported going into Iraq as well. I'll give you that a Trump nomination probably means a shift to the left in foreign policy, regardless of who wins the presidency. But that's my entire point. He will most likely be surrounded by right-leaning people in his cabinet ... generally hawkish people pressuring him to take action when another dictator is gassing his people. Will he be able to stick to his words in the face of that?
Well at least we agree here.
Hm.. alright.
One, I'm not saying Trump is a hawk, I'm saying he's dishonest. Of course he's displaying isolationist sentiments to a war-weary electorate. His entire style is to speak in short and simple talking points that poll well. My question is, why anyone would believe he actually believes his rhetoric, and would or could keep to them? This is a person who will have to stand up to a lot of opposition if he hopes to keep isolationist foreign policy. But ultimately I question whether he has the temperament to keep cool when foreign agitators challenge him, and the fortitude to resist pressure to act militarily. You mentioned earlier that Trump has only spoken in the past as a private citizen. Well the Bush administration didn't just invade Iraq on a whim ... they thought they had relatively good intelligence that WMD's were in Iraq. I'm not convinced Trump would keep to his isolationist sentiments with that type of information.
Okay, I don't know why blasting Bush, one of the most unpopular presidents of our lifetime, is so admirable... especially considering Clinton supported going into Iraq as well. I'll give you that a Trump nomination probably means a shift to the left in foreign policy, regardless of who wins the presidency. But that's my entire point. He will most likely be surrounded by right-leaning people in his cabinet ... generally hawkish people pressuring him to take action when another dictator is gassing his people. Will he be able to stick to his words in the face of that?
Well at least we agree here.
Hm.. alright.
