Is Trump a Relationship Deal Breaker?

[Just Joe]

All politicians are irrelevant to me and have a negligible impact on my life, no matter what they do. I’ve lived all over the country and can’t recall a single politician having a lasting impact. Sure, I have to roll with new this and new that, all temporary.

In my opinion, the hate for the current president is unhealthy for you. It is laughable to me to see all the hypocrisy of the hate that is spewed here at times. Trump is trump, will be trump. In four years and a couple months no matter what he will be in the history books. I think the real worry is Congress and how inept they seem to be.

I will say a deal breaker to me is someone who blindly follows anything or anyone.

I'm pretty much onboard with this line of thinking.   There have been several presidents in my lifetime that I didn't care for but none of them seriously affected my life.   This one or the next one won't either.
If you didn't learn anything from that debate the other night, you should have at least seen that solutions to issues in your life are not going to be fixed by the folks in DC.

This thread also points out how rude, hateful and hard headed the anti Trump crowd is.  A whole bunch of threads and posts throughout this forum focused on nothing but outright hate for Trump, but I've yet to see one against Biden.   Pretty hypocritical how the anti DT crowd calls out DT all the time as being hateful, racist, etc. while all they do is spew hate for him and anybody that supports him.

Much like the conservatives did during Barack Obama's tenure - right?

Its all fun and games until your family has minority or LGBTQ members in it. Then you begin to understand a different perspective. Even the white ladies here experience a different America than us white guys. Its time to break the power monopoly religion and old white guys hold over our society.

RE: "Stand back and stand down". Trump could have told these people to simply go home, put their guns away and vote for change just like the rest of us. Or work with existing political mechanisms to get more people to vote for their party's objectives. Nope, he'd apparently rather they stand back and be ready for a call to action. Intimidating or assaulting people is a better way to hold on to power in 2020 America? Not a good sign...

[bbqbonelesswing]

When asked the super duper softball question of whether or not he would denounce racists, he not only failed to do this . . . but he told them in his own words to stand back and get ready for further orders.

Ha ha ha!  "Further orders"??!  Sounds QAnon-ish.... ;)

If we're going to parse "stand back and stand by" into something nefarious, there's a trove of Biden's remarks just waiting for similar treatment, but playing "gotcha" isn't helpful from either side.

Trump did whiff on the opportunity to rebuke Wallace for the Charlottesville question.  Don't know whether his prep team didn't prep him, or he just forgot, but it should have been an expected question and he should have been prepared with something like "Chris, what part of 'neo-Nazis and the white nationalists...should be condemned totally' did you not understand, and why do you continue to misreport that?"

I don't think you need to "parse" those words. Do you know what "stand by" means? Especially when he said it before launching into an attack on the far-left groups and saying someone needs to do something about them?

Anyway...

Yes, Trump support would be a total deal breaker for any serious relationship. Support for a political candidate reflects someone's values. If someone doesn't support abortion rights, thinks voter suppression is ok, and spends all day talking about conspiracy theories, we aren't going to have much in common.

[sherr]

When asked the super duper softball question of whether or not he would denounce racists, he not only failed to do this . . . but he told them in his own words to stand back and get ready for further orders.

Ha ha ha!  "Further orders"??!  Sounds QAnon-ish.... ;)

If we're going to parse "stand back and stand by" into something nefarious, there's a trove of Biden's remarks just waiting for similar treatment, but playing "gotcha" isn't helpful from either side.

Trump did whiff on the opportunity to rebuke Wallace for the Charlottesville question.  Don't know whether his prep team didn't prep him, or he just forgot, but it should have been an expected question and he should have been prepared with something like "Chris, what part of 'neo-Nazis and the white nationalists...should be condemned totally' did you not understand, and why do you continue to misreport that?"

Every time Trump is forced to read a prepared statement he does manage to get the words out that condemn white supremacy, yes. And every time he is speaking "off-the-cuff" he seems to not find that ability. "Wink-wink nudge-nudge look they're making me say it for the camera"?

[By the River]

I abhor Trump and the values (or lack of, to be more exact) he represents, but I didn't vote because for me too much depends on the relationship in question. If a person has enough redeeming qualities on their own, then perhaps I can look past their support of Trump. I wouldn't be likely to form a close relationship or friendship with anyone who actively supports racism, locking up children, white supremacy, lying, destroying the environment, corruption, wooing dictators, destroying democracy and norms, and all the other things Trump displays. But I'll say that many of the Trump supporters I know (and even love) are woefully ignorant about Trump's debasing behavior. I don't approve of their ignorance, of course, but they are not bad people.

You know that many believe Obama was active in all the bolded areas, right?   (Destroying democracy and norms and all the other things would include wiretapping journalists (James Rosen, 20 AP phone lines); Killing US citizens with drone strikes; asking the FBI to keep them informed of the new admin when out of power; etc.)  Therefore, welcome to the libertarian party for everyone that said yes.

[GuitarStv]

Destroying democracy and norms and all the other things would include wiretapping journalists (James Rosen, 20 AP phone lines

James Rosen said that the phones he used were not eavesdropped upon and that the reporting by Fox was in error.

https://apnews.com/article/b89a121c72794bcfbfcc92e9299d7e0f

Killing US citizens with drone strikes;

Obama's use of drones was certainly one of the worst things he did in his presidency, and pretty indefensible.

asking the FBI to keep them informed of the new admin when out of power; etc.)

This one I hadn't heard about.  Can you link me some information?

[sherr]

I abhor Trump and the values (or lack of, to be more exact) he represents, but I didn't vote because for me too much depends on the relationship in question. If a person has enough redeeming qualities on their own, then perhaps I can look past their support of Trump. I wouldn't be likely to form a close relationship or friendship with anyone who actively supports racism, locking up children, white supremacy, lying, destroying the environment, corruption, wooing dictators, destroying democracy and norms, and all the other things Trump displays. But I'll say that many of the Trump supporters I know (and even love) are woefully ignorant about Trump's debasing behavior. I don't approve of their ignorance, of course, but they are not bad people.

You know that many believe Obama was active in all the bolded areas, right?   (Destroying democracy and norms and all the other things would include wiretapping journalists (James Rosen, 20 AP phone lines); Killing US citizens with drone strikes; asking the FBI to keep them informed of the new admin when out of power; etc.)  Therefore, welcome to the libertarian party for everyone that said yes.

This is completely disingenuous, whether Republicans or Libertarians are doing it.

Obama "locked up children" technically yes, but as a last resort only when the law absolutely required it. Trump made a show of eagerly tearing families apart with no capability or plans for ever re-uniting them in order to dis-incentivize misdemeanor border-hoppers.

The "lying" bit is probably referring to being "able to keep your doctor/plan" under the ACA, which may not have been universally true but was still true for the vast majority of people. Most people's insurance plan did not evaporate after the ACA.

Obama and corruption? How? Just because intelligence agencies acted on information about the Trump<->Russia connection, a lot of which has been born out in subsequent investigations?

Obama and dictators? Again how? Because extreme partisans claim he "showered them with cash and concessions", aka actually negotiated with them to further the US's interests without starting a war?

No one seriously believes that killing an enemy combatant in the middle of a war is actually unconstitutional just because he happened to be a citizen, not even Republicans.

I can't find anything saying that Obama wanted the FBI to "keep him informed after he was out of power", got a source for that?

You can equate the Obama administration and the Trump administration all you want, but I doubt any reasonable people who lived through both are going to be convinced. They're simply not comparable.

[GreenToTheCore]

This is an active situation in my life at the moment.
My family has gone from the generally ignorant/quiet side of the line to the actively malignant side of the line.

Before there was general discomfort and I could get by with the rational "but faaamily".
Now I cannot ignore my grandfather loudly saying "rag head" as a woman wearing a head scarf walks by, nor my parents' abysmal tirade towards a Hispanic family at the bowling alley, nor my mother's lamenting that my father isn't being hired because of all those minority regulations (no matter that he was hired within a few months of starting his search, no matter that their daughter is one of those "minority" hires).

Now that I'm an active member of society as a minority and married into another minority, I can't help but think that maybe I was blind to my family's bigotry. However, I can guarantee you that the Trump presidency has given my family members the "courage" to act on their beliefs in the past few years.


tl;dr: Yes.

[Pigeon]

It's a deal breaker, certainly for a romantic partner, but also for friends. I don't have any good friends who support him at all. I have a few old friends from high school who are single issue voters willing to ignore the misogyny, racism, xenophobia, lying, cheating, gratuitous cruelty, etc. over abortion rights. If you support all that, then that's who you are. I rarely see these people anyway.

I have one Trump supporting sister and we are about done. My children are immigrants. They are young women who should have the right to control their bodies.  I've got LGBT and POC family members. It's far too personal.

[Well Respected Man]

Intelligence is a must for me, so yeah, deal-breaker.

[LennStar]

Unfortunately, Well Respected Man, intelligence is no prevention from being racist. And being intelligent actually makes it more likely to believe in conspiracy theories. Probably because it takes a dose of intelligence just to be able to imagine a lot of them.

Killing US citizens with drone strikes;

Obama's use of drones was certainly one of the worst things he did in his presidency, and pretty indefensible.

And still Trump easily beat Obama here. There were more drone strikes in his first year than in Obamas whole presidency. So much in fact that weapon producers had problems getting the resources to produce that many bombs.

[sherr]

And being intelligent actually makes it more likely to believe in conspiracy theories.

Got a source for that? A quick Google leads me to an article that says at least that education and conspiracy theories are negatively correlated.

And still Trump easily beat Obama here. There were more drone strikes in his first year than in Obamas whole presidency. So much in fact that weapon producers had problems getting the resources to produce that many bombs.

Right, the other major difference here is that Trump stopped publishing the transparency report on how much drone strikes he's doing. So the reason no one is talking about how many people he's killing with drones is simply because no one knows how many people he's killing with drones, but it was way higher before the report stopped being published at least.

[joleran]

I don't like Trump.  He's a low-brow dick that most recently just made me very annoyed seeing him debate Biden in an incredibly childish manner.  He still gets my vote because his policies are generally good, he is relatable and patriotic, and the alternative is self-hatred and embracing ideological fairy tales.

[RetiredAt63]

I don't like Trump.  He's a low-brow dick that most recently just made me very annoyed seeing him debate Biden in an incredibly childish manner.  He still gets my vote because his policies are generally good, he is relatable and patriotic, and the alternative is self-hatred and embracing ideological fairy tales.

Not being an American, I won't comment on his domestic policies.  His foreign policy has been to alienate his allies, kow-tow to dictators, and screw up international trade (all American Presidents tend to do the last, but he has been particularly bad).  When your alienated former allies are not there for you anymore will you still Iike his policies?

Oh, and when he last said that the US/Canadian border would reopen soon, the basic Canadian reaction was "hell no".  We are generally polite, but not stupid.  His domestic policy on Covid-19 means we wish our border was even more shut than it is now.  Oops, I seem to have indirectly commented on an internal policy, since that one affects us.

He is "relatable"?  Seriously?  He has major character flaws.   Whole books have been written about his character flaws.  I would worry about my character if I found him relatable.

He is "patriotic"?  In his rhetoric, yes.  In his behaviour?  Only like Henry Ford, what's good for me is good for the country.

I think I'll stop now, high BP is dangerous in the days of Covid.

[nick663]

And being intelligent actually makes it more likely to believe in conspiracy theories.

Got a source for that? A quick Google leads me to an article that says at least that education and conspiracy theories are negatively correlated.

Disclaimer:  Not agreeing with the post you're replying to

Keep in mind that education is not intelligence.  Plenty of educated idiots out there and plenty of intelligent people who never saw a classroom after high school.

Higher education being negatively correlated does not surprise me though as one of the bigger lessons in college was how to evaluate and interrogate sources.  My K-12 education was very much "repeat facts from the book" so I can see why people who stop there are more likely to believe everything they read on the internet.

[sherr]

And being intelligent actually makes it more likely to believe in conspiracy theories.

Got a source for that? A quick Google leads me to an article that says at least that education and conspiracy theories are negatively correlated.

Disclaimer:  Not agreeing with the post you're replying to

Keep in mind that education is not intelligence.  Plenty of educated idiots out there and plenty of intelligent people who never saw a classroom after high school.

Higher education being negatively correlated does not surprise me though as one of the bigger lessons in college was how to evaluate and interrogate sources.  My K-12 education was very much "repeat facts from the book" so I can see why people who stop there are more likely to believe everything they read on the internet.

Right. I thought I was pretty clear in not equating the two, that's why I'm asking for a source about intelligence. I would be surprised if that's actually true though.

[joleran]

Not being an American, I won't comment on his domestic policies.  His foreign policy has been to alienate his allies, kow-tow to dictators, and screw up international trade (all American Presidents tend to do the last, but he has been particularly bad).  When your alienated former allies are not there for you anymore will you still Iike his policies?

Oh, and when he last said that the US/Canadian border would reopen soon, the basic Canadian reaction was "hell no".  We are generally polite, but not stupid.  His domestic policy on Covid-19 means we wish our border was even more shut than it is now.  Oops, I seem to have indirectly commented on an internal policy, since that one affects us.

He is "relatable"?  Seriously?  He has major character flaws.   Whole books have been written about his character flaws.  I would worry about my character if I found him relatable.

He is "patriotic"?  In his rhetoric, yes.  In his behaviour?  Only like Henry Ford, what's good for me is good for the country.

I think I'll stop now, high BP is dangerous in the days of Covid.

Yes, I love his foreign policy.  He's now triply nominated for the Nobel peace prize regarding his success in achieving landmark middle east peace deals and he has done some great things for the USA directly as well, negotiating international deals in a very beneficial manner (it has not been a good outcome for non-US countries though).  His policy consistently supports the USA at the expense of other countries. 

[RetiredAt63]

Not being an American, I won't comment on his domestic policies.  His foreign policy has been to alienate his allies, kow-tow to dictators, and screw up international trade (all American Presidents tend to do the last, but he has been particularly bad).  When your alienated former allies are not there for you anymore will you still Iike his policies?

Oh, and when he last said that the US/Canadian border would reopen soon, the basic Canadian reaction was "hell no".  We are generally polite, but not stupid.  His domestic policy on Covid-19 means we wish our border was even more shut than it is now.  Oops, I seem to have indirectly commented on an internal policy, since that one affects us.

He is "relatable"?  Seriously?  He has major character flaws.   Whole books have been written about his character flaws.  I would worry about my character if I found him relatable.

He is "patriotic"?  In his rhetoric, yes.  In his behaviour?  Only like Henry Ford, what's good for me is good for the country.

I think I'll stop now, high BP is dangerous in the days of Covid.

Yes, I love his foreign policy.  He's now triply nominated for the Nobel peace prize regarding his success in achieving landmark middle east peace deals and he has done some great things for the USA directly as well, negotiating international deals in a very beneficial manner (it has not been a good outcome for non-US countries though).  His policy consistently supports the USA at the expense of other countries.

Josef Stalin was twice nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in ending WWII. There are over 300 nominations for 2020.

Isn't international trade supposed to be win-win?  You make it sound like win-lose is good.

[joleran]

Josef Stalin was twice nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in ending WWII. There are over 300 nominations for 2020.

Isn't international trade supposed to be win-win?  You make it sound like win-lose is good.

Fair point - getting nominated isn't an amazing achievement (though I would still argue it's quite noteworthy). 

International trade is certainly win-win, but some trading partners win comparatively more than others.  Adjusting this balance can be spun as win-lose or just being more fair depending on one's political bent.

[bbqbonelesswing]

Josef Stalin was twice nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in ending WWII. There are over 300 nominations for 2020.

Isn't international trade supposed to be win-win?  You make it sound like win-lose is good.

Fair point - getting nominated isn't an amazing achievement (though I would still argue it's quite noteworthy). 

International trade is certainly win-win, but some trading partners win comparatively more than others.  Adjusting this balance can be spun as win-lose or just being more fair depending on one's political bent.

How has your life improved as a result of a Trump trade deal?

[joleran]

How has your life improved as a result of a Trump trade deal?

Nothing comes to mind.  I would actually expect a net loss as an early retiree as a result of moving more jobs back to the US with higher wages. 

[LennStar]

I can't think of any trade deal that Trump made at all. Examples?
He is great at ending treaties though. And the US certainly saved a few millions on the WHO. And other international organisations where they now have no (official) say anymore.

And being intelligent actually makes it more likely to believe in conspiracy theories.

Got a source for that? A quick Google leads me to an article that says at least that education and conspiracy theories are negatively correlated.

I stand corrected. It was not intelligence but the status in society. (And there especially unintelligent men are suspectible.)
It doesn't matter if you have low social status middle or high. In the low middle you are more suspectible because you think you are a loser of the conspiracies. (for the US probably read as: MAGA worker couple)

The book (about the study) is German only I think.
https://www.luebbe.de/quadriga/buecher/gesellschaft/fake-facts/id_7818123

[OtherJen]

How has your life improved as a result of a Trump trade deal?

Nothing comes to mind.  I would actually expect a net loss as an early retiree as a result of moving more jobs back to the US with higher wages.

Have people in your community benefitted from those jobs? Have the tariffs led to increases in local business?

I am genuinely curious.

[driftwood]

Depends on the type/level of support they give to Trump.

Voting for a candidate as the lesser of other evils? I can understand that. Voting for a specific party to keep that party in power vs another party, I can understand this too. Wouldn't be a deal breaker, because I see most parties and candidates as pretty crappy choices and I wouldn't choose any of the top choices as my leader.

But if you mean they are into Trump, they like him, they respect him as a leader?  Yeah that would be a dealbreaker for me.  Or at least I'd respect them much less.

[joleran]

I can't think of any trade deal that Trump made at all. Examples?
He is great at ending treaties though. And the US certainly saved a few millions on the WHO. And other international organisations where they now have no (official) say anymore.

The biggest one was https://ustr.gov/usmca - other stances taken diplomatically have led to less formal adjustments to trade.  It is a long term position capitalizing on relative national strengths - the US is perhaps the best place in the world to start a new business that eventually becomes wildly successful (risk/reward proposition)

I am greatly skeptical of the benefits to the US of most, if not all, international organizations.  A few million is a pittance, but Trump's decisive early travel bans in the face of the WHO, while met with cries of racism, almost certainly saved countless lives.

Have people in your community benefitted from those jobs? Have the tariffs led to increases in local business?

I am genuinely curious.

Not sure.  As a former high tech worker with relatively few connections to blue collar industry, my main connections to the industries that are supposedly being helped directly are limited to business owners that mostly gripe about unions, though some have talked about enjoying fewer EPA regulations.  Supporting Republican politics pretty much only hurts me professionally and personally, but I find it a compelling position nevertheless.

[GuitarStv]

Trump's decisive early travel bans in the face of the WHO, while met with cries of racism, almost certainly saved countless lives.

Trump restricted some travel from mainland China on Feb. 2, 2020.

There was no ban on travel from China's administrative zones though, so thousands of Chinese and foreign nationals from Hong Kong and Macau continued to enter the U.S. in the three months following though. These areas had Covid-19 at the time.  The bad did not effect Americans either . . . and thousands of Americans still arrived in the U.S. on direct flights from China after the restrictions were imposed.

It may have helped a bit, but there is little proof that the February restrictions helped save many lives.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-ban-travel-china-pandemic/

[joleran]

Trump restricted some travel from mainland China on Feb. 2, 2020.

There was no ban on travel from China's administrative zones though, so thousands of Chinese and foreign nationals from Hong Kong and Macau continued to enter the U.S. in the three months following though. These areas had Covid-19 at the time.  The bad did not effect Americans either . . . and thousands of Americans still arrived in the U.S. on direct flights from China after the restrictions were imposed.

It may have helped a bit, but there is little proof that the February restrictions helped save many lives.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-ban-travel-china-pandemic/

Fair enough.  Though, given intense political opposition, cries of racism, and Pelosi literally encouraging people to go hug Chinese nationals - I can't fault the policy too much compared to the apparent alternative.

[GuitarStv]

Trump restricted some travel from mainland China on Feb. 2, 2020.

There was no ban on travel from China's administrative zones though, so thousands of Chinese and foreign nationals from Hong Kong and Macau continued to enter the U.S. in the three months following though. These areas had Covid-19 at the time.  The bad did not effect Americans either . . . and thousands of Americans still arrived in the U.S. on direct flights from China after the restrictions were imposed.

It may have helped a bit, but there is little proof that the February restrictions helped save many lives.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-ban-travel-china-pandemic/

Fair enough.  Though, given intense political opposition, cries of racism, and Pelosi literally encouraging people to go hug Chinese nationals - I can't fault the policy too much compared to the apparent alternative.

I believe that many of the cries of racism came because of all the holes that Trump allowed . . .

Chinese people couldn't enter the US.  Unless they spent a couple extra bucks and flew to Hong Kong first.  Then it's fine.  It seemed to be another political thing in his spat with China.  The same way that he continually calls covid the 'China virus'.

[bbqbonelesswing]

Trump restricted some travel from mainland China on Feb. 2, 2020.

There was no ban on travel from China's administrative zones though, so thousands of Chinese and foreign nationals from Hong Kong and Macau continued to enter the U.S. in the three months following though. These areas had Covid-19 at the time.  The bad did not effect Americans either . . . and thousands of Americans still arrived in the U.S. on direct flights from China after the restrictions were imposed.

It may have helped a bit, but there is little proof that the February restrictions helped save many lives.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-ban-travel-china-pandemic/

Fair enough.  Though, given intense political opposition, cries of racism, and Pelosi literally encouraging people to go hug Chinese nationals - I can't fault the policy too much compared to the apparent alternative.

This is so tiresome. How hard is it to verify what you hear coming from Trump's Twitter account?

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/trumps-false-claims-about-pelosi-and-chinatown/

[joleran]

Sufficed to say, cries of fake news and misrepresenting facts abound across the political spectrum.  I don't agree with your source's spin on this, but I also don't trust that Trump was doing anything less than grandstanding and making a much bigger deal out of her comments for political gain.  The video and quote are incontestable, but the interpretation thereof is very open.

[Kris]

Trump restricted some travel from mainland China on Feb. 2, 2020.

There was no ban on travel from China's administrative zones though, so thousands of Chinese and foreign nationals from Hong Kong and Macau continued to enter the U.S. in the three months following though. These areas had Covid-19 at the time.  The bad did not effect Americans either . . . and thousands of Americans still arrived in the U.S. on direct flights from China after the restrictions were imposed.

It may have helped a bit, but there is little proof that the February restrictions helped save many lives.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-ban-travel-china-pandemic/

Fair enough.  Though, given intense political opposition, cries of racism, and Pelosi literally encouraging people to go hug Chinese nationals - I can't fault the policy too much compared to the apparent alternative.

This is so tiresome. How hard is it to verify what you hear coming from Trump's Twitter account?

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/trumps-false-claims-about-pelosi-and-chinatown/

Support of Trump is basically predicated on not verifying the accuracy of what he says, plus dismissing any source that explains the inaccuracy as spin or fake news.

[joleran]

Support of Trump is basically predicated on not verifying the accuracy of what he says, plus dismissing any source that explains the inaccuracy as spin or fake news.

The way I look at it is that Trump is a storyteller who is very good at exerting his own spin.  He is very good at constructing a plausible narrative that frames his opponents' mindsets in poor light by inserting motivations into their actual behavior using hyperbole.  Most "fact checks" I see are either willfully or naively ignorant of this approach - the linked article spends an inordinate amount of time on whether Pelosi actually posted the video directly and utterly ignores the likely political motivations inherent in her actions which comprise the thrust and intent of Trumps attack on her.

[bbqbonelesswing]

Support of Trump is basically predicated on not verifying the accuracy of what he says, plus dismissing any source that explains the inaccuracy as spin or fake news.

The way I look at it is that Trump is a storyteller who is very good at exerting his own spin.  He is very good at constructing a plausible narrative that frames his opponents' mindsets in poor light by inserting motivations into their actual behavior using hyperbole.  Most "fact checks" I see are either willfully or naively ignorant of this approach - the linked article spends an inordinate amount of time on whether Pelosi actually posted the video directly and utterly ignores the likely political motivations inherent in her actions which comprise the thrust and intent of Trumps attack on her.

I think "lying" is the word you're looking for.

[joleran]

I think "lying" is the word you're looking for.

You're not wrong, but focusing on this aspect means you are missing the true message that he is communicating and what is actually resonating with his base.  His lies are obvious to all - that's what makes him a non-traditional politician.  Sometimes I think that a key complaint from the left is that he's just not better at lying to people and it's seen as incompetence or disrespect instead of a coherent strategy.

[MaybeBabyMustache]

Support of Trump is basically predicated on not verifying the accuracy of what he says, plus dismissing any source that explains the inaccuracy as spin or fake news.

The way I look at it is that Trump is a storyteller who is very good at exerting his own spin.  He is very good at constructing a plausible narrative that frames his opponents' mindsets in poor light by inserting motivations into their actual behavior using hyperbole.  Most "fact checks" I see are either willfully or naively ignorant of this approach - the linked article spends an inordinate amount of time on whether Pelosi actually posted the video directly and utterly ignores the likely political motivations inherent in her actions which comprise the thrust and intent of Trumps attack on her.

That's a very, very generous description of Trump's actions. If you described a TV personality or opinion piece writer in this way, it wouldn't be my favorite but I would understand the distinction of difference between factually based news & "entertainment". However, you're describing the President of the United States. A person I would like very much to be able to trust. A person who should be factual & not repeatedly attempt to "spin" a "plausible narrative."

I've disagreed with policies of previous presidents. However, I will give them universal credit for (almost always) attempting to unite the country and (again, almost always) doing their best attempt at sharing factually validated information. Trump does the opposite of this, almost always, in an attempt to divide. Why do you think that is? What's your attribution to this behavior? When you create spin regularly, people doubt you.

[MaybeBabyMustache]

I think "lying" is the word you're looking for.

You're not wrong, but focusing on this aspect means you are missing the true message that he is communicating and what is actually resonating with his base.  His lies are obvious to all - that's what makes him a non-traditional politician.  Sometimes I think that a key complaint from the left is that he's just not better at lying to people and it's seen as incompetence or disrespect instead of a coherent strategy.

yeah, I'm not looking for a liar as a president. Regardless of political party affiliation, I want someone I can believe, even when I disagree. So, pass. Definitely not my key complaint.

[bbqbonelesswing]

I think "lying" is the word you're looking for.

You're not wrong, but focusing on this aspect means you are missing the true message that he is communicating and what is actually resonating with his base.  His lies are obvious to all - that's what makes him a non-traditional politician.  Sometimes I think that a key complaint from the left is that he's just not better at lying to people and it's seen as incompetence or disrespect instead of a coherent strategy.

I doubt his lies are "obvious to all." You mentioned a few here that you seem to believe- the success of Trump's Chinese "travel ban", lying about Pelosi, and not being able to name more than one completed trade deal, or anyone who it's benefitted.

That's not "hyperbole", that's more like "living in an alternate universe".

[sherr]

I've disagreed with policies of previous presidents. However, I will give them universal credit for (almost always) attempting to unite the country and (again, almost always) doing their best attempt at sharing factually validated information. Trump does the opposite of this, almost always, in an attempt to divide. Why do you think that is? What's your attribution to this behavior? When you create spin regularly, people doubt you.

"Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership." - General James Mattis, Trump's Secretary of Defense

[OtherJen]

I think "lying" is the word you're looking for.

You're not wrong, but focusing on this aspect means you are missing the true message that he is communicating and what is actually resonating with his base.  His lies are obvious to all - that's what makes him a non-traditional politician.  Sometimes I think that a key complaint from the left is that he's just not better at lying to people and it's seen as incompetence or disrespect instead of a coherent strategy.

yeah, I'm not looking for a liar as a president. Regardless of political party affiliation, I want someone I can believe, even when I disagree. So, pass. Definitely not my key complaint.

Same. I also don't approve of excuse-making for terrible behavior.

[RetiredAt63]

Looking at joleran's posts, I see 3 possibilities.
1. He is a troll.
2. He likes to play his version of devil's advocate.
3. He is for real and what you are dealing with in this election.

His approach to Trump answers the thread's question, for me his opinion of Trump is a deal breaker. I'm too old to waste any of my remaining precious 25 years on any discussions with him.

And in reference to another thread, if Puerto Rico is tired of being a territory, they might want to consider being a Province.  Newfoundland joined Confederation in 1949, it's conceivable.

[joleran]

Looking at joleran's posts, I see 3 possibilities.
3. He is for real and what you are dealing with in this election.

His approach to Trump answers the thread's question, for me his opinion of Trump is a deal breaker. I'm too old to waste any of my remaining precious 25 years on any discussions with him.

As bad as Trump is, I see the alternative as being far worse.  I don't object to much of Biden's published plans, but where it hits home is centered around foreign policy and identity politics.  We're far from the days of polite discourse regardless, and I greatly miss those days.  Trump has diminished the presidency significantly and I wish desperately for a better option.

[jrhampt]

Good news!  Biden is that better option.

As far as deal breaker or not, if a Trump supporter is not vocal about it or (have a couple of these in the family) is pro-Trump only because pro-choice and has deluded themselves into voting for him that way, if I value the relationship enough I avoid the subject.  I'm not looking to make any new Trump supporter friendships, though, and I've definitely let some pro-Trump acquaintances go in the past four years.  And, hey, it's a pandemic, so my circle right now is pretty small anyway.

[Villanelle]

I don't like Trump.  He's a low-brow dick that most recently just made me very annoyed seeing him debate Biden in an incredibly childish manner.  He still gets my vote because his policies are generally good, he is relatable and patriotic, and the alternative is self-hatred and embracing ideological fairy tales.

Patriotic?  Have you read the things he has said about those who died serving this country?

[mm1970]

All politicians are irrelevant to me and have a negligible impact on my life, no matter what they do. I’ve lived all over the country and can’t recall a single politician having a lasting impact. Sure, I have to roll with new this and new that, all temporary.

In my opinion, the hate for the current president is unhealthy for you. It is laughable to me to see all the hypocrisy of the hate that is spewed here at times. Trump is trump, will be trump. In four years and a couple months no matter what he will be in the history books. I think the real worry is Congress and how inept they seem to be.

I will say a deal breaker to me is someone who blindly follows anything or anyone.

I'm pretty much onboard with this line of thinking.   There have been several presidents in my lifetime that I didn't care for but none of them seriously affected my life.   This one or the next one won't either.
If you didn't learn anything from that debate the other night, you should have at least seen that solutions to issues in your life are not going to be fixed by the folks in DC.

This thread also points out how rude, hateful and hard headed the anti Trump crowd is.  A whole bunch of threads and posts throughout this forum focused on nothing but outright hate for Trump, but I've yet to see one against Biden.   Pretty hypocritical how the anti DT crowd calls out DT all the time as being hateful, racist, etc. while all they do is spew hate for him and anybody that supports him.

Much like the conservatives did during Barack Obama's tenure - right?

Its all fun and games until your family has minority or LGBTQ members in it. Then you begin to understand a different perspective. Even the white ladies here experience a different America than us white guys. Its time to break the power monopoly religion and old white guys hold over our society.

RE: "Stand back and stand down". Trump could have told these people to simply go home, put their guns away and vote for change just like the rest of us. Or work with existing political mechanisms to get more people to vote for their party's objectives. Nope, he'd apparently rather they stand back and be ready for a call to action. Intimidating or assaulting people is a better way to hold on to power in 2020 America? Not a good sign...

Yup.  I'll add, on a personal note...

STAY THE FUCK OUT OF MY UTERUS.

[MaybeBabyMustache]

Looking at joleran's posts, I see 3 possibilities.
3. He is for real and what you are dealing with in this election.

His approach to Trump answers the thread's question, for me his opinion of Trump is a deal breaker. I'm too old to waste any of my remaining precious 25 years on any discussions with him.

As bad as Trump is, I see the alternative as being far worse.  I don't object to much of Biden's published plans, but where it hits home is centered around foreign policy and identity politics.  We're far from the days of polite discourse regardless, and I greatly miss those days.  Trump has diminished the presidency significantly and I wish desperately for a better option.

Identity politics? Are you referring to equal rights for minorities. gays & women? Because, yes, that's absolutely a difference between the two candidates. Biden has consistently demonstrated his respect for others, including those in groups that require additional support (facing systemic challenges.) Considering Trump the better candidate in any way on "identity politics" suggest that's we are absolutely miles apart on anything worth debating.

So, I'll just reiterate Just Joe:

Its all fun and games until your family has minority or LGBTQ members in it. Then you begin to understand a different perspective. Even the white ladies here experience a different America than us white guys. Its time to break the power monopoly religion and old white guys hold over our society.
 

[nick663]

I can't think of any trade deal that Trump made at all. Examples?
He is great at ending treaties though. And the US certainly saved a few millions on the WHO. And other international organisations where they now have no (official) say anymore.

The biggest one was https://ustr.gov/usmca - other stances taken diplomatically have led to less formal adjustments to trade.  It is a long term position capitalizing on relative national strengths - the US is perhaps the best place in the world to start a new business that eventually becomes wildly successful (risk/reward proposition)

I am greatly skeptical of the benefits to the US of most, if not all, international organizations.  A few million is a pittance, but Trump's decisive early travel bans in the face of the WHO, while met with cries of racism, almost certainly saved countless lives.

You should look into this deeper because from what I have seen, the claim people called the China travel "ban" racist is usually supported by people misrepresenting the facts.

Around the same time the China travel "ban" was announced, Trump banned travel from 6 other nations.  That travel ban was called racist by many civil rights groups along with people on the left:  https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/civil-rights-groups-condemn-trump-s-travel-ban-expansion-six-n1142231
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/04/opinion/trump-travel-ban-nigeria.html

[joleran]

Identity politics? Are you referring to equal rights for minorities. gays & women? Because, yes, that's absolutely a difference between the two candidates. Biden has consistently demonstrated his respect for others, including those in groups that require additional support (facing systemic challenges.) Considering Trump the better candidate in any way on "identity politics" suggest that's we are absolutely miles apart on anything worth debating.

So, I'll just reiterate Just Joe:

Its all fun and games until your family has minority or LGBTQ members in it. Then you begin to understand a different perspective. Even the white ladies here experience a different America than us white guys. Its time to break the power monopoly religion and old white guys hold over our society.

Separating people based on the color of their skin and denigrating them as being unable to compete without special privileges is contemptuous and racist.  Trump holds people to be equal under the law and in reality.  It is very clear that we will not see eye to eye on the idea that all people are created equal, and that anyone of any color, gender, creed, etc. should be treated the same.

[partgypsy]

Joleran, you might benefit from reading more about the history of the United States. Not just regarding the civil war, but how race was used to divide people, and minorities were not allowed the same rights and opportunities. It's not just ancient history, it's up into recent history which is informing the present. Some things to look up; wilmington insurrection. The oklahoma race riot, the influence of the KKK in politics and mainstream life in the south. The use of tests to suppress minority voting. In the rest of the country the use of redlining, ability of blacks to obtain mortgages. There's really almost too much to get into. This is living history, the people who walked at selma are passing away but some are still alive and their children certainly are. Currently I live in NC. It's actually a purple state, close to half democrats, based on that we should have like 6 democrats, 7 Republicans. Instead we have 9 Republicans and 3 Democrats due to gerrymandering largely based along racial lines. It's STILL going on. Trump holds everyone is equal under the law and reality -are you serious? Anyways one thing I will be looking for if Biden is elected, is election and campaign reform. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-secret-files-of-the-master-of-modern-republican-gerrymandering/amp

[joleran]

Joleran, you might benefit from reading more about the history of the United States. Not just regarding the civil war, but how race was used to divide people, and minorities were not allowed the same rights and opportunities. It's not just ancient history, it's up into recent history which is informing the present. Some things to look up; wilmington insurrection. The oklahoma race riot, the influence of the KKK in politics and mainstream life in the south. The use of tests to suppress minority voting. In the rest of the country the use of redlining, ability of blacks to obtain mortgages. There's really almost too much to get into. This is living history, the people who walked at selma are passing away but some are still alive and their children certainly are. Currently I live in NC. It's actually a purple state, close to half democrats, based on that we should have like 6 democrats, 7 Republicans. Instead we have 9 Republicans and 3 Democrats due to gerrymandering largely based along racial lines. It's still going on.

It's about who we want to be.  I certainly won't deny the deeply racist history of the US, albeit led by Democrats (who would now attempt to claim a party "switch").  Political corruption and gerrymandering is not a one-party issue either.  Do we really want to acknowledge these past injustices and simply correct them with further injustices?  If so, when do we normalize being an out-of-style color or religion?  Or is it better to start as we mean to go on and while regretting the past, vow to treat everyone as equals?

[MaybeBabyMustache]

Identity politics? Are you referring to equal rights for minorities. gays & women? Because, yes, that's absolutely a difference between the two candidates. Biden has consistently demonstrated his respect for others, including those in groups that require additional support (facing systemic challenges.) Considering Trump the better candidate in any way on "identity politics" suggest that's we are absolutely miles apart on anything worth debating.

So, I'll just reiterate Just Joe:

Its all fun and games until your family has minority or LGBTQ members in it. Then you begin to understand a different perspective. Even the white ladies here experience a different America than us white guys. Its time to break the power monopoly religion and old white guys hold over our society.

Separating people based on the color of their skin and denigrating them as being unable to compete without special privileges is contemptuous and racist.  Trump holds people to be equal under the law and in reality. It is very clear that we will not see eye to eye on the idea that all people are created equal, and that anyone of any color, gender, creed, etc. should be treated the same.

And with that, I tap out. I can't have a conversation with someone that believes Trump holds everyone equal. The amount of data that supports the absolute opposite of that is staggering. Good luck to you.

[joleran]

 

And with that, I tap out. I can't have a conversation with someone that believes Trump holds everyone equal. The amount of data that supports the absolute opposite of that is staggering. Good luck to you.

I will gladly defend your right to speak your mind with my life as an absolute moral conviction that can never be abridged even as I disrespect your actual position.  Common ground can be found and lived and there is so much to lose for even the poorest minimum wage earners in the US.