Legitimate criticisms of each 2016 Presidential Candidate

[Gin1984]

Can't say I didn't warn you.

Over eight months ago, one day after your warning, I wrote this:

The success of Trump's candidacy is seriously, honestly causing me to lose hope about the long-term future of the world.  Again, the parallels being drawn between the content of Trump's rhetoric and modern society's greatest atrocities are not hyperbolic.  Yet in spite of that, or because of that, his campaign is finding wild success among the population at large.  He's tapping into an ugliness of human society that is always there--when not openly on display on the surface then hiding latent just below it--and making me doubt our ability to ever truly rise above it.  Civilization is hideously fragile, and once again we're starting to witness the removal of the varnish separating us from the horrors underneath.

And I just spent the last eleven hours still feeling that way, in a state of near-total despair at our civilization apparently crumbling around us.  Then I read this (WBW:  It's Going to Be Okay), and now I feel much better.

Yea, no.  I will be looking at other countries for opportunities.  My degree does mean something abroad. I can't have my daughter raise in a country where people would rather vote for a rapist instead of a woman.

[sol]

Thanks for the link. It helped.

I failed to find anything reassuring in there.

As it turns out, America is a big diverse country full of secret bigots who lied to pollsters about their darkest innermost thoughts.  I am only disappointed in us.

Regardless of the policy implications of an unchecked conservative movement controlling every branch of government, which are disturbing but a separate issue, I'm just disheartened that we turned out to be so ugly.  I thought we were better than this.  I thought we had learned to value diversity and equality and inclusiveness, but instead the people rose up in support of white nationalism, trickle down economics, and blatantly unconstitutional discrimination.  The modern electorate apparently favors destroying everything America once stood for.

So be it.  If this is what America has become, then democracy dictates that this is what America shall be.  Warts and all.

[Glenstache]

Thanks for the link. It helped.

I failed to find anything reassuring in there.

As it turns out, America is a big diverse country full of secret bigots who lied to pollsters about their darkest innermost thoughts.  I am only disappointed in us.

Regardless of the policy implications of an unchecked conservative movement controlling every branch of government, which are disturbing but a separate issue, I'm just disheartened that we turned out to be so ugly.  I thought we were better than this.  I thought we had learned to value diversity and equality and inclusiveness, but instead the people rose up in support of white nationalism, trickle down economics, and blatantly unconstitutional discrimination.  The modern electorate apparently favors destroying everything America once stood for.

So be it.  If this is what America has become, then democracy dictates that this is what America shall be.  Warts and all.

Yeah, a lot of false equivalency in the WBY piece. The only part I thought was useful was this:

So yeah, we’re gonna have to look at Trump’s face a lot for a bunch of years, and that’s a shame. And he might do some really shitty things. And it’s fair to be really upset about having a guy like Trump representing you in the world and worried about how the country will fare under his administration. But if we want to make the best of this, we need to ask a question: Why did those 50 million people vote for Trump?

Trying to get to the bottom of that question will help us learn from the past and get better.

Quite frankly, I'm not sure that has an easy answer and I'm not convinced we would like it, anyways. Those 50 million people were willing to vote for a bigoted misogynist, who also has terrible economic ideas (at least according to pretty much every economist). What if the answer is that our nation includes a significant fraction of people who are also biogted and misogynistic and have no understanding of economics, and that as a block they can control an election? Or, that people are stupid enough to believe anything they hear?

Regardless of if a person is conservative or liberal on the social and fiscal fronts, this election result is a total failure. Trump won by identifying a group that he could mobilize to show up ("I love the under educated") and assumed he would still carry a large fraction of people who just vote red because, well, that's what they do. The former was motivated by the worst of what Trump said, the latter were simply complacent about it.

[RangerOne]

Well part of the bad economic plan was promising a tax cut to the middle class. Which of course with a bit of help we can see that this will not be true for a broad range of people...

They sold it well. Whether it gets implemented and then seen as a bait and switch remains to be seen. Married couples, single adults and families with 1 or 2 kids should come out a tiny bit ahead with this plan. Saving maybe a few grand in taxes a year.

Whether it will get the same backlash as the ACA once some people saw costs rise remains to be seen.

At this point I am just hopping that he does a poor enough job that in 4 years we have a shot to beat him... It is hard as heel to dethrone the sitting president and it will take more than an establishment democrat to do it.

[Metric Mouse]

At this point I am just hopping that he does a poor enough job that in 4 years we have a shot to beat him... It is hard as heel to dethrone the sitting president and it will take more than an establishment democrat to do it.

Maybe that's the best part about a Trump presidency - in the future politicians will have to actually appeal to voters and respond to the needs of more than a few select demographics to win, and then deliver on those promises to keep their office.

Or, ya know, maybe it'll be like the last go-around, where the majority party will ram-rod a few select pieces of legislation while the minority party focuses on making Trump a one-term president by obstructing everything he supports.

[Cressida]

On March 1, over 8 months ago, I wrote:

Well, with Super Tuesday mere hours away, time to put my prediction down:

This November, Trump defeats Hillary.

(Please note that a prediction is different than a wish.)

At the time, Trump was considered a long shot (to Cruz or Rubio, mostly, though there were a few others) to even win his primary.  Hillary (despite a surprisingly rousing contest from Bernie) was very likely to win hers, though.

Here we are.

Can't say I didn't warn you.

jesus bleeding motherfucking christ, arebelspy, nobody gives a fuck. MOD NOTE: Forum Rule #1 and personal attack. Not acceptable.

[golden1]

Quote from: pbkmaine on November 09, 2016, 09:00:06 AM
Thanks for the link. It helped.

I failed to find anything reassuring in there.

As it turns out, America is a big diverse country full of secret bigots who lied to pollsters about their darkest innermost thoughts.  I am only disappointed in us.

Regardless of the policy implications of an unchecked conservative movement controlling every branch of government, which are disturbing but a separate issue, I'm just disheartened that we turned out to be so ugly.  I thought we were better than this.  I thought we had learned to value diversity and equality and inclusiveness, but instead the people rose up in support of white nationalism, trickle down economics, and blatantly unconstitutional discrimination.  The modern electorate apparently favors destroying everything America once stood for.

So be it.  If this is what America has become, then democracy dictates that this is what America shall be.  Warts and all.

Yep, we always get he country we deserve.  Pretty disheartening but it's the reality. 

[jim555]

Trump win = Triumph of the Stupid
Trumpees are the stupidest people I have ever encountered.  You can't reason with stupid.
"But its got electrolytes, its what plants crave!"

[TheStachery]

really wish that these liberals would stop throwing temper tantrums and get behind and support Trump for better or worse.  He has not even taken office or done a single thing yet to denounce him.  Give him a chance.  Trump is not going to step down because a bunch liberals who live in a bubble are protesting and aren't happy. 

[jim555]

really wish that these liberals would stop throwing temper tantrums and get behind and support Trump for better or worse.  He has not even taken office or done a single thing yet to denounce him.  Give him a chance.  Trump is not going to step down because a bunch liberals who live in a bubble are protesting and aren't happy.

I don't give him a chance.  I know enough about him to resist him at every turn.

[TheStachery]

really wish that these liberals would stop throwing temper tantrums and get behind and support Trump for better or worse.  He has not even taken office or done a single thing yet to denounce him.  Give him a chance.  Trump is not going to step down because a bunch liberals who live in a bubble are protesting and aren't happy.

I don't give him a chance.  I know enough about him to resist him at every turn.

The irony is not lost on me.

[sol]

really wish that these liberals would stop throwing temper tantrums and get behind and support Trump

You mean the same way conservatives got behind Obama in 2008?  When they publicly vowed to oppose him at every turn, to devote their lives to making him a one term president, instead of governing?  Republicans literally shut down the federal government in protest.

I cannot fathom how those same people are now expecting Democrats to forgive and forget and just fall in line.

Even if you disagree with Obama's policy positions, he was at least a decent human being.  I'm not looking forward to the first state of the union address where Trump says Angela Merkel is fat.

[wenchsenior]

really wish that these liberals would stop throwing temper tantrums and get behind and support Trump

You mean the same way conservatives got behind Obama in 2008?  When they publicly vowed to oppose him at every turn, to devote their lives to making him a one term president, instead of governing?  Republicans literally shut down the federal government in protest.

I cannot fathom how those same people are now expecting Democrats to forgive and forget and just fall in line.

Even if you disagree with Obama's policy positions, he was at least a decent human being.  I'm not looking forward to the first state of the union address where Trump says Angela Merkel is fat.

Temper tantrums aside,  it's pretty ludicrous to expect anyone, conservative, liberal, libertarian, or whatever, to support ANY candidate whose platform is full of things that they fundamentally oppose as being acceptable. Nor is it moral to do so, in my opinion. We SHOULD stand up and resist and oppose things we find unacceptable.  To that extent, as frustrating as I personally found 8 years of GOP obstruction to the Obama administration, I can kinda squint and see how the resistors were being true to their moral codes.

I support nonviolence. I support peaceful transition of power. I am unlikely to support much of anything Trump and the GOP does or attempts to do, and I'm not going to. Ever. Because their agenda is mostly composed of elements that I find completely unacceptable and destructive.  This doesn't having anything to do with Trump personally (though I find him unqualified and personally repugnant). However, if he promotes policies that I agree with, I will support  him on those policies, regardless of how unacceptable I find him as a person or a leader. 

As an example, I found George W Bush to be lacking in traits I personally would prefer in a leader, but not entirely repugnant. However, I found his policies and administration mostly reprehensible, and would consider myself morally compromised if I had 'fallen in line' and supported them for the 'good of the country'. On the other hand, I wholeheartedly and vocally supported a few of his policies and attempted policies, that I believed WERE for the good of the nation. Same with Obama, who I find personally very  impressive, and whose policies and vision I mostly support. But a few of his policies I find unacceptable, and I oppose them.

It's not reasonable to ask people to put aside their fundamental values for the good of the 'team'.

[LeRainDrop]

On March 1, over 8 months ago, I wrote:

Well, with Super Tuesday mere hours away, time to put my prediction down:

This November, Trump defeats Hillary.

(Please note that a prediction is different than a wish.)

At the time, Trump was considered a long shot (to Cruz or Rubio, mostly, though there were a few others) to even win his primary.  Hillary (despite a surprisingly rousing contest from Bernie) was very likely to win hers, though.

Here we are.

Can't say I didn't warn you.

jesus bleeding motherfucking christ, arebelspy, nobody gives a fuck.

Cressida, that was a pretty mean thing to say.  I actually was curious to remember which of the MMM folks predicted (not hoped for) Trump way back many months ago.

really wish that these liberals would stop throwing temper tantrums and get behind and support Trump

You mean the same way conservatives got behind Obama in 2008?  When they publicly vowed to oppose him at every turn, to devote their lives to making him a one term president, instead of governing?  Republicans literally shut down the federal government in protest.

I realize there were many conservatives who followed the path that you describe, sol, but I'll point out that many others did accept the election results and quickly adopted an attitude of hoping for Obama to serve well.  I did not vote for him, but he is my president and has been since the very day he was sworn in.  That doesn't mean I didn't continue to advocate for my policy views, but it does mean I acknowledged the results of the election system as official and fair and I had optimism and hope for a well-run and continuously improving country.

[sol]

I realize there were many conservatives who followed the path that you describe, sol, but I'll point out that many others did accept the election results and quickly adopted an attitude of hoping for Obama to serve well.

Not enough of them to avoid a government shutdown. 

You must be referring to the congressional republicans who voted in favor of health care reform?  All zero of them?

Maybe you meant the handful of Republicans who helped break the filibuster on the minimum wage, equal pay for women, the end offshoring act, infrastructure spending, student loan reform, unemployment benefits, the buffet rule, and ending oil company subsidies?  Oh right, there weren't any because Republicans filibustered all of that and more.

I see what you're trying to say, not all conservative voters in America were balls-out obstructionists after Obama's sweeping electoral victory.  But their elected representatives absolutely were.  100% obstructionist 100% of the time, so you'll understand why I'm not terribly sympathetic to claims that Republicans wanted Obama to govern well.  If they wanted to govern, they could have passed some damn laws instead of being the least productive Congress in American history.

[VladTheImpaler]

Hey Sol
Is your avatar a photo of you?
I wundered this long time.

[LeRainDrop]

I realize there were many conservatives who followed the path that you describe, sol, but I'll point out that many others did accept the election results and quickly adopted an attitude of hoping for Obama to serve well.

. . . I see what you're trying to say, not all conservative voters in America were balls-out obstructionists after Obama's sweeping electoral victory.  But their elected representatives absolutely were.  100% obstructionist 100% of the time, so you'll understand why I'm not terribly sympathetic to claims that Republicans wanted Obama to govern well.  If they wanted to govern, they could have passed some damn laws instead of being the least productive Congress in American history.

Right, and I think you've identified one of the big reasons why so many people are sick of politicians.  Some voters feel strongly about who they voted for, but many others were just leaning that way.  So when the voters who are not ardent partisans see their representatives playing procedural games, they also can get annoyed at them or throw their hands up in the air over the "Washington insiders."  And then what can they do?  Just vote for the other side next time?  That doesn't seem like much of a solution either because "they're all the same."

[sol]

Is your avatar a photo of you?

No. 

http://www.rogerballen.com/platteland/
http://hermanverwey.blogspot.com/2012/01/two-kindly-jovial-fellows.html

[VladTheImpaler]

Thanks Sol.
It is a photo of a mentally challenged man from South Africa.
That clears up the mystery.
I wanted ask for long time!

[sol]

Does this thread apply to presidents-elect?  How about to vice presidents-elect?

Because today Mike Pence is seeking to keep secret his emails from his time as governor.  Apparently he hired a lawyer to delete and redact emails he wrote relating to Indiana's efforts to block Obama's executive orders on immigration.

I hope the hypocrisy here is not lost on anyone.  Didn't you hear, Mike?  The American people demand full email transparency!

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2016/11/14/whats-mike-pence-hiding-his-emails/92839560/

[MDM]

I hope the hypocrisy here is not lost on anyone.

Nope, at least not in a sound-bitey way

Although, Pence's situation differs from Clinton's.  While Clinton apparently deleted e-mails after receiving a congressional subpoena to produce them, Pence has "...a decision handed down by Marion Superior Court in April, which decided that redactions the administration made to a public record could not be second-guessed by the court" on his side.

[Metric Mouse]

Does this thread apply to presidents-elect?  How about to vice presidents-elect?

Because today Mike Pence is seeking to keep secret his emails from his time as governor.  Apparently he hired a lawyer to delete and redact emails he wrote relating to Indiana's efforts to block Obama's executive orders on immigration.

I hope the hypocrisy here is not lost on anyone.  Didn't you hear, Mike?  The American people demand full email transparency!

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2016/11/14/whats-mike-pence-hiding-his-emails/92839560/

Wait, i thought everyone used private email servers and deleting emails was not a problem?

[sol]

Nope, at least not in a sound-bitey way

That's the funny part, though.  Of course the situations are different.  Clinton released all of her public emails, while Pence is trying to redact and conceal his public ones.  Clinton had a lawyer make the determination of which emails were public (which she released) and which were private (which she deleted on her end, though the recipient copies all still existed).  Pence hired a lawyer to specifically redact from his emails all evidence of government fraud, waste, and abuse.

But you have to admit there is humor in ANY republican arguing in favor of email secrecy these days.  If we're going to ask for full transparency from our elected officials, let's at least be consistent in how we apply that standard.  I won't extend the standard to Trump, of course, since he has refused to release his tax returns, documents about Trump University, or or any information about his business entanglements in Russia.  I think it's sort of a given at this point that he will be the least transparent President since Nixon.

[MDM]

Pence hired a lawyer to specifically redact from his emails all evidence of government fraud, waste, and abuse.

That may be true - don't know enough details to opine - but that's not in the linked article...?

If we're going to ask for full transparency from our elected officials, let's at least be consistent in how we apply that standard.

Consistency is good.  Don't want "full" transparency (e.g., I'm fine with keeping the nuclear launch codes secret).  Defining where to draw the "keep secret"/"disclose" line is difficult. 

I think Clinton fell victim to the same thing that brought down Nixon: it wasn't so much the original act as the attempted coverup.

I think it's sort of a given at this point that he will be the least transparent President since Nixon.

Speaking of Nixon...I guess we'll see.  For good or bad, it seems there is little about Trump that we can take as given....

[Jack]

really wish that these liberals would stop throwing temper tantrums and get behind and support Trump for better or worse.  He has not even taken office or done a single thing yet to denounce him.  Give him a chance.  Trump is not going to step down because a bunch liberals who live in a bubble are protesting and aren't happy.

Germans surely said the same thing in 1934.

Policy that's "bad" or "stupid" or "unfeasible" or whatever is one thing. But Trump's threats against civil liberties, support for torture, etc. is entirely another. It is literally an existential threat to freedom and justice, and I would rather see a civil war than support that totalitarian asshat!

[wenchsenior]

really wish that these liberals would stop throwing temper tantrums and get behind and support Trump for better or worse.  He has not even taken office or done a single thing yet to denounce him.  Give him a chance.  Trump is not going to step down because a bunch liberals who live in a bubble are protesting and aren't happy.

Germans surely said the same thing in 1934.

Policy that's "bad" or "stupid" or "unfeasible" or whatever is one thing. But Trump's threats against civil liberties, support for torture, etc. is entirely another. It is literally an existential threat to freedom and justice, and I would rather see a civil war than support that totalitarian asshat!

In particular, I think the difference between a worst-case-scenario, fascist Trump admin vs a run of the mill super conservative GOP admin, will emerge if the Trump admin starts actively persecuting or suppressing the free press. If we start seeing that, comparisons to true fascist regimes will begin no longer be hyperbole. Watch for it.

[Gin1984]

Pence hired a lawyer to specifically redact from his emails all evidence of government fraud, waste, and abuse.

That may be true - don't know enough details to opine - but that's not in the linked article...?

If we're going to ask for full transparency from our elected officials, let's at least be consistent in how we apply that standard.

Consistency is good.  Don't want "full" transparency (e.g., I'm fine with keeping the nuclear launch codes secret).  Defining where to draw the "keep secret"/"disclose" line is difficult. 

I think Clinton fell victim to the same thing that brought down Nixon: it wasn't so much the original act as the attempted coverup.

I think it's sort of a given at this point that he will be the least transparent President since Nixon.

Speaking of Nixon...I guess we'll see.  For good or bad, it seems there is little about Trump that we can take as given....

"The administration is fighting to conceal the contents of an email sent to Gov. Mike Pence by a political ally. That email is being sought by a prominent Democratic labor lawyer who says he wants to expose waste in the Republican administration." and
"In December 2014, Groth requested information regarding Pence's decision to hire outside counsel and the cost to Indiana taxpayers.
"I think joining the lawsuit without the attorney general and hiring that firm was a waste of taxpayer dollars and the people have the right to know how much of their money was spent,” Groth said. Groth is known in Indiana for representing the plaintiffs in the 2008 U.S. Supreme Court voter identification case, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board.
Pence produced the documents in the request “but those documents included substantial redaction,” according to court documents."

[MDM]

Pence hired a lawyer to specifically redact from his emails all evidence of government fraud, waste, and abuse.

That may be true - don't know enough details to opine - but that's not in the linked article...?

"...lawyer who says he wants to expose waste in the Republican administration." and
"I think...that...was a waste of taxpayer dollars...,” Groth said.
Pence produced the documents in the request “but those documents included substantial redaction,” according to court documents."

As I said, that may be true, but the article fairly states that it is Groth's opinion.  As Groth is the one bringing suit, his stated opinion may or may not be factual.  So far Pence has judicial backing for his actions.  That may change in the Indiana Supreme Court, but as things stand....