Am I crazy for supporting Donald Trump? - Page 4
Blogs > Starlightsun |
Rathwirt
United States42 Posts
| ||
DarkPlasmaBall
United States42202 Posts
On July 26 2016 11:00 Rathwirt wrote: I'm voting for him because yolo. We know exactly what we'll get with Clinton. Trump will be interesting, at least. This is what we'll get with Clinton: | ||
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
On July 26 2016 10:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I'd rather have him become informed That's why he asked us! Agree! But in the meantime I'm willing to discourage wavering trump voters, cause, ya know, I don't like the collapse of civilization. | ||
Scarecrow
Korea (South)9172 Posts
On July 26 2016 11:00 Rathwirt wrote: I'm voting for him because yolo. We know exactly what we'll get with Clinton. Trump will be interesting, at least. There's plenty of interesting shit to watch, politics isn't meant to be about entertainment. If you don't care then don't vote. It's like hiring some loud-mouthed drunk to drive you home (cos yolo) instead of a boring company driver who's sober and will go the safe, standard route? It'll be interesting at least. Except it's not a car, it's the entire country. | ||
MarlieChurphy
United States2063 Posts
Ie; trump doesnt really matter much more than hillary for the 4-8 years they would be in office, but whoever is in office during that time mold congress for the next few decades or something. That being said, I have been able to accurately predict like as soon as the leading candidates start forming a year or so before they get the parties nomination, who will win the presidential election for like the last 12 years or so. It's legitimately super clear and obvious to me. I don't know if it's all gerrymandering, voter fraud, rigged machines, and all that conspiracy shit, or just simply that I can tell based on the little to medium amount of political news I take in and assume that the average dumb american voter uses to cast their vote. Like I have my finger on the pulse of the american citizens or something. Anyway, It's gonna be President Trump. And I already bet my friend 100$ like 6 months ago. | ||
MarlieChurphy
United States2063 Posts
On July 26 2016 12:53 Scarecrow wrote: There's plenty of interesting shit to watch, politics isn't meant to be about entertainment. If you don't care then don't vote. It's like hiring some loud-mouthed drunk to drive you home (cos yolo) instead of a boring company driver who's sober and will go the safe, standard route? It'll be interesting at least. Except it's not a car, it's the entire country. What are you talking about, this car is going to be GREAT again. Hillaries people constantly set themselves up for this kinda shit too, it's definitely entertaining. http://i.imgur.com/B7iIPWG.jpg | ||
Barrin
United States5002 Posts
On July 26 2016 08:48 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Yes. Melliflue just gave a whole bunch of reasons why, as have many other people, both in this thread and in the US Politics thread I was hoping to hear it in your words. On July 26 2016 10:28 EatThePath wrote: Yes Barrin don't be thick. On July 26 2016 12:03 EatThePath wrote: I'm willing to discourage wavering trump voters, cause, ya know, I don't like the collapse of civilization. Yours too. | ||
Barrin
United States5002 Posts
"If Trump is elected, all that is gone." Really now? | ||
DarkPlasmaBall
United States42202 Posts
On July 26 2016 21:01 Barrin wrote: "If Trump is elected, all that is gone." Really now? The RNC and Trump oppose these and Republicans have explicitly tried repealing these at one level or another, yeah. | ||
Barrin
United States5002 Posts
On July 26 2016 21:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: The RNC and Trump oppose these and Republicans have explicitly tried repealing these at one level or another, yeah. So [the ones we already have] would be gone? | ||
farvacola
United States18768 Posts
| ||
Barrin
United States5002 Posts
On July 26 2016 22:06 farvacola wrote: Trump's proposed Supreme Court candidates would wreak havoc on the current state of US constitutional precedent. All of them? What do you mean by "wreak havoc"? Only one of them gets to become 1 of the 9, right? | ||
farvacola
United States18768 Posts
| ||
Barrin
United States5002 Posts
On July 26 2016 22:48 farvacola wrote: The next president will almost certainly get to appoint at least 2 if not 3 SC justices, and wreak havoc means: overturn Roe v. Wade, make habeas petitions even harder to grant, increase state sovereign immunity, make 1983 actions against the government harder to bring, beef up police immunities, curtail 1st Amendment rights under libel/slander law, potentially overturn Obergefell, and the list goes on. All of them? All of those things? | ||
farvacola
United States18768 Posts
| ||
Barrin
United States5002 Posts
On July 26 2016 23:03 farvacola wrote: I never used the word all, the list is merely exemplary. You didn't qualify it with something like "some", so "all" was implied. Even only one of them is cause to not vote Trump. But why? More to the point: Is it only a cause not to vote for Trump, or are you also implying that it is a cause to vote for Hillary? | ||
farvacola
United States18768 Posts
| ||
Barrin
United States5002 Posts
On July 26 2016 23:24 farvacola wrote: I'm sure you asked the same question when they took away your ban hammer. Sometimes, only self-reflection will do. I did indeed, even though I knew. The reason given was later rescinded as not the real reason. You really can't avoid logical fallacies, can you? | ||
farvacola
United States18768 Posts
| ||
Barrin
United States5002 Posts
On July 26 2016 23:24 farvacola wrote: and asking to be spoon-fed information that accords with I am not really here to learn (although that is a nice side effect), but rather to highlight any logical inconsistencies. your insipid style of thinking Do not confuse my method of examination, which closely resembles the Socratic Method, with my "style of thinking". begets only an understanding as to how one might open their mouth widest. What do you mean by this? | ||
| ||