Hail To The Chief (Read Mod Warning In OP)

Trump ok has not issued orders for he’s supporters to commit genocide or is proposing WW3 yet. What I have observed so far is not good though, and he does not act like a normal human being

Trump similar to Hitler in lot of ways he’s militaristic. Trump believes in conspiracy theories that have time and time again proven to be wrong. He spreads lies about people he dislikes. Attacks women about their appearance and publically mocked a man with a disability for standing up to him. Just like Hitler Trump has threatened protestors, got them removed by force and was happy and laughing about it. How is this any way different when Hitler henchmen stopped people from protesting peacefully?

Hes vilified Muslims, Mexicans and people of colour because they looked different. He has blamed minorities for crime, rapes and murders. A year ago or so talked about building a wall to keep Mexicans out, and he also wanted to stop all Muslim from entering the United States for one year. Do you not see how dangerous that is if he got he’s way? Hitler started off by just deporting Jews from Germany. The Mass killings of Jews came later, and only during a World War when Hitler had nothing left to lose. Would Trump carry out a genocide and wipe out Muslim populations?

I see it like this Trump has shown he lacks apathy, remorse, decency, not emotionally stable, he lies about everything don’t care just like a dictator would act and lets not forget this man has been accused of raping and assaulting numerous women and was accused of raping a 13 year old girl. Trump is evil and is capable of carrying out terrible crimes acts against humanity, don’t be stupid and think hes not got in him!

Skullface McGubbin wrote: »

>Preaches "LOVE TRUMPS HATE"

>Attempts to light a girl's hair on fire

So tolerant :rolleyes:

And they would be Feminists.... Is your fellow woman a target if they don't group think ?

gandalf wrote: »

There are idiots on boths sides. Their actions don't invalidate the reason people protested just as the racist outpourings seen from knuckles draggers don't represent those who voted for Trump because they want gainful employment. A large part of the problems America faces today is generalising everything.

Are Trump supporters lighting people on fire ? Smashing up Washington ? Shouting Ala ackbar in Germany ? A few idiots ????

B_Wayne wrote: »

Shouting "Allahu akbar" isn't extremism... They were joining all demographics in a protest against Trump. Freedom of religion is a right. Was there anything actually extreme about the Muslim protesters or do they just make you uncomfortable?

You realise Germany was recently attacked by the Allah akbar lads yes ? No thought for the family's at all. Sickening even to try and defend that kind of nonsense.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Yes she was and yes he did. Anything to say about Trump? His policies? His appointments? Rejection of TPP?

Anything?

I thought we were just making jokes about his hand and skin colour and his hair ?

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I've done that numerous times, what many posters on this thread haven't done is give him an ounce of praise for anything, or even a chance. I've posted close to ten tweets on companies announcing bringing jobs back to the US and they've either been ignored, or made fun of then the rhetoric immediately went back to bashing the man. That isn't a fair environment to have any sort of real discussion where the outcome of a point has a predetermined negativity to it.

Given the jobs he announced he was bringing back were exaggerated and lied about, it's no wonder that people argued. And the rhetoric is, at least, pretty fair bashing from what I've seen. I'm sure there have been some unreasonable posts, but the incredibly unreasonable things in here -he has actually done or said-. That's why it's so negative. Because he keeps doing and saying lunatic things.

Thing is this squabbling with the media or people wanting his taxes doesn't make me think for a second perhaps his opponent was a better choice. Anytime I bring up something related to her I get called out for dodging questions or trying to shift the blame elsewhere, and that isn't fair either. Someone makes the point that Trump might be sued for owning foreign hotels and accepting money, I make the point the state department were taking money from the Saudi's and what not and I get attacked for it. It's my honest belief a disaster was avoided with Trump winning and I'm prepared to at least give the man a chance. That doesn't mean you can't bash him or call him out, but even when there's something positive and it just gets ignored it feels like a one way street and this thread becomes pointless.

The majority of the media is politically controlled by opponents of Trump, that is something which is never discussed here. If we want to talk about how brash Trump has been towards them, why can't we talk about the reasons for that.

The problem is that the assumption is immediately that anyone who says anything bad about Trump is a politically controlled enemy. How do you expect a civil conversation on the matter when that's the starting point?

Quite honestly, from having followed the news throughout the campaign, here's what I saw, and I'm sure others will have read it differently.

- Early days; Trump was an outsider amusing candidate, the nut choice. He was mostly ignored until he started saying ridiculous things. The Republican field was ridiculously large and the media started covering the most interesting one - the one doing the shouting. There wasn't a great deal of fact-checking because it was mostly amusement.

- Becomes candidate; That made people sit up, including individual reporters. And that's when fact-checking started to creep in and people started really turning against him. It was a "holy ****, what have we nominated here?" And the thing is, he was -still saying and doing- the same things. Only now they weren't so funny, it was dawning horror that he meant this ****.

- Late days: The media is being accused of lying, Trump is able to say anything he likes and people will back up his nonsense in the face of all available evidence. After all, the media are obviously against him, so what he says must be true and what they say must be false. No, that's not the case. The media are obviously against him because journalists are individual people as well and, from close proximity and covering what he's saying, they're completely horrified. Yeah, the media are totally against him (bar Breitbart and Fox wants to be with him, but even they had to stand with CNN that time), but that's because the sort of bull**** he comes out with is offensive to their common sense, their knowledge of how things work and, frankly, reality.

Now? The media is being lambasted by Trump for saying things he doesn't like. He accuses them of lying when they don't suck his ass (see size of crowd at inaugeration). And his supporters back up this complete nonsense and defend him while calling anyone who disagrees a liar.

No **** the conversation isn't getting very far. Now, i'm not saying that the media doesn't need a reform. In truth, I think the best thing for the media would be their controlling themselves in their output. 24/7 news has left the quality poor. 24/7 filled with the sort of output Trump has is just ridiculous. One has barely finished sorting through his last dump and he takes another big old **** all over truth and decency. The media is publishing without fact-checking deeply enough because they simply do not have time as individual journalists. That's a bad look-out. And it makes it very very easy for something like Trump to get in and just overload with rubbish.

In short, okay, you avoided disaster with Clinton. I don't agree, but that's by the by. She's gone. We got Trump. You won. But now this great big elephant in the room is what we -have- and to stick one's head in the sand, defending even the silliest things he does...where is anyone going to get with that?

Sonics2k wrote: »

Yes yes, we've all established that a few of the millions of protesters worldwide are nutjobs.

Now, can we get back on to Trump breaking the TPP, appointing a climate change denier to the head of the EPA, a bafflingly inappropriate woman in charge of Education, a billionaire oil Tycoon as Secretary of State and two high ranking members of Goldman Sachs appointed to Trumps administration, or the fact that Trump still has not resigned from his companies like he said he would.

Oh, how about his Executive Order to start dismantling the ACA without any plans to improve or replace it.

Or would you prefer to keep deflecting because, as was said before, Trump is nothing more than a corrupt businessman who twisted people into thinking he was a good guy and actual gave a care for the working class and you got duped by a salesman.

edit:
For gods sake, even his Inauguration Hats were made in China, so he failed on the very first hurdle.

Is it not logical to wait for these people to do something wrong before we assume that they're bad choices? I don't know Trump's reasoning on any of his choices, and neither do you.