Jump to content
Telesphore

John Kasich departs GOP primary race, the Prince of Darkness left as sole candidate

Recommended Posts

 

Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, a moderate voice who tried to portray himself as the adult in the Republican primary field but failed to win any state but his own, ended his long-shot quest for the presidency on Wednesday, cementing Donald J. Trump’s grip on the presidential nomination.

 

Mr. Kasich’s departure, a day after Donald J. Trump’s victory in the Indiana primary, leaves Mr. Trump as the only candidate remaining in the Republican race. His closest challenger, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, dropped out Tuesday night.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/05/us/politics/john-kasich.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Choo, choo! All board the Trump Train to the White House!

I am intensely disturbed by this post. Trump is a raving loon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm gonna choose the lesser of the three evils, Trump

 

What about Austin Peterson?

(And BTW, Trump is at most 2% less evil than Clinton.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about Austin Peterson?

(And BTW, Trump is at most 2% less evil than Clinton.)

Who's that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone please explain to me how the openly racist, misogynist, xenophobic, anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, political-violence-inciting, endorsed by the Ku Klux Klan whirlwind that is Donald Trump is in any way less evil than Hillary Clinton? 

 

The fact that I would quite literally fear for my safety as a Jewish-affiliated non-Christian in Trump's America ought to speak volumes about the man. Hillary is many things, and very few of them are good. That just makes her yet another lying, incompetent politician. Not a dangerous raving lunatic demagogue.

Edited by Synod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's that?

I misspelled; it should read Petersen. Anyway, he is one of the Libertarian candidates running, and he is miles better than Trump or Cruz.

Can someone please explain to me how the openly racist, misogynist, xenophobic, anti-Semitic

I legitimately believe that Trump is not a single one of those things. Well, maybe misogynist, but that's because he's a serial cheater, not because of anything he's said in his campaign. Trump is terrible, but he's not any of this.

 

I would quite literally fear for my safety as a Jewish-affiliated non-Christian in Trump's America

Why?

 

ought to speak volumes about the man.

I feel like it speaks more volumes about your strange perception of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about Austin Peterson?

(And BTW, Trump is at most 2% less evil than Clinton.)

 

Never once has a candidate not from the two largest political parties at the time made it to the White House. And judging that I have never heard of this guy, this election isn't likely to change it. 3rd party voters really just waste their votes in presidential elections, just vote for a Democrat or a Republican, choose the lesser of two evils.

 

  I have never really saw Trump quite as "evil" as some seem to describe him, he certainly isn't my ideal candidate. His views on healthcare, gay rights, and security are definably more Liberal, and he's not exactly of best character. However, I do admire his "Politically Incorrect" (Maybe I ought to start a discussion on political correctness...) stances on foreign policy, immigration, and personal liberties.

 

 My ideal election (now that Cruz is out) is that Clinton gets indicted, forced to concede. Trump beats through the slight remaining Democratic resistance and makes it to the White House. From what I've seen, Trump is a very impressionable man, so if he surrounds himself with seasoned, upright, establishment Republicans, he could make an okay president.

Edited by PlasmaHam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never once has a candidate not from the two largest political parties at the time made it to the White House. And judging that I have never heard of this guy, this election isn't likely to change it. 3rd party voters really just waste their votes in presidential elections, just vote for a Democrat or a Republican, choose the lesser of two evils.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I legitimately believe that Trump is not a single one of those things. Well, maybe misogynist, but that's because he's a serial cheater, not because of anything he's said in his campaign. Trump is terrible, but he's not any of this.

 

And I legitimately believe that that is stark raving mad. Here's a nice selection:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-racist-examples_us_56d47177e4b03260bf777e83

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-history-of-flippant-misogyny/2015/08/08/891f1bec-3de4-11e5-9c2d-ed991d848c48_story.html

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2015/07/donald-trumps-xenophobia

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/09/politics/donald-trump-islam-hates-us/

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/204413#.Vyt-ZPkrLIU

 

I just don't know how any member of an ethnic or religious minority could feel comfortable with such a man running the nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I legitimately believe that that is stark raving mad.

I just don't know how any member of an ethnic or religious minority could feel comfortable with such a man running the nation.

I don't know how anyone can feel comfortable with him running the nation, ethnic or religious minority or anyone who's not in the "in" crowd. And yes, I think he's kind of crazy....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Racism here? I don't see it. Stupid, insensitive bumbling over racial issues? Of course. But they're not the same. It's not racism without actual feelings of hostility or superiority to another racism. Trump exemplifies absurdity, not antagonism.

Perhaps I should rephrase. Trump is obviously a misogynist, but there's nothing in his platform that's specifically misogynist.

Generalized statements about people who illegally enter a country is not the same as xenophobia. Again, it's stupid and vastly overgeneralizing, and obviously is being used to get a reaction, but that doesn't mean Trump is actually and personally a xenophobe.

Islam is neither a race nor a country. It's a religion. So it's not an example of racism or xenophobia. Obviously Trump promotes Islamophobia, but even then I'm not sure whether this involves his real beliefs or just his campaign appearance.

Again, I refer to what I said above. Does this involve bumbling over racial issues and stereotyping? Duh. But is it anti-Semitic? Not unless Trump is hostile to, dislikes, or feels superior to Semitic peoples. (Well, I mean, he feels superior to them, obviously, but he feels superior to everyone equally.)

 

You seem to be making two basic mistakes:

1) mistaking racial stupidity/insensitivity for racism, and

2) assuming that Trump's political act necessarily matches his personal views and feelings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to introduce you to someone. Perhaps you know him, his name is Abraham Lincoln. The Republican party in that day was in its earliest infancy stages and Lincoln's grasp of the Presidency with 36% of the vote was fairly impressive.

 

However, your post does bring up valid concern regarding Duverger's Law. But, occasionally, in some circumstances, things change and new parties rise while others fall. I believe we can expect this with the GOP from here on out.

  I assumed someone would bring him up. Despite being only 7 years old, some would argue the Republicans became a dominant party before the general election of 1860. The former dominant party, the Whigs, were basically dead, scandals regarding the 1850 compromise and divisions along slave issues resulted in a large majority leaving to form the Republican Party. These Republicans quickly filled the political vacuum left by the Whigs and became the go-to party for the North. In fact, by 1856, the Whigs Party disbanded in the shadow of the rising Republicans, they didn't even have a candidate in the 1860 election.

 

 However, I do think that the GOP is possibly on its last days. But it will take a couple years if things go haywire for the party for it to lose its power and to be superseded by another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be making two basic mistakes:

1) mistaking racial stupidity/insensitivity for racism, and

2) assuming that Trump's political act necessarily matches his personal views and feelings.

 

I am disturbed by the thoroughness of your attempts to draw an ultimately false dichotomy between who 'Trump' is and who 'Trump' is on the campaign trail. It doesn't matter whether Trump personally believes the bile he spews; the problem is that he says these things at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be making two basic mistakes:

1) mistaking racial stupidity/insensitivity for racism, and

2) assuming that Trump's political act necessarily matches his personal views and feelings.

 

You point in 1) is considerably alarming.

  • Trump uses the term "outside agitators" to describe the Black Lives Matter movement. This is the same phrase used by Alabama governor George C. Wallace (of "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" fame) in a 1964 letter to an Alabama resident, referring to civil rights activists. Whether we like it or not, language matters. Either the rhetoric reference to Wallace was intentional because Trump is a racist, or it was because he's conniving enough and knew it would appeal to parts of the populace who are racist, and in doing put black citizens (who are least likely to vote for him) at both risk and disadvantage... which I'm pretty sure still makes him a racist. 
  • Trump has been prosecuted twice by the Department of Justice for refusing to rent to black people. Idk how much more evident it needs to be that he thinks black people are inferior. 
  • He took out adverts in the New York Times calling for the death penalty to be reinstated in order to murder the Central Park Five. 

The list, of course, goes on. 

 

2) is covered by Matthew 7:16 - by their fruits you will recognise them. Trump might not believe the things he says on the podium, I'll give you that. But, the fact that he is willing to use those things to gain power, knowing the impact that they have, demonstrates moral repugnancy. The words he uses and the actions he takes bear witness to his character. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should point out that I'm not saying there's anything good about Trump, or that he's not using racist language or utilizing racism and xenophobia as campaign tools. I'm simply skeptical that any of this goes deeper than politics. I'm too suspicious that Trump is intelligently playing a game without believing half of what comes out of his mouth. Ultimately, the biggest reason I doubt he's actually a racist or whatnot is because of how much I think him to be be smart but a thoroughly dishonest demagogue. The only one of these points that I would agree could indicate actual racism is the DOJ renting issue, but it's difficult to use that to reliabily read back into his motives or intentions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He quotes Hitler.

Also he's orange.

That's who he is. A Hitler quoting oompa loompa.

XD This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should point out that I'm not saying there's anything good about Trump, or that he's not using racist language or utilizing racism and xenophobia as campaign tools. I'm simply skeptical that any of this goes deeper than politics. I'm too suspicious that Trump is intelligently playing a game without believing half of what comes out of his mouth. Ultimately, the biggest reason I doubt he's actually a racist or whatnot is because of how much I think him to be be smart but a thoroughly dishonest demagogue. The only one of these points that I would agree could indicate actual racism is the DOJ renting issue, but it's difficult to use that to reliabily read back into his motives or intentions.

...People are voting/pledging for his political front. Supporters are seeing his political front as socially acceptable, which is a problem. Is it the moot point that you think he's tactically superior to his opponents that you're trying to make or are you arguing these points out of boredom?

Trumps a creep. People are lemmings. Hillary's creepy, bernies got the approval of birds. Obama's a pretty classy pres. Idk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should point out that I'm not saying there's anything good about Trump, or that he's not using racist language or utilizing racism and xenophobia as campaign tools. I'm simply skeptical that any of this goes deeper than politics. I'm too suspicious that Trump is intelligently playing a game without believing half of what comes out of his mouth. Ultimately, the biggest reason I doubt he's actually a racist or whatnot is because of how much I think him to be be smart but a thoroughly dishonest demagogue. The only one of these points that I would agree could indicate actual racism is the DOJ renting issue, but it's difficult to use that to reliabily read back into his motives or intentions.

I agree. Trump knows what to say and do to appeal to just enough of the GOP electorate — the percentage that still thinks Obama is a Muslim from Kenya, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump's foreign policy is much more heinous than Clinton's. While Clinton might be a hawk, Trump's promise to extort money from US allies in exchange for continued protection, along with his explicit willingness to dissolve NATO, and his stated strategy of being unpredictable make him a much larger threat to global stability and peace. 

 

See these two analyses:

 

http://www.vox.com/2016/3/28/11318722/trump-foreign-policy

 

http://www.vox.com/2016/5/5/11590870/trump-world-reaction

 

 I'm simply skeptical that any of this goes deeper than politics.

 

Saying some things as the leader of the free world is dangerous, since U.S. credibility is an important and powerful currency. If Trump gives the market the impression of instability, it hurts the economy. If Trump gives our allies the impression of irascibility, it hurts us diplomatically. As the linked article above elaborates:
 
It is not necessary for a President Trump to actually withdraw American security guarantees... Trump believes a credible threat to withdraw will get him better deals, and maybe it will. But if the threatened countries take those threats seriously, they will begin hedging for the possibility that this threat is carried through, which means assuming that American support is unreliable.
 
At this point, Trump winning the election alone--on the basis of the promises and threats he's made--would be enough to inject considerable instability into the world. A minimal requirement for the president is to not say things that stupid, that ignorant, and that destabilizing, even if doing so pleases an insane constituency.
Edited by Chris-M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Saying some things as the leader of the free world is dangerous, since U.S. credibility is an important and powerful currency. If Trump gives the market the impression of instability, it hurts the economy. If Trump gives our allies the impression of irascibility, it hurts us diplomatically. As the linked article above elaborates:

 
It is not necessary for a President Trump to actually withdraw American security guarantees... Trump believes a credible threat to withdraw will get him better deals, and maybe it will. But if the threatened countries take those threats seriously, they will begin hedging for the possibility that this threat is carried through, which means assuming that American support is unreliable.
 
At this point, Trump winning the election alone--on the basis of the promises and threats he's made--would be enough to inject considerable instability into the world. A minimal requirement for the president is to not say things that stupid, that ignorant, and that destabilizing, even if doing so pleases an insane constituency.

 

 

I wouldn't deny or challenge any of this. I only wanted to resist making definitive statements as to whether Trump is personally a racist or xenophobe or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't deny or challenge any of this. I only wanted to resist making definitive statements as to whether Trump is personally a racist or xenophobe or whatever.

 

 

Oh ^^ I tend to overreact I suppose :B

 

Still, I guess I'm arguing with the basic idea that Hillary's problems are at all comparable with Trump's. Not necessarily am I directing that argument at you, though. 

Edited by Chris-M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×