• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Donald Trump praises Xi Jinping's power grab: 'Maybe we'll give that a shot'.

Cardinal said:
It's not a joke when his admiration of foreign autocrats over Democratically elected heads of state is an established pattern. It also doesn't help that he entered office not understanding that there were going to be checks on his power and still doesn't know the three branches of government.
Click to expand...

Trump's idea of the three branches of government are (1) mine (2) mine, and (3) mine .........
 
roughdraft274 said:
It absolutely was a joke. POTUS shouldn't be joking about how less democracy in the world is a good thing. It's not the end of the world, but it is still an incredibly stupid statement for a president to make.
Click to expand...


see, this is what Trump supporters & Trump's base JUST DON"T get; the fact that the POTUS sets the tone for ALL of America for the rest of the planet.

When folks around the planet hear that type of bull**** coming out of the mouth of a sitting POTUS then folks better believe, the world DOES pay ****ing attention.

Trump was in NO WAY joking; Trump really wants to be a dictator & I am not ****ing kidding ............
 
cuban smokes said:
see, this is what Trump supporters & Trump's base JUST DON"T get; the fact that the POTUS sets the tone for ALL of America for the rest of the planet.

When folks around the planet hear that type of bull**** coming out of the mouth of a sitting POTUS then folks better believe, the world DOES pay ****ing attention.

Trump was in NO WAY joking; Trump really wants to be a dictator & I am not ****ing kidding ............
Click to expand...

Don't go overboard. Trump wants to be dictator in the same way that every president wants to be dictator. It's much easier to get your wish list accomplished when you control everything. But I doubt if given the chance he would take the offer up. And if he were to ever try that he'd be thrown in jail the rest of his life.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Don't go overboard. Trump wants to be dictator in the same way that every president wants to be dictator. It's much easier to get your wish list accomplished when you control everything. But I doubt if given the chance he would take the offer up. And if he were to ever try that he'd be thrown in jail the rest of his life.
Click to expand...
I don't think he would turn the offer down, but such a scenario doesn't matter anyway. No one is offering, and the man is 71 with only one year in to a potential 8 years.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Fiddytree said:
I don't think he would turn the offer down, but such a scenario doesn't matter anyway. No one is offering, and the man is 71 with only one year in to a potential 8 years.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I think the chances of him making 4 years is becoming less and less by the month. But 8 years is just laughable.
 
roughdraft274 said:
I think the chances of him making 4 years is becoming less and less by the month. But 8 years is just laughable.
Click to expand...
It's not laughable. Democrats don't live in enough states to make defeat a sure thing. Then the Senate is the greatest obstacle to ousting Trump, and Democrats aren't exactly in prime condition to even keep that 49 vote margin they've got. The electoral college and the Senate will continue to vex Democrats over the next couple or few decades.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Fiddytree said:
It's not laughable. Democrats don't live in enough states to make defeat a sure thing.
Click to expand...

Independents do though. And they're not very happy with Trump- at all.
 
Fiddytree said:
It's not laughable. Democrats don't live in enough states to make defeat a sure thing. Then the Senate is the greatest obstacle to ousting Trump, and Democrats aren't exactly in prime condition to even keep that 49 vote margin they've got. The electoral college and the Senate will continue to vex Democrats over the next couple or few decades.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

He barely beat the least likable candidate to ever run. And his novelty factor has worn off to many that voted for him. And if he were to pull another rabbit out of his ass, I'd bet my next paycheck just by looking at the man that he won't be in good health through 2024. Everythings against the man.

For him to last a full 8 years, the russia investigation needs to find that there's no evidence that he did anything wrong, his health, both mental and physical, needs to hold up, the democrats need to find someone just as unlikable or even more unlikable as Hillary Clinton, the economy has to stay strong or get stronger and the republican base needs to be just as energized as they were in 2016 after having a democrat in office for 8 years. It's like splitting an arrow with an arrow. Give trump a slightly worse economy or a big international screwup that ends in a military entanglement and his chances go from **** to impossible. Give the democrats a decent candidate that's fairly likable and it's game over.
 
roughdraft274 said:
He barely beat the least likable candidate to ever run. And his novelty factor has worn off to many that voted for him. And if he were to pull another rabbit out of his ass, I'd bet my next paycheck just by looking at the man that he won't be in good health through 2024. Everythings against the man.

For him to last a full 8 years, the russia investigation needs to find that there's no evidence that he did anything wrong, his health, both mental and physical, needs to hold up, the democrats need to find someone just as unlikable or even more unlikable as Hillary Clinton, the economy has to stay strong or get stronger and the republican base needs to be just as energized as they were in 2016 after having a democrat in office for 8 years. It's like splitting an arrow with an arrow. Give trump a slightly worse economy or a big international screwup that ends in a military entanglement and his chances go from **** to impossible. Give the democrats a decent candidate that's fairly likable and it's game over.
Click to expand...

Yep, but you're also missing a few more beats involving internal dynamics of the Democratic Party. Democrats have been slowly marching themselves into the same pits of hell that Republicans did back in '08. Primary challenges are becoming fashionable, as are purity tests, and the ever-fun problem of needing to energize the largest voting demographic beyond its paltry 16% showing one year ago. Then there's the matter of geographic self-selection, whereby liberals are, perhaps unintentionally clustering closer together in areas with other liberals, rather than spreading some of their power to other states.
 
Fiddytree said:
Yep, but you're also missing a few more beats involving internal dynamics of the Democratic Party. Democrats have been slowly marching themselves into the same pits of hell that Republicans did back in '08. Primary challenges are becoming fashionable, as are purity tests, and the ever-fun problem of needing to energize the largest voting demographic beyond its paltry 16% showing one year ago. Then there's the matter of geographic self-selection, whereby liberals are, perhaps unintentionally clustering closer together in areas with other liberals, rather than spreading some of their power to other states.
Click to expand...
Not sure what purity tests you are really referring to. That's something that pops up in both parties literally all the time. Geographic self-selection is something to very much worry about long term. But in reality Obama never had that issue. And if they had run a likable candidate in 2016 that people could even be slightly enthusiastic about, they would have the presidency right now. That's just reality. If the republicans someone besides Trump in 2020, then all of that other stuff comes in to play. If Trump is running, then they need only find a likable candidate that doesn't have any videos of abusing children or animals and it's basically theirs.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Not sure what purity tests you are really referring to. That's something that pops up in both parties literally all the time. Geographic self-selection is something to very much worry about long term. But in reality Obama never had that issue. And if they had run a likable candidate in 2016 that people could even be slightly enthusiastic about, they would have the presidency right now. That's just reality. If the republicans someone besides Trump in 2020, then all of that other stuff comes in to play. If Trump is running, then they need only find a likable candidate that doesn't have any videos of abusing children or animals and it's basically theirs.
Click to expand...


I'm not so sure about that. Trump will probably run a great campaign and stumping is clearly one of his strengths. He's also adept as steamrolling the competition.
 
Acadia said:
[/B]
I'm not so sure about that. Trump will probably run a great campaign and stumping is clearly one of his strengths. He's also adept as steamrolling the competition.
Click to expand...

Lol, ok.

Trump didn't run a great campaign. He barely beat the least likable candidate in history. That's when he was new and shiny and people were just excited about having a guy that would tell everyone to go **** themselves. He's not going to have that novelty factor in 2020.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Lol, ok.

Trump didn't run a great campaign. He barely beat the least likable candidate in history. That's when he was new and shiny and people were just excited about having a guy that would tell everyone to go **** themselves. He's not going to have that novelty factor in 2020.
Click to expand...
Conversely, Hillary Clinton who was in many respects supposed to be coronated, lost to Donald Trump. And he didn't barely squeak by. His electoral win, which he smartly campaigned for, was decisive.
Not for nothing, and you can ignore my advice if you'd like, but liberals should disabuse themselves of the notion that Trump won because he was a new, shiny bauble.
That's not why he won.
He won because he related to people in a way the desperately lacked for 8 years.
 
Acadia said:
Conversely, Hillary Clinton who was in many respects supposed to be coronated, lost to Donald Trump. And he didn't barely squeak by. His electoral win, which he smartly campaigned for, was decisive.
Not for nothing, and you can ignore my advice if you'd like, but liberals should disabuse themselves of the notion that Trump won because he was a new, shiny bauble.
That's not why he won.
He won because he related to people in a way the desperately lacked for 8 years.
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree. The only people who said that Clinton was supposed to be coronated were Republicans trying to be smart asses. And Trump didn't get a decisive electoral win. He got a few more than Bush. Obama, Clinton, Bush Sr. Reagan all had larger electoral college margins.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Agree to disagree. The only people who said that Clinton was supposed to be coronated were Republicans trying to be smart asses. And Trump didn't get a decisive electoral win. He got a few more than Bush. Obama, Clinton, Bush Sr. Reagan all had larger electoral college margins.
Click to expand...

While "coronate" is admittedly being used pejoratively, you can't have missed all the liberal pundits and talk show hosts laughing their asses off at the notion that Trump would win. Thankfully, we have evidence of the utter hubris and smugness preserved for posterity. This, is just one of MANY.

 
Acadia said:
While "coronate" is admittedly being used pejoratively, you can't have missed all the liberal pundits and talk show hosts laughing their asses off at the notion that Trump would win. Thankfully, we have evidence of the utter hubris and smugness preserved for posterity. This, is just one of MANY.

Click to expand...


Oh absolutely. I agree with you that everyone was certain Hillary would beat Trump. I was refering to the idea that she was the tapped to be the next president and there wouldn't even be any competition from Republicans period. Hillary was never a sure thing. Just like she wasn't a sure thing in 2008. I think everyone was certain that she would beat trump, but that's it. It wasn't because everyone thought she was so wonderful. It's because Trump was so bad. But like I said, she had something like 30 years of baggage to carry around and was widely polled as unlikable. If the republicans had run a likable candidate, they would have won in a landslide. If Democrats had run a likable candidate, they would have won in a landslide.
 
Fiddytree said:
It's not laughable. Democrats don't live in enough states to make defeat a sure thing. Then the Senate is the greatest obstacle to ousting Trump, and Democrats aren't exactly in prime condition to even keep that 49 vote margin they've got. The electoral college and the Senate will continue to vex Democrats over the next couple or few decades.
Click to expand...

We wouldn't even be in this position had the Dems put forth a marginally decent candidate. I think they have even more change in 2020... if they don't screw that up, too, which I'm not seeing any inspiring people coming forward, so... ya never know.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Don't go overboard. Trump wants to be dictator in the same way that every president wants to be dictator.
[...]
Click to expand...

Please list the presidents before trump who hinted at wanting to be a dictator, or commenting how who cool being a dictator is,
or remarks that exude the obvious envy of other dicators, jokingly or otherwise?

There are none. There are only presidents who condemn dictators on evry level, and that is every president I have seen since Eisenhower, and I'm old enough to remember him.

It's just like the guy who jokingly says something outrageous, and if there is a bad reaction, he can hide behind the fact that "it was a joke", but you and I know it really wasn't.
 
OscarLevant said:
Please list the presidents before trump who hinted at wanting to be a dictator, or commenting how who cool being a dictator is,
or remarks that exude the obvious envy of other dicators, jokingly or otherwise?

There are none. There are only presidents who condemn dictators on evry level, and that is every president I have seen since Eisenhower, and I'm old enough to remember him.

It's just like the guy who jokingly says something outrageous, and if there is a bad reaction, he can hide behind the fact that "it was a joke", but you and I know it really wasn't.
Click to expand...

Probably Nixon.
 
Polar Bum said:
Not the worst we have heard, and unlikely to be the last time a POTUS makes a poor joke.

“My fellow Americans, I am pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.” - Ronald Reagan, 1984
Click to expand...

That was Reagan talking into what he thought was a muted mic. That it was a joke is obvious. You know darn well Reagan wouldn't have made that kind of joke if he had known the mic was hot. Trump, on the other hand, tells the kinds of "joke" he secretly wish were true, and not jokes, but if he gets a bad reaction, he can backpedal and claim they were a joke. A few times he made that claim, upon reviewing the video, it's not obvious he was joking at all.

But, apparently Trump can't even grasp what a joke is or isn't, so how can he claim he was joking? Just like the time he sued Bill Maher for failing to live up to his "contract" where Maher told Trump he would pay him $5 million if Trump could prove he wasnt the spawn of an orangutan. Predictably, Maher refused to pay. When asked about why he sued, and why the judge threw out the suit, Trump said "I didn't realize Maher was joking", I guess it was the elusive clues about "orangutan" and Maher beingi a well-known comedian and all.

Let's face it, Trump is a moron, the evidence is clear.

Intelligent people can see right through Trump, especially when it comes to this kind of thing.
 
Last edited:
OscarLevant said:
That was Reagan talking into what he thought was a muted mic. That it was a joke is obvious. You know darn well Reagan wouldn't have made that kind of joke if he had known the mic was hot. Trump, on the other hand, tells the kinds of "joke" he secretly wish were true, and not jokes, but if he gets a bad reaction, he can backpedal and claim they were a joke. A few times he made that claim, upon reviewing the video, it's not obvious he was joking at all.

But, apparently Trump can't even grasp what a joke is or isn't, so how can he claim he was joking? Just like the time he sued Bill Maher for failing to live up to his "contract" where Maher told Trump he would pay him $5 million if Trump could prove he wasnt the spawn of an orangutan. Predictably, Maher refused to pay. When asked about why he sued, and why the judge threw out the suit, Trump said "I didn't realize Maher was joking", I guess it was the elusive clues about "orangutan" and Maher beingi a well-known comedian and all.

Let's face it, Trump is a moron, the evidence is clear.

Intelligent people can see right through Trump, especially when it comes to this kind of thing.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom