Trump suggests that it could get 'very bad' if military, police, biker supporters play 'tough'

[Moderate Right]

Can you show this imaginary poll?

https://www.debatepolitics.com/us-p...ght=democrats+believe+2020+violence+justified

 

[j-mac]

They are not looking in the mirror either.

You want conservatives to be ashamed of casting their votes for Trump in 2016, but there are enough good things that came of his policies to overcome that....Better economy, stronger stance in the world, and the exposure of Democrats, and some Republican's as the progressive destroyers they are for starters...

True conservatism, like anything else has to be flexible enough to achieve the greater goal...Rigid adherence only proves in history to denote failure....

 

[SmartCat]

Yes, the actual results generated are obviously being ignored by you as the march towards that liberal utopia continues. Still waiting where that utopia exists in the world because 50 independent states in this country won't allow it to work here.

Why on earth would business believe in democratic socialism? What does that offer to people, dependence? Slightly liberal my ass!! You don't get it and probably never will but the silent majority does exist in this country and will never adopt democratic socialism as their economic model. Keep working to destroy the best economy in the world all because you cannot compete

Read this about the best economies in the world:

The World Happiness Report (WHR) of 2018 gives a brief description of the happiness levels of all the countries in the world. The report is an annual publication of UN’s sustainable development solutions network which contains data according to various perspectives of national happiness and their ranking based on the analysis of people’s well-being and living standards.

Top 10 Happiest Countries in the World 2019 - The Mysterious World

Read this to describe the low quality of your response to my comment:

---------

How to Disagree, by Paul Graham

If we're all going to be disagreeing more, we should be careful to do it well. What does it mean to disagree well? Most readers can tell the difference between mere name-calling and a carefully reasoned refutation, but I think it would help to put names on the intermediate stages. So here's an attempt at a disagreement hierarchy:

DH1. Ad Hominem.

An ad hominem attack is not quite as weak as mere name-calling. It might actually carry some weight. For example, if a senator wrote an article saying senators' salaries should be increased, one could respond:
Of course he would say that. He's a senator.
This wouldn't refute the author's argument, but it may at least be relevant to the case. It's still a very weak form of disagreement, though. If there's something wrong with the senator's argument, you should say what it is; and if there isn't, what difference does it make that he's a senator?

Saying that an author lacks the authority to write about a topic is a variant of ad hominem—and a particularly useless sort, because good ideas often come from outsiders. The question is whether the author is correct or not. If his lack of authority caused him to make mistakes, point those out. And if it didn't, it's not a problem.

https://www.debatepolitics.com/newreply.php?do=postreply&t=350507

 

[Conservative]

Read this about the best economies in the world:

Top 10 Happiest Countries in the World 2019 - The Mysterious World

Read this to describe the low quality of your response to my comment:

---------

How to Disagree, by Paul Graham

If we're all going to be disagreeing more, we should be careful to do it well. What does it mean to disagree well? Most readers can tell the difference between mere name-calling and a carefully reasoned refutation, but I think it would help to put names on the intermediate stages. So here's an attempt at a disagreement hierarchy:

DH1. Ad Hominem.

An ad hominem attack is not quite as weak as mere name-calling. It might actually carry some weight. For example, if a senator wrote an article saying senators' salaries should be increased, one could respond:
Of course he would say that. He's a senator.
This wouldn't refute the author's argument, but it may at least be relevant to the case. It's still a very weak form of disagreement, though. If there's something wrong with the senator's argument, you should say what it is; and if there isn't, what difference does it make that he's a senator?

Saying that an author lacks the authority to write about a topic is a variant of ad hominem—and a particularly useless sort, because good ideas often come from outsiders. The question is whether the author is correct or not. If his lack of authority caused him to make mistakes, point those out. And if it didn't, it's not a problem.

https://www.debatepolitics.com/newreply.php?do=postreply&t=350507

View attachment 67252619

OMG, do you really think that a happiness survey serves any purpose? Why are you so unhappy? One has a responsibility in this country to create their own happiness. Don't see any major country in the world on this list, countries with large populations and size. I don't give a damn about what you think of me or my comments as they are based upon facts, logic, and common sense none of which you have.

You spend every waking moment here promoting nothing but hatred of Trump, efforts to give the federal bureaucrats money, promoting class warfare and chaos, never offering anything positive as an alternative all of which makes you irrelevant and lacking credibility. Whining and complaining is what the liberals always do promoting that grass is greener argument on just about every issue yet never explaining how that grass is paid for or ever admitting when wrong.

Looks to me like a bunch of so called book smart but street stupid individuals posting in this forum feeding the egos of others that believe the same way net never changing anyone else's mind

 

[roguenuke]

He didn't 'encourage' anyone. It was a warning that things are getting a bit over the top, and I don't think he wants to see anyone get hurt.

Sure it was.

And you are deluding yourself if you honestly believe this. This President has offered to pay the lawyer fees for anyone who punched a protester. But he doesn't want to see anyone get hurt. Bullcrap.

And that was a threat, it may not have anything to do with him winning or not (I don't think he thinks that far ahead), but it most certainly was a threat, not a warning about what could happen. Especially since he is naive or stupid enough to think that he has the support of all "the tough" guys.

 

[SmartCat]

What I find fascinating is folks who claim to be conservative or republican supporting TRump.

Trump is the greatest con man of all time.

 

[SmartCat]

There is a reason that most democracies in the world fail, lost incentive and laziness.

Once a democratic government has lasted for several generations it is very stable. This is because most people do not make radical changes in their political opinions. In 1932 the United States made a turn to the left by electing Franklin Roosevelt rather than Herbert Hoover. Nevertheless, most people who voted for Hoover in 1928 voted for him again in 1933.

In 1980 the United States made a turn to the right by electing Ronald Reagan rather than Jimmy Carter. Nevertheless, most people who voted for Carter in 1976 voted for him again in 1980. I sure did.

When a dictator is overthrown, his successor is likely to pursue a very different set of policies.

 

[SmartCat]

What are the consequences of Democratic Socialism?

Under social democracy there is less poverty, less crime, and better health.

 

[Conservative]

Once a democratic government has lasted for several generations it is very stable. This is because most people do not make radical changes in their political opinions. In 1932 the United States made a turn to the left by electing Franklin Roosevelt rather than Herbert Hoover. Nevertheless, most people who voted for Hoover in 1928 voted for him again in 1933.

In 1980 the United States made a turn to the right by electing Ronald Reagan rather than Jimmy Carter. Nevertheless, most people who voted for Carter in 1976 voted for him again in 1980. I sure did.

When a dictator is overthrown, his successor is likely to pursue a very different set of policies.

Nice revisionist history, did you bother to point out that Reagan got 10 million more votes in 1984 than in 1980? Did you bother to point out that it was California alone that gave Hillary the popular vote win over Trump although that doesn't matter? You can cherry pick numbers and information to support your point of view but you cannot re-write history where this country was built on the economic model we have in place.

Trump got it right

"America was founded on liberty and independence - not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free, and we will stay free. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country."

 

[SmartCat]

OMG, do you really think that a happiness survey serves any purpose? Why are you so unhappy? One has a responsibility in this country to create their own happiness. Don't see any major country in the world on this list, countries with large populations and size. I don't give a damn about what you think of me or my comments as they are based upon facts, logic, and common sense none of which you have.

You spend every waking moment here promoting nothing but hatred of Trump, efforts to give the federal bureaucrats money, promoting class warfare and chaos, never offering anything positive as an alternative all of which makes you irrelevant and lacking credibility. Whining and complaining is what the liberals always do promoting that grass is greener argument on just about every issue yet never explaining how that grass is paid for or ever admitting when wrong.

Looks to me like a bunch of so called book smart but street stupid individuals posting in this forum feeding the egos of others that believe the same way net never changing anyone else's mind

Intelligent people read lots of books. Try it some time.

 

[Conservative]

Under social democracy there is less poverty, less crime, and better health.

Show me a country the size of the U.S. that has less poverty, less crime, and better health? You can't so keep putting up leftwing talking points. With freedom comes responsibility that you want to delegate to a federal bureaucrat. The nanny state is alive and well in your fantasy world. I will take our freedoms any day over your pie in the sky grass is greener argument

 

[SmartCat]

Nice revisionist history, did you bother to point out that Reagan got 10 million more votes in 1984 than in 1980? Did you bother to point out that it was California alone that gave Hillary the popular vote win over Trump although that doesn't matter? You can cherry pick numbers and information to support your point of view but you cannot re-write history where this country was built on the economic model we have in place.

Trump got it right

You did not refute my point. That point once again: democratic governments are usually more stable than alternative forms of government.

 

[SmartCat]

Show me a country the size of the U.S. that has less poverty, less crime, and better health? You can't so keep putting up leftwing talking points. With freedom comes responsibility that you want to delegate to a federal bureaucrat. The nanny state is alive and well in your fantasy world. I will take our freedoms any day over your pie in the sky grass is greener argument

Social democracy works fine in Scandinavia and in the British Commonwealth. I do not see Scandinavians fleeing the horrors of democratic socialism to cross the Atlantic Ocean in makeshift boats to enjoy what you describe as "freedom."

 

[Conservative]

Intelligent people read lots of books. Try it some time.

That apparently is your problem too many books and not much in real life experiences. Suggest you read about the pocketbook issues like employment, economic data

 

[Conservative]

Social democracy works fine in Scandinavia and in the British Commonwealth. I do not see Scandinavians fleeing the horrors of democratic socialism to cross the Atlantic Ocean in makeshift boats to enjoy what you describe as "freedom."

How many people and how much geography in Scandinavia and the British Commonwealth? Maybe you ought to move there for a while and see how well you like it?

 

[Conservative]

You did not refute my point. That point once again: democratic governments are usually more stable than alternative forms of government.

Smaller countries, smaller geography. How do you know they are more stable?

 

[SmartCat]

That apparently is your problem too many books and not much in real life experiences. Suggest you read about the pocketbook issues like employment, economic data

Both of us have had real life experiences. You do not seem to know anything beyond your own life.

 

[SmartCat]

How many people and how much geography in Scandinavia and the British Commonwealth? Maybe you ought to move there for a while and see how well you like it?

I really do not see what difference the size of a country makes. Except for democracy, which you do not like anyway, China is catching up with us economically. Our trade gap with China has grown since the election of Trump.

 

[SmartCat]

Smaller countries, smaller geography. How do you know they are more stable?

Size is irrelevant. I am confident that as the presidency of Herbert Hoover led to the New Deal, the presidency of Donald Trump will lead to a new New Deal, featuring social democracy (AKA, democratic socialism).

 

[Conservative]

Both of us have had real life experiences. You do not seem to know anything beyond your own life.

Right, my 35 years of business experience and travel all over the country in 49 of the 50 states proves you right, LOL

 

[Conservative]

I really do not see what difference the size of a country makes. Except for democracy, which you do not like anyway, China is catching up with us economically. Our trade gap with China has grown since the election of Trump.

China has a billion people, we have 330 million, size matters. Trade gap has always been great with China but you want to judge Trump after two years in office? how typical of you totally ignoring the good results that have been generated as you focus on only the negatives

 

[Conservative]

Size is irrelevant. I am confident that as the presidency of Herbert Hoover led to the New Deal, the presidency of Donald Trump will lead to a new New Deal, featuring social democracy (AKA, democratic socialism).

Aw, yes, that liberal utopia that will never be achieved nor will you or the left ever admit failure. what happens if you are wrong?

 

[sjmay]

I really do not see what difference the size of a country makes. Except for democracy, which you do not like anyway, China is catching up with us economically. Our trade gap with China has grown since the election of Trump.

Yet, you are arguing against democracy, in favor of socialism.....

Ironic.

 

[JustHanging]

Show me a country the size of the U.S. that has less poverty, less crime, and better health? You can't so keep putting up leftwing talking points. With freedom comes responsibility that you want to delegate to a federal bureaucrat. The nanny state is alive and well in your fantasy world. I will take our freedoms any day over your pie in the sky grass is greener argument

Size has nothing to do with it. Canada has better healthcare, better education, less hatred, less racism, less division, less violence, more livable cities, etc.

The European Union is the same, and together they are the size of the USA.

Among Western nations, the USA has become a "****hole" country. Isn't it interesting how once again Trump's projection is spot on?

 

[sjmay]

Size is irrelevant. I am confident that as the presidency of Herbert Hoover led to the New Deal, the presidency of Donald Trump will lead to a new New Deal, featuring social democracy (AKA, democratic socialism).

Honest question, because I don't understand the concept of, if I can't do it myself, I deserve for it to be handed to me.

Is that not the base of the "new deal" you are arguing for, free college, guaranteed income etc, is that not stating, don't worry about having to work, we will give it to you anyways, if I am wrong there, tell me where.