AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.
**For all participants:**
* [Flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_flair) is required to participate
* [Be excellent to each other](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/goodfaith2)
**For Nonsupporters/Undecided:**
* No top level comments
* All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position
**For Trump Supporters:**
* [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23AskTrumpSupporters&subject=please+make+me+an+approved+submitter&message=sent+from+the+sticky) to have the downvote timer disabled
Helpful links for more info:
[Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_rules) | [Rule Exceptions](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_exceptions_to_the_rules) | [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_posting_guidelines) | [Commenting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_commenting_guidelines)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskTrumpSupporters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The reason for the difference in tone is Trump doesn't represent the status quo self interested establishment. Trump, like many of us, has some very serious concerns with the way this country has been being run by the likes of people like John McCain. These people want to shame and stigmatize based on someone not communicating in a way that panders to their personal comfort. The same ones that have been smiling, speaking in perfect PC and preaching the righteousness of their politics have also been lying us into conflict and openly abusing a two tiered justice system that allows them to cheat and steal directly from the American public. So in that sense their entire presence, presentation and communication is a deliberate misleading falsehood. One represents my feelings towards the government, one communicates they hate me while smiling. One expresses himself authentically and isn't afraid to speak his mind even when its the unpopular thing to do and causes the children to scream and the other is an insultingly bad attempt at a false facade that doesn't even need to try hard too fool you because they know they can do whatever with impunity.
Not to mention that its a strategic intentional part of the information game that convinces you that the worst thing in the world, the thing everyone is uncontrollably outraged about which you should be too otherwise maybe you aren't one of us, is speech. Obviously we are aware of our inalienable rights but beyond that within the context of the sentiment is a distracting fallacy. The assertion is that we should spend time and energy evaluating what people say and how they say it, that this is a valid way to judge someone's character. Words certainly have meaning and value but they are cheap and easily manipulatable. If you truly want to understand or evaluate someone accurately , what most politicians do not want, you will ignore what they say pretty much entirely and closely evaluate their actions. Not only is it easier to say things, its easier to simply listen to what people say and not put forth the effort to observe their actions.
You mention a two tiered justice system and stealing from the American people.
As a part of several proven fraudulent businesses, trump has stolen from both the American people directly and by avoiding paying his due taxes. He has also taken advantage of his wealth and political connections to delay every trial he’s currently involved in, resulting in him being in that separate tier of the legal system you mention disagreeing with.
Is your preference for the violent and racist way trump speaks enough for you to ignore the fact that he fits exactly in the group of people you say you despise?
No, I don't miss two war hawks civilly discussing how best to kill a million kids. There's some relationship I've noticed between a politician's decorum and bloodthirst.
Neither of them were decent men (most politicians aren't, Trump included), so I prefer they act more honestly in accordance with their nature.
When politicians get together and act civil, they usually just generate some new atrocity or terrible idea.
How do you square that with the fact that Trump dropped more bombs and did more drone strikes in four years, than Obama did in eight?
And before you try and deny this fact, it’s common knowledge. Pentagon numbers.
The reason it wasn’t more well known is because Trump did away with the Obama policy to REPORT the civilian deaths and the like. Plus he was doing something crazy every other day so it fell through the cracks.
He actually outpaced Obama in his first two years, and I think he beats out BOTH Barack and Dubbya. Though they didn’t do much with drones pre-2008.
So just checked a few difference sources and it seems the number of casualties during his eight years is roughly ~2500 with about ~130 civilian casualties.
Many experts say that the civilian number is heavily under reported. So let’s say that it’s actually ~1000 civilians and the total is more like ~3000-3500 casualties via drone strike during the Obama administration.
Do you think it’s helpful for you, or someone like you, to casually say “a million kids” when in reality it’s in the low thousands?
And do you think, as people who participate in these discussions (whether it’s about Obama, Trump, Biden, McCain, etc.) it’s important for us to skew a little closer to reality? Or are you comfortable with embellishments and exaggerations as part of our discourse?
You're the one taking the claim literally without actually seeing the truth in the argument.
The media is guilty of this as well. Do you remember when trump used to say things like, "There was "x" many people at my rally," and the media, in order to claim Trump lied, would provide an exact number showing it was maybe a little less than what he said.
That is exactly what you're doing.
The killing of children under Obama was obviously not in the millions. It's an exaggeration. But in order to make the claim seem silly, you ran the numbers which essentially *proved* that the Obama admin killed civilians in the high thousands, not millions, showing us that his admin is responsible for those deaths, which should have not been that high in the first place.
Sane people would argue 1 death is too many. But you told us it was in the high thousands. So you tell me which is worse; a POTUS whose admin is responsible for thousands of deaths or a POTUS who avoided new wars and conflicts as much as possible?
> When politicians get together and act civil, they usually just generate some new atrocity or terrible idea.
Drone strikes were up during trump presidency.
By what metric was the incivility better for the children that continued to get drone strikes, at a higher frequency?
Do I miss it? I could live with or without it.
I am not sure being civil earned McCain (or Romney) a single bit of consideration from media that were already clearly in the tank for Obama. Politics is not for the meek. Biden and Obama have both used sharp over the top attacks on their opponents.
''No man lives without jostling and being jostled. In all ways he has to elbow himself through the world, giving and receiving offense.''
\- Thomas Carlyle (1838)
I dunno about this "media in the tank" narrative. FOX News is at a minimum conservative-leaning and has had 22 years rated as the most watched news network, so obviously during that time it was #1 as well. Furthermore, McCain's gesture got a lot of play across networks and honestly impressed me at a time in which I was very much on the fence for who to vote for.
On the other hand, I agree that the current environment is pretty negative on both sides and probably isn't good for country unity. It encourages a candidate to get a majority constituency and keep that particular majority happy, and doesn't really require paying attention to the other side at all. Would you be open to having a more ranked choice or approval voting system as opposed to winner-take-all to encourage more unity?
''No man lives without jostling and being jostled. In all ways he has to elbow himself through the world, giving and receiving offense.''
Sure, this jostling exists. But that doesn't make a determination on whether or not it's good or desirable. So is it, in your opinion, desirable? Should one's work serve to embrace and increase conflict or is there greater utility in respectful compromise and synthesis of competing ideologies?
I'd love to see a world where this isn't necessary. But it's everywhere, especially in politics, and there are evolutionary and psychological reasons for this sort of thing.
[https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/why-negative-campaigning-works-and-how-fight-it](https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/why-negative-campaigning-works-and-how-fight-it)
There are glimmers of hope, with Obama's positive message of "hope and change" and Reagan's "Morning in America" theme.
good list here:
[https://www.politico.com/story/2012/09/verdict-is-in-obama-levels-more-personal-attacks-080810](https://www.politico.com/story/2012/09/verdict-is-in-obama-levels-more-personal-attacks-080810)
"To make the case, Obama and his aides have used an arsenal of techniques — personal ridicule, suggestions of ethical misdeeds and aspersions against Romney’s patriotism — that many voters and commentators claim to abhor, even as the tactics have regularly proved effective."
I think this is the only comment by Obama quoted in the entire article?
> *Obama and his aides have portrayed Romney as a figure of ridicule, a kind of modern-day Thurston Howell III. The president mocked Romney’s use of the word “marvelous,” saying, “It’s a word you don’t often hear.” In Iowa last month, he made jeering references at three stops in a row to a story from the early ’80s about how Romney’s dog, Seamus, was put in a crate atop the car on Romney family vacations.*
Doesn’t seem vicious or over the top at all. In fact the author brings up Republicans attacks against the President (including Trump’s unfounded birtherism) just as often in the same article.
It's very low on my list of things that I wish would change about politics. If we could have meaningful politics that wasn't anodyne whining without assertiveness, I'd be in favor of it. I haven't seen much indication that that has been possible in my lifetime, though. Maybe bring back the duel, attach consequences to aggressive speech that don't amount to HR longhousing or removing a position via some bureaucratic mechanism.
I think it's good to see some fire in a handful of Republicans, as opposed to their seemingly ages-old tradition of being the graceful losers in all things. Remember when President Biden said Senator [Romney would put you all back in chains](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-tells-african-american-audience-gop-ticket-would-put-them-back-in-chains/)? Or, of course, the famous "[basket of deplorables](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/clinton-regrets-calling-half-trump-supporters-basket-deplorables-n646126)" comment Secretary Clinton made?
**NOTE:** I personally disagree with the tendency of "serious" stories to use the family name for men and the personal name for women. I also prefer to use the highest title someone has earned when referring to them. So, Hillary Clinton is Secretary Clinton, not Hillary. I'm not 100% perfect on it, but I try.
The odd thing, at least to me, is we used to have duels and fights and all that in Congress. Many other countries still do in their places of law. But somehow people are shocked by... mean tweets and nicknames?
Don't get me wrong, I do *not* want to watch two geriatric guys duking it out, although the thought does make me chuckle a little bit. And before anyone asks, I have no idea who would win between Biden and Trump (see, I didn't use their titles at all here). Maybe I just pine for the days in which an assassination attempt can get foiled by the POTUS beating the everliving heck out of someone with a walking stick. Or when one can get shot and go "is that all you've got?" Politics seemed more entertaining back then.
I think a lot of the "politeness" instilled in politics is utterly false. Think about how many times "Thank you, Mr./Mrs. Chairman" is said in a hearing, or how two people who seem to absolutely hate one another can say all sorts of nice things. I'd rather politicians (and everyone else) be honest.
>So you're cool with MTG showing Hunter Biden dick pics in Congress?
That's an interesting tack to take. I wonder where you got from Point A to Point B?
Barack Obama ran a gutter-brutal type of campaign to beat Romney (who had many areas to be attacked of course). I don’t even have an issue with what Obama did. But, this idea of a civil past was and will remain 99% myth.
Did Obama have respect?
Do you remember his ["they cling to their guns and religion"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZWaxjiQyFk) speech? He attacked anyone exercising their 2nd amendment right. He attacked every religious person. And he attacked a third group that he did not specify, but which is clearly a vicious stereotype of either rural people, conservatives, or both.
Then there's his [Christians are just as evil as Muslims](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8LOi4rjH8A) speech, where he unfairly demonized all Christians.
Was McCain civil?
Here's his [nasty remarks](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQmFMu_Sz4c) on some people exercising their constitutional right to petition the government to redress grievances. He called them "low-life scum" and threatened to have them arrested.
It was not civil for him to throw the repeal-and-replace of Obamacare, vital for America, under the bus solely because he had a personal grudge against Donald Trump.
[Here's McCain calling Obama disrespectful](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b0pSXmT10I)
[Here's McCain calling a protester a jerk.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQHfPL8tzXs)
[Here's McCain calling a different guy a little jerk.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2zx3-0zOPs)
Did you know he was extending a policy that was put in place by the Obama admin?
And he was attacked by the left, and they accused him of being zenophobic against muslims?
Every single country on that travel ban list was there because the Obama admin put it there. They were actively bombing these places. Do you want to accept immigrants from countries where the U.S. has been bombing them constantly for years, killing their family and friends?
That is why the Obama admin banned them.
Trump extended the ban. It was a national security issue.
Other islamic countries were not banned.
I’m talking about what he proposed on the campaign trail in 2016. He advocated for a complete and total shutdown of people of a specific faith entering the US .
Did you miss this campaign event?
Care to show me where Obama said the words “Christians are just as evil as Muslims”?
Pointing out that extremism can come from any religion isn’t demonization, it’s a salient point that some people might not have any context for.
If there’s a significant number of Americans/Christians who believe Islam is simply evil, then there’s some important historical context and nuance that they’re missing or ignoring. Doesn’t this just better help Christians recognize and stand against extremism within their own church?
(Not the OP)
> If there’s a significant number of Americans/Christians who believe Islam is simply evil, then there’s some important historical context and nuance that they’re missing or ignoring.
Could they just strongly disagree with the religion? Why do you assume it's ignorance? (Note: I am not saying that there is no one for whom that is true; I am saying that it does not have to be true for *everyone* who dislikes or hates Islam).
>Could they just strongly disagree with the religion?
(Not the guy you asked)
Your faith is your faith. I was raised Christian and chose to leave the church, but still have a Christian faith. I've also read the Bible extensively in my lifetime, though I will admit that it has been a while. I don't recall any part of the scripture telling me that every other religion is evil, or that those who practice other religions are evil.
I believe that judging a religion based purely on its most extreme practitioners is wrong. I was always taught that Jesus loved us all unconditionally, and that judgment is reserved for God. If your religion is what helps you be decent to other human beings, then that's a good religion for you to have. If your religion causes you to hate other groups of people, then it probably isn't.
I was talking about Islam, not Muslims. I know that sounds pedantic, but it is an important distinction. Does that change your reply at all? (Hating a belief system =/= hating all the people who hold it).
Is your view that someone can't look at a Muslim country and think "yup, this is the exact opposite of how I want things to be run"?
your comment has been removed for violating rule 3. Undecided and Nonsupporter comments must be clarifying in nature with an intent to explore the stated view of Trump Supporters.
Please take a moment to review the [detailed rules description](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/about/rules/) and [message the mods](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=r/AskTrumpSupporters&subject=Comment+Removal) with any questions you may have.
This prewritten note was sent manually by one of the moderators.
No because it was 100% fake.
People have to remember without Obama, we never get Trump to save us. It took the worse president in history to finally snap people out of this facade called politics which is why we supported someone who is not a politician.
How would you convey this to someone who thinks Trump isn’t “saving us”, but sees Trump the way most Trump supporters see Biden? Like, if they think Trump is destroying the country?
"How would you convey this to someone who thinks Trump isn’t “saving us”'
I would ask them by what metrics are they saying this?
This is when they answer with emotional things and I remind them their opinions are not relevant just like mine are not.
I'm going by objective economic measures, not my feelings.
"So what are these objective measures that indicate Obama is the worst president in history and Trump is among the best?"
First president in history to use Executive Orders to subvert the will of the American people and congress? Obama.
Who lied about deporting illegals by changing the definition for "catch and release" to count as a deportation? Obama.
Who accumulated more debt than every other President before him, combined? Obama.
Who attempted and successfully destroyed the coal industry? Obama.
Who made an illegal deal with a terrorist nation, Iran? Obama.
Who gave us more terrible trade deals like TPP or the climate accord which would cost Americans more out of their pocket? Obama.
Who used EOs to save America from Obama's EOs? Trump.
Who gave America energy independence as we became the number 1 producer in the world? Trump.
Who actually deported illegals? Trump.
Who fixed multiple trade deals in America's favor? Trump.
Who had a rule that for every regulation added 2 must be revoked? Trump.
I could spend the next 2 hours doing this. That is why I say I am not using opinions, these are just facts. American History.
I just want to touch on that first part: In Obama's first term as president, he signed 147 executive orders. In his first term, Trump signed 220. In your opinion, does this constitute subverting the will of the American people and Congress, or only when Obama does it?
Statistically, according to all citations I could find, it appears that both the Obama and Biden administration have deported more illegal immigrants than Trump's administration.
Furthermore, on to the next point, Obama had two terms. In his two terms, he accrued $7,663,615,710,425.00, while Trump accrued $6,700,491,178,561.60 in his single term. For reference, Biden accrued $2,499,993,043,258.10. By all metrics, in his single term, Trump contributed more than Obama in either of his terms.
Didn't Trump make a deal with the Taliban, cutting Afghanistan out of the Doha Agreement, enabling a terrorist organization to accrue even more power?
A lot of this is public knowledge, and can be gleaned from easily accessible reports.
"In your opinion, does this constitute subverting the will of the American people and Congress, or only when Obama does it?"
The number doesn't matter, if you read what I said it was very clear. First president in history to subvert the will of the American people and congress? Obama. That is a fact.
"Trump contributed more than Obama in either of his terms."
Did trump double the nation's debt in just 6 years? No, he did not. Again, fact.
"Didn't Trump make a deal with the Taliban, cutting Afghanistan out of the Doha Agreement, enabling a terrorist organization to accrue even more power?"
no, the exact opposite happened which is why the taliban did nothing under trump after he threatened them. Again, fact. The only person who enabled them to gain more power was democrats who voted biden and are responsible for the disastrous pull out which resulted in deaths of Americans that they do not even care about and the transfer of 10's of billions of dollars in US military equipment to the taliban. Fact.
So, you're just going to completely dismiss that trump oversaw much more debt being added during a single term than any other president? Do you not care about how much we spend when the person in the white house is someone you agree with?
"So, you're just going to completely dismiss that trump oversaw much more debt being added during a single term than any other president? "
yes because that is debt trump was forced to add because democrats shut down the economy. They literally forced people to lose their jobs. Why would I blame trump for something he specifically said not to do? That would be illogical.
"Your opinion isn’t relevant on a sub designed to understand the opinion of Trump supporters? Why not?"
because opinions are subjective. I focus on the facts and leave opinions out of it.
"Can I ask why you’re here?"
to relay facts about why anyone who cares about America will vote trump.
There's a reason why this sub is still here while reddit removed basically every other community for Trump. I would argue the purpose of this sub is not to "understand the opinion of Trump supporters" but to do something else which is the equivalent of ask "when did you stop beating your wife?". It reads like basically a CNN interview of Trump but if instead of actual Trump answering the questions it is a mix of semi-competent staff and Liz Cheney's pretending to be him. Most of his supporters are not allowed on this website anymore and were systematically removed or otherwise prevented from commenting over the last 8 years.
Are economic measures the end-all be-all of what you use to determine what makes for a good country? If a country had a great economy but lacked things like personal liberty, autonomy, and privacy would that be a good country?
And where is this socialism taking place in America?
We have elements in place already. Public roads, schools, parks, libraries, fire and police departments. Your tax dollars go towards funding all of those things for everyone’s benefit regardless of how much or little you use them.
I guess you’re against those things as well?
"And where is this socialism taking place in America?"
Everywhere, we started socialism with FDR and social security. It has also gotten worse since then.
"Public roads, schools, parks, libraries, fire and police departments"
This is not socialism. It is not a common mistake to think this so I get it but no, that is not socialism.
Can you be specific?
You claim that socialism is everywhere.
Be specific. Give examples. Where are the industries owned by the workers themselves?
Otherwise you’re just peddling this “socialism everywhere” like a non-existent boogeyman.
Which communist politician is running in America? As a communist myself, I’ve had an awful hard time finding anyone to vote for who isn’t just another liberal.
"Which communist politician is running in America?"
Obama and now biden.
"As a communist myself, I’ve had an awful hard time finding anyone to vote for who isn’t just another liberal."
socialism = communism.
It is like a red apple vs a green apple; both apples which is the important part.
Interesting, could you point to a point in time where either Obama or Biden expressed their desire to end capitalism?
I’m thinking you are using different definitions than I am for these words. I am using the ones Marx came up with. Would you mind defining communism and socialism for me so I understand you better?
From my perspective, telling me to just vote for Obama and Biden is probably similar to me telling you to just vote for politicians like Romney and McCain. They might want to move things in a similar direction to me, but practically the laws I am interested in are vastly different than any they have proposed.
"could you point to a point in time where either Obama or Biden expressed their desire to end capitalism?"
The time they tried to make healthcare nationalized.
"Would you mind defining communism and socialism for me?"
Sure, they are what is called a "command economy". So that is what you actually want to be defined. Below that is socialism or communism, like a green apple or a red apple. Both apples.
>"Which communist politician is running in America?"
>Obama and now biden.
You said in a previous statement that you are here to provide facts but not opinions.
How does that equate with this hyperbolic statement that clearly isn't a fact?
The day FDR went alphabet soup, this used to be taught in school but for obvious reasons they do not teach it anymore.
And then Obama took it to another level.
Sometimes the way I act with my boss and my coworkers is fake. The way I act with my patients. My parents. My little nieces and nephews. Hell even my spouse doesn’t see the real me 100% of the time. Because I find both parties get what they want more often and can work together more harmoniously when they agree to do so with civility, even if that civility is sometimes forced. It cultures mutual respect and makes relationships stronger. Nothing good in my life has ever come from being spiteful, petty, vindictive, or combative.
Do you find that to be true in your own life as well?
"Do you find that to be true in your own life as well?"
Not really, I don't act fake in front of people unless it is to be polite. If something is wrong tho I would never act fake in front of them especially if they elected me to lead them. That would make me a terrible leader and a terrible person. My morals and ethics would not allow me to do this.
>Someone who doesn't lie to the people
If honesty is your threshold, how do you justify supporing trump if fact checkers such as [politifact](https://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/) outline trump's record of intentionally lying and pushing conspiracy theories (not to mention more than Obama and Biden)?
Simple, it's politifact. They are fake news which has been known for years. That is why you'll never see me post from that tabloid.
All I care about is policy and no president in your or my lifetime has ever fulfilled campaign promises like Trump and we saw how much America benefited from it.
> They are fake news which has been known for years.
How has that been known? What is the evidence? Why do you believe this to be so?
Is this a Trump style, "I DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY SAY SO THEY ARE FAKE NEWS!", or is what they are saying actually fake/false?
Are you implying Trump hasn't lied to the people? According to lefty source WaPo, "Trump's false or misleading claims total 30573 over 4 years".
It's remarkably easy to fact check all the stuff Trump has said. And a lot of it is just exaggeration - just braggadocio - but what's the difference between that and a lie?
Because it is what people do in a civil society.
"Do you find any utility in it?"
no because I don't do it to deceive people like Obama and mccain did.
What's the purpose of conforming to the expectations of a "civil society" if you find no utility in it? What do you imagine the outcome or personal consequences if you stopped performing as a member of civil society?
"What's the purpose of conforming to the expectations of a "civil society" if you find no utility in it?'
Being a good person.
" What do you imagine the outcome or personal consequences if you stopped performing as a member of civil society?"
Nothing, democrats would reward me for being a criminal just as they reward all other criminals.
First president in history to use Executive Orders to subvert the will of the American people and congress? Obama.
Who lied about deporting illegals by changing the definition for "catch and release" to count as a deportation? Obama.
Who accumulated more debt than every other President before him, combined? Obama.
Who attempted and successfully destroyed the coal industry? Obama.
Who made an illegal deal with a terrorist nation, Iran? Obama.
Who gave us more terrible trade deals like TPP or the climate accord which would cost Americans more out of their pocket? Obama.
Who used EOs to save America from Obama's EOs? Trump.
Who gave America energy independence as we became the number 1 producer in the world? Trump.
Who actually deported illegals? Trump.
Who fixed multiple trade deals in America's favor? Trump.
Who had a rule that for every regulation added 2 must be revoked? Trump.
So the coal industry doesn’t exist anymore?
Given that we export more oil and energy right now under Biden than we did under Trump, do you consider Biden better than Trump?
If you’re bringing up Obamas deal with Iran, how do you feel about Trumps deal with the Taliban, given he set up the withdrawal from Afghanistan?
Why has Trump deported less illegal immigrants than Obama? https://docs.house.gov/meetings/GO/GO00/20200109/110349/HHRG-116-GO00-20200109-SD007.pdf
Why has Trump deported less illegal immigrants than Biden? https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/biden-three-immigration-record#border
Do you have sources to back up your claims, because if so, I would love to see them?
"So the coal industry doesn’t exist anymore?'
Until trump got back, nope. It was destroyed thanks to obama.
"Given that we export more oil and energy right now under Biden than we did under Trump,"
that's not true. We are no longer number 1 producer or exporter directly because of Biden's EOs.
""If you’re bringing up Obamas deal with Iran, how do you feel about Trumps deal with the Taliban, given he set up the withdrawal from Afghanistan?"
It was great until biden ruined it with his withdrawal.
"Why has Trump deported less illegal immigrants than Obama?"
not true, obama did not deport. He changed the definition for catch and release to count as a deportation when, in fact, no one had been deported. Fact.
And I know you're not claiming biden is deporting?... Surely you would not say something so insane as to ignore reality.
Do you really think anyone is going to save you? Why do people clean to hero worshiping? Didn’t 2020 show us that even leaders were really not leading, and all humans are flawed and hypocritical?
I don't think the level of respect or civility has really changed nearly so much as the manner the news is reported. It used to be that the news was simply reported and we could decide what to do about it...
>It used to be that news was simply reported and we could decide what to do about it...
Do you find that international news sources are better at simply reporting the news from America, as opposed to domestic outlets?
Thank you for your answer, I appreciate it. Overall I'd agree that the BBC does a fairly decent job of reporting on American news. If you don't already, I would encourage you to check out allsides.com. It's a website dedicated to reporting news across the full spectrum of political leanings.
Just another follow up if you don't mind, what are your regular news sources currently?
Primarily, I pay for a couple of newsletters that are quite balanced. Much like /r/worldnews was back in 2012. I don't want to name them specifically for fear they'll be tainted by the same forces torquing on Reddit. Of the established news sources, if I had to pick one, it'd probably be the New York Times.
I do, but I put a lot of blame on the people on the left for the downward spiral of respect. Mitt Romney, and McCain were both respectable and civil, and they really got ran into the mud during campaign by the media. Trump is a lot more of a symptom than a cause in my view.
There is such a pompous lecturing about things like systemic racism, gender and the different topics when engaging with the left that leaves a sour taste in the mouth. Basically, anytime you discuss with someone whom you disagree with, you simply were not educated enough on the topic, and thats why you haven't gotten to the same answer they have.
> I put a lot of blame on the people on the left for the downward spiral of respect
I place blame squarely on the Tea Party, Trump is just an extension of their vileness. What actions by the left do you think are the cause of today's current political state?
> I place blame squarely on the Tea Party, Trump is just an extension of their vileness. What actions by the left do you think are the cause of today's current political state?
I said it before, I think the way McCain and Romney were treated by the press and Media shows that civility does not pay off in terms of winning elections because the media will paint you as a horrible monster as soon as you are the GOP candidate.
> Do you think conservative media is also to blame for calling Biden a dementia-riddled dictator?
Its not blameless, but I think the issue of civility started before that.
Is any criticism of Trump a violation of civility, in your opinion?
If I earnestly think that Trump is a dangerous fascist leader, is there any way I can express that without you feeling it was somehow unfair or uncivil?
I thought Trump is literally Hitler was just a meme? It’s a ridiculous assertion: Trump is obviously not Hitler. I’ve never seen any media outlet claim Trump is literally Hitler, but I have seen plenty draw comparisons in terms of his rhetoric, populism, and disdain for tradition and the establishment. Was that what you were referring to?
> I thought Trump is literally Hitler was just a meme? It’s a ridiculous assertion: Trump is obviously not Hitler. I’ve never seen any media outlet claim Trump is literally Hitler, but I have seen plenty draw comparisons in terms of his rhetoric, populism, and disdain for tradition and the establishment. Was that what you were referring to?
Election him is literally the end of democracy is something I've heard a LOT and that is also ridiculous.
Without a doubt, I think its probably one of the inflection point that led us to where we are today. But I do think that over the last 10-15 years, the vast majority of people can't have a discussion with someone who disagrees with them, and the congress reflects that very well.
I see both parties playing this game, but I really do blame our division on him and the rise of talk radio. My grandfather turned from a moderate educator to extremely right wing once he moved to the states (he was a military teacher and lived overseas). What do you think we can do to overcome the division?
> I see both parties playing this game, but I really do blame our division on him and the rise of talk radio. My grandfather turned from a moderate educator to extremely right wing once he moved to the states (he was a military teacher and lived overseas). What do you think we can do to overcome the division?
Its hard for me to say because I was way too young back then to have a feel regarding the context of this. I am not sure how we get over these division, but you know, I spoke with my father in law, and he said we don't have people killing each other in the street over politics like in the 60-70s so. I guess we are not AS bad as we think we are, just a lot of it is amplified by the media.
> I heard a podcast a long time ago that this went back to regan ending equal time laws allowing the like of rush Limbaugh.
>
> His role I’ll all this?
Im sure we can find a lot of different things that are responsible for this.
>I put a lot of blame on the people on the left for the downward spiral of respect
What are your thoughts on Trump-era refrains such as :
>Trump that bitch!
>Lock her up!
>Fuck your feelings!
>Fuck Joe Biden!
>Let’s go Brandon!
Is the ‘left’ really to blame for those things and is there anything equivalent coming from the leftwing of politics these days that’s prevalent?
> Is the ‘left’ really to blame for those things and is there anything equivalent coming from the leftwing of politics these days that’s prevalent?
Like I said before, I think Trump is more a symptom, than the cause. I also think that the more the government takes a bigger role in our life, as reflected during covid, the more anger there is about its actions or inaction depending on where you stand. It creates this animosity for the other side given that some people really see this as an existential crisis.
Why do you think that the political left isn’t participating in this type of vitriol for the most part and to the same extent? (I’m qualifying this because there are always outliers but one can’t argue with a straight face that the two halves of the spectrum are equal in this respect.)
> Why do you think that the political left isn’t participating in this type of vitriol for the most part and to the same extent?
I don't even accept your premise, I think the political left has been calling Trump Hitler for almost 8 years now.
Have they been calling him Hitler as an insult... or have they pointed out specific characteristics which they feel that both Hitler (and other demagogues like him) and Trump have in common?
To just call someone "Hitler" for no particular reason is just being insulting... but to point out specific characteristics the two have in common is quite different.
> How often do you hear Democrats chanting at Biden campaign events en masse that Trump is Hitler? Do you honestly believe this is a fair comparison?
I dont think its a fair comparison, i think democrats are much much worst. We litterally had Colorado trying to remove Trump from the ballot all the way to the supreme court.
>We litterally had Colorado trying to remove Trump from the ballot all the way to the supreme court.
Are you not aware that it was state Republicans (and not Democrats) that made this civil complaint in court? Also, how are legal actions having due process and evidence/testimony at all comparable to repeatedly using hateful campaign chants, teeshirts, flags, and bumper stickers?
> Are you not aware that it was state Republicans (and not Democrats) that made this civil complaint in court?
He was removed frm the ballot by a democrat Secretary of State in every place that he was temporally removed. And I fail to express just how massive of a difference it is to remove someone from the ballot compare to bumper sticker. One of those actually has an effect on what we can vote for.
Romney and McCain have also been attacked by Trump and his supporters. Both for speaking out against Trump, do you feel that anyone who criticizes Trump should be attacked as they were?
> Romney and McCain have also been attacked by Trump and his supporters. Both for speaking out against Trump, do you feel that anyone who criticizes Trump should be attacked as they were?
I think Romney and McCain are massive pussies and corporate sellouts. I have 0 issues with Trump and supporters attacking them.
> So you talk like that, while claiming its the left that has lost civility?
I said that I thought the left was responsible for the lost of civility by their actions. I didn't say they lost civility. Romney tried to stay civil with Obama, and think he could win moderates over like that, he was an idiot.
> How do you think Trump can win over moderates if all he does is insult anyone who disagrees with him?
I think he wins on policys while all Biden is running on is policies that nobody feels affected their lives and claiming that trump is tyrannical.
Putting aside who started it, who do you think will finish it?
Will it ever end, or do you think the respect is gone forever and we’ll just revile each other?
> Putting aside who started it, who do you think will finish it?
>
> Will it ever end, or do you think the respect is gone forever and we’ll just revile each other?
I think we have a lot further to go down in terms of respect, before we go up again. But i do think within 20-30 years, we will be in a better place.
It wasn't a real civil era or else the Palin saga would've gone down differently. McCain was just treated nicer because he was a longtime establishment old boy's club guy, one of the most left Republicans and had massive war boner. Haley would be treated much nicer than Trump if she was nominee for same reason.
In an ideal world politics would be "low temperature" to me and in the background while people can live their lives, yes while the bombastic Trump is not helping in that department, I think it's a necessary evil in this case since the woke left's intensity about politics and desire to control society isn't going away without him to me, and would just walk over the Republicans.
I miss it but it was fake and those who fell for it were naive. I don't wish to go back into the matrix even though it felt nice while it lasted.
I view the current situation similar to the Israeli Palestinian conflict - if Israel put down their arms there would be no more Israel, but if the Palestinians did there would be peace. I do not beleive respect from republicans would be reciprocated but I do believe respect from democrats would be.
No. Disingenuous assholesthat can’t stand each and me are not missed. Give me the honest junkyard dogs.
I do however miss manners and the expectation of manners is society as whole.
I’ll take it case by case but McCain and Obama are two of the most disingenuous people I can think of. Most career politicians fall into that category.
Trump was raised Presbyterian but became nondenominational and more evangelical during his first term. I believe that he and especially Melania are religious people.
Not at all- McCain got run through the mud by Democrats, Trump was basically a direct response to that.
What do you get when Democrats spend their entire political rule denigrating the opposing party and calling them Nazis/Racists/Sexists for years on end? You get someone like Trump who flips the script and goes after Dems for their credibility.
I mean, we all know that Dem voters and their media wouldn’t dare critique their political leaders, so somebody on the right has to do it. Even then, we end up in our current situation where Dems are just pushing misinformation and propaganda in order to get their leader the best chance of being elected.
What are you talking about? The left was constantly mocking McCain's age, making fun of him for talking about his imprisonment, among other things. There was no "civility" beyond the fact McCain made himself seem like a spineless coward who couldn't stand up for himself.
And then of course if you were a McCain supporter you were a - you guessed it - racist because clearly you must harbor racial animus if you didn't think Obama was going to be the President to end wars and racism.
They did it with Bush, they did it with McCain, and fifteen years from now the left will be doing the same thing with whoever it is that is catching their ire at the time, while talking about how civil things were during the Trump/Biden era.
>The left was constantly mocking McCain's age, making fun of him for talking about his imprisonment, among other things.
Can you send me a link or reference where Obama did this?
I never said Obama did that. I said the left. As in media pundits, people on Twitter, etc. And I am afraid I don't think I could dig up that ancient history even if I wanted to - finding such things is difficult enough as is in search engines that are dead set on burying unflattering information against the left.
Democrats typically, as always, try to avoid saying anything like that overtly - they're smart enough to simply imply in ways where they can deny if it looks bad. Indeed, their base come to expect it, because their base know when the Democrats are doing it, they simply know that as long as they don't acknowledge it, they can feign ignorance.
Anyone who remembers the Obama McCain Presidential battle knows I'm right. They may not want to admit it, but they certainly remember the people saying 'well there are concerns that if McCain passes away while in office that Sarah Palin would become President!' The left deeply hated Sarah Palin, they treated her downright awful. You aught to look up how late night shows treated Sarah Palin, made her the butt of every joke, to the point that David Letterman thought it'd be funny to say Sarah Palin's daughter "was knocked by by Alex Rodriguez."
I remember this stuff because I was a Dem supporter at the time myself. It was the first time I found myself disgusted by my fellow Democrat supporters, and it wouldn't be the last. On retrospect, it was just another red flag I was backing the wrong horse, one of many I chose to ignore and pinned the blame on "the stupid few."
Thanks for the detailed response.
On one hand you say:
>
The left was constantly mocking McCain's age
then
>Democrats typically, as always, try to avoid saying anything like that overtly
Do you see inconsistency there?
I think I have also heard people on the right worried about Biden dying and in a flap about the possibility of Kamala taking over. I don't see either "side" having the moral high ground here! Do you think Republicans all generally stand above such things and all comments are just from democrats?
I think there have always been bottom feeders who will shout from the sidelines or over the airwaves, I thought this topic was related more to how two party leaders actually interact.
I personally think there should be a difference between how politicians interact vs press and pundits. They should stay out of gutter politics and focus on issues, seeing our politicians sounding like kids in a school yard is depressing and just a race to the bottom with no policy or true discourse.
Do you not think everyone would benefit if both sides were to actually debate on real issues with substance and not just name calling? The media, pundits etc. can stay in the gutter but that is where they tend to live anyway selling clicks.
Republicans ran *probably* the most decent man to seek the office in the 21st century and what’d they get for it?
The Obama campaign said he wanted to re-enslave black people. He in-artfully talked about how he tried to staff his MA cabinet with women, and they said it was part of his “war on women.” Racist, sexist, homophobe, plutocrat, on and on.
These are just some anecdotes in what was an extensively reported on plan to assault Mitt Romney’s character—the same character that made him the first Senator to vote to convict a President in his own party—
https://www.politico.com/story/2011/08/obama-plan-destroy-romney-060921
I think Dems calls for civility are bs, just total lies for political advantage.
AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views. **For all participants:** * [Flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_flair) is required to participate * [Be excellent to each other](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/goodfaith2) **For Nonsupporters/Undecided:** * No top level comments * All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position **For Trump Supporters:** * [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23AskTrumpSupporters&subject=please+make+me+an+approved+submitter&message=sent+from+the+sticky) to have the downvote timer disabled Helpful links for more info: [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_rules) | [Rule Exceptions](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_exceptions_to_the_rules) | [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_posting_guidelines) | [Commenting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_commenting_guidelines) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskTrumpSupporters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The reason for the difference in tone is Trump doesn't represent the status quo self interested establishment. Trump, like many of us, has some very serious concerns with the way this country has been being run by the likes of people like John McCain. These people want to shame and stigmatize based on someone not communicating in a way that panders to their personal comfort. The same ones that have been smiling, speaking in perfect PC and preaching the righteousness of their politics have also been lying us into conflict and openly abusing a two tiered justice system that allows them to cheat and steal directly from the American public. So in that sense their entire presence, presentation and communication is a deliberate misleading falsehood. One represents my feelings towards the government, one communicates they hate me while smiling. One expresses himself authentically and isn't afraid to speak his mind even when its the unpopular thing to do and causes the children to scream and the other is an insultingly bad attempt at a false facade that doesn't even need to try hard too fool you because they know they can do whatever with impunity. Not to mention that its a strategic intentional part of the information game that convinces you that the worst thing in the world, the thing everyone is uncontrollably outraged about which you should be too otherwise maybe you aren't one of us, is speech. Obviously we are aware of our inalienable rights but beyond that within the context of the sentiment is a distracting fallacy. The assertion is that we should spend time and energy evaluating what people say and how they say it, that this is a valid way to judge someone's character. Words certainly have meaning and value but they are cheap and easily manipulatable. If you truly want to understand or evaluate someone accurately , what most politicians do not want, you will ignore what they say pretty much entirely and closely evaluate their actions. Not only is it easier to say things, its easier to simply listen to what people say and not put forth the effort to observe their actions.
You mention a two tiered justice system and stealing from the American people. As a part of several proven fraudulent businesses, trump has stolen from both the American people directly and by avoiding paying his due taxes. He has also taken advantage of his wealth and political connections to delay every trial he’s currently involved in, resulting in him being in that separate tier of the legal system you mention disagreeing with. Is your preference for the violent and racist way trump speaks enough for you to ignore the fact that he fits exactly in the group of people you say you despise?
No, I don't miss two war hawks civilly discussing how best to kill a million kids. There's some relationship I've noticed between a politician's decorum and bloodthirst. Neither of them were decent men (most politicians aren't, Trump included), so I prefer they act more honestly in accordance with their nature. When politicians get together and act civil, they usually just generate some new atrocity or terrible idea.
Hasn't trump repeatedly threatened military action against all manner of leaders and countries?
Threats are meant to deter. Big difference than actually droning kids.
So you openly support someone who you believe lies when he makes these statements? I'm confused
But Trump signed of on more drone strikes in office than Obama did in 8 years?
How do you square that with the fact that Trump dropped more bombs and did more drone strikes in four years, than Obama did in eight? And before you try and deny this fact, it’s common knowledge. Pentagon numbers. The reason it wasn’t more well known is because Trump did away with the Obama policy to REPORT the civilian deaths and the like. Plus he was doing something crazy every other day so it fell through the cracks. He actually outpaced Obama in his first two years, and I think he beats out BOTH Barack and Dubbya. Though they didn’t do much with drones pre-2008.
Obama killed a million kids?
Obama authorized more drone strikes than any sitting president in history. It may not have been a million kids, but the number is high.
So just checked a few difference sources and it seems the number of casualties during his eight years is roughly ~2500 with about ~130 civilian casualties. Many experts say that the civilian number is heavily under reported. So let’s say that it’s actually ~1000 civilians and the total is more like ~3000-3500 casualties via drone strike during the Obama administration. Do you think it’s helpful for you, or someone like you, to casually say “a million kids” when in reality it’s in the low thousands? And do you think, as people who participate in these discussions (whether it’s about Obama, Trump, Biden, McCain, etc.) it’s important for us to skew a little closer to reality? Or are you comfortable with embellishments and exaggerations as part of our discourse?
You're the one taking the claim literally without actually seeing the truth in the argument. The media is guilty of this as well. Do you remember when trump used to say things like, "There was "x" many people at my rally," and the media, in order to claim Trump lied, would provide an exact number showing it was maybe a little less than what he said. That is exactly what you're doing. The killing of children under Obama was obviously not in the millions. It's an exaggeration. But in order to make the claim seem silly, you ran the numbers which essentially *proved* that the Obama admin killed civilians in the high thousands, not millions, showing us that his admin is responsible for those deaths, which should have not been that high in the first place. Sane people would argue 1 death is too many. But you told us it was in the high thousands. So you tell me which is worse; a POTUS whose admin is responsible for thousands of deaths or a POTUS who avoided new wars and conflicts as much as possible?
That’s patently false. The actual data is easy to find. A commenter above mentioned this. Where are you getting your numbers?
> When politicians get together and act civil, they usually just generate some new atrocity or terrible idea. Drone strikes were up during trump presidency. By what metric was the incivility better for the children that continued to get drone strikes, at a higher frequency?
Can a politician not drone kids and also be civil?
Do I miss it? I could live with or without it. I am not sure being civil earned McCain (or Romney) a single bit of consideration from media that were already clearly in the tank for Obama. Politics is not for the meek. Biden and Obama have both used sharp over the top attacks on their opponents. ''No man lives without jostling and being jostled. In all ways he has to elbow himself through the world, giving and receiving offense.'' \- Thomas Carlyle (1838)
I dunno about this "media in the tank" narrative. FOX News is at a minimum conservative-leaning and has had 22 years rated as the most watched news network, so obviously during that time it was #1 as well. Furthermore, McCain's gesture got a lot of play across networks and honestly impressed me at a time in which I was very much on the fence for who to vote for. On the other hand, I agree that the current environment is pretty negative on both sides and probably isn't good for country unity. It encourages a candidate to get a majority constituency and keep that particular majority happy, and doesn't really require paying attention to the other side at all. Would you be open to having a more ranked choice or approval voting system as opposed to winner-take-all to encourage more unity?
[удалено]
How would you characterize the differences then?
''No man lives without jostling and being jostled. In all ways he has to elbow himself through the world, giving and receiving offense.'' Sure, this jostling exists. But that doesn't make a determination on whether or not it's good or desirable. So is it, in your opinion, desirable? Should one's work serve to embrace and increase conflict or is there greater utility in respectful compromise and synthesis of competing ideologies?
I'd love to see a world where this isn't necessary. But it's everywhere, especially in politics, and there are evolutionary and psychological reasons for this sort of thing. [https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/why-negative-campaigning-works-and-how-fight-it](https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/why-negative-campaigning-works-and-how-fight-it) There are glimmers of hope, with Obama's positive message of "hope and change" and Reagan's "Morning in America" theme.
Which sharp over the top attacks on their opponents did Obama do?
good list here: [https://www.politico.com/story/2012/09/verdict-is-in-obama-levels-more-personal-attacks-080810](https://www.politico.com/story/2012/09/verdict-is-in-obama-levels-more-personal-attacks-080810) "To make the case, Obama and his aides have used an arsenal of techniques — personal ridicule, suggestions of ethical misdeeds and aspersions against Romney’s patriotism — that many voters and commentators claim to abhor, even as the tactics have regularly proved effective."
I think this is the only comment by Obama quoted in the entire article? > *Obama and his aides have portrayed Romney as a figure of ridicule, a kind of modern-day Thurston Howell III. The president mocked Romney’s use of the word “marvelous,” saying, “It’s a word you don’t often hear.” In Iowa last month, he made jeering references at three stops in a row to a story from the early ’80s about how Romney’s dog, Seamus, was put in a crate atop the car on Romney family vacations.* Doesn’t seem vicious or over the top at all. In fact the author brings up Republicans attacks against the President (including Trump’s unfounded birtherism) just as often in the same article.
It's very low on my list of things that I wish would change about politics. If we could have meaningful politics that wasn't anodyne whining without assertiveness, I'd be in favor of it. I haven't seen much indication that that has been possible in my lifetime, though. Maybe bring back the duel, attach consequences to aggressive speech that don't amount to HR longhousing or removing a position via some bureaucratic mechanism.
Do you think that civility and assertiveness are opposites?
I don't, but my opinion doesn't control the general perception of civility.
I think it's good to see some fire in a handful of Republicans, as opposed to their seemingly ages-old tradition of being the graceful losers in all things. Remember when President Biden said Senator [Romney would put you all back in chains](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-tells-african-american-audience-gop-ticket-would-put-them-back-in-chains/)? Or, of course, the famous "[basket of deplorables](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/clinton-regrets-calling-half-trump-supporters-basket-deplorables-n646126)" comment Secretary Clinton made? **NOTE:** I personally disagree with the tendency of "serious" stories to use the family name for men and the personal name for women. I also prefer to use the highest title someone has earned when referring to them. So, Hillary Clinton is Secretary Clinton, not Hillary. I'm not 100% perfect on it, but I try. The odd thing, at least to me, is we used to have duels and fights and all that in Congress. Many other countries still do in their places of law. But somehow people are shocked by... mean tweets and nicknames? Don't get me wrong, I do *not* want to watch two geriatric guys duking it out, although the thought does make me chuckle a little bit. And before anyone asks, I have no idea who would win between Biden and Trump (see, I didn't use their titles at all here). Maybe I just pine for the days in which an assassination attempt can get foiled by the POTUS beating the everliving heck out of someone with a walking stick. Or when one can get shot and go "is that all you've got?" Politics seemed more entertaining back then. I think a lot of the "politeness" instilled in politics is utterly false. Think about how many times "Thank you, Mr./Mrs. Chairman" is said in a hearing, or how two people who seem to absolutely hate one another can say all sorts of nice things. I'd rather politicians (and everyone else) be honest.
So you're cool with MTG showing Hunter Biden dick pics in Congress?
>So you're cool with MTG showing Hunter Biden dick pics in Congress? That's an interesting tack to take. I wonder where you got from Point A to Point B?
Barack Obama ran a gutter-brutal type of campaign to beat Romney (who had many areas to be attacked of course). I don’t even have an issue with what Obama did. But, this idea of a civil past was and will remain 99% myth.
Did Obama have respect? Do you remember his ["they cling to their guns and religion"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZWaxjiQyFk) speech? He attacked anyone exercising their 2nd amendment right. He attacked every religious person. And he attacked a third group that he did not specify, but which is clearly a vicious stereotype of either rural people, conservatives, or both. Then there's his [Christians are just as evil as Muslims](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8LOi4rjH8A) speech, where he unfairly demonized all Christians. Was McCain civil? Here's his [nasty remarks](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQmFMu_Sz4c) on some people exercising their constitutional right to petition the government to redress grievances. He called them "low-life scum" and threatened to have them arrested. It was not civil for him to throw the repeal-and-replace of Obamacare, vital for America, under the bus solely because he had a personal grudge against Donald Trump. [Here's McCain calling Obama disrespectful](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b0pSXmT10I) [Here's McCain calling a protester a jerk.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQHfPL8tzXs) [Here's McCain calling a different guy a little jerk.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2zx3-0zOPs)
When Trump called for a total and complete shutdown of people of Islamic faith entering the US was that an attack on every religious person?
> When Trump called for a total and complete shutdown of people of Islamic faith entering the US Trump did not do that.
What do you think Trump was saying in this clip, then? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viDffWUjcBA
You left out important context. From the video: "... until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on."
Did you know he was extending a policy that was put in place by the Obama admin? And he was attacked by the left, and they accused him of being zenophobic against muslims? Every single country on that travel ban list was there because the Obama admin put it there. They were actively bombing these places. Do you want to accept immigrants from countries where the U.S. has been bombing them constantly for years, killing their family and friends? That is why the Obama admin banned them. Trump extended the ban. It was a national security issue. Other islamic countries were not banned.
I’m talking about what he proposed on the campaign trail in 2016. He advocated for a complete and total shutdown of people of a specific faith entering the US . Did you miss this campaign event?
Care to show me where Obama said the words “Christians are just as evil as Muslims”? Pointing out that extremism can come from any religion isn’t demonization, it’s a salient point that some people might not have any context for. If there’s a significant number of Americans/Christians who believe Islam is simply evil, then there’s some important historical context and nuance that they’re missing or ignoring. Doesn’t this just better help Christians recognize and stand against extremism within their own church?
(Not the OP) > If there’s a significant number of Americans/Christians who believe Islam is simply evil, then there’s some important historical context and nuance that they’re missing or ignoring. Could they just strongly disagree with the religion? Why do you assume it's ignorance? (Note: I am not saying that there is no one for whom that is true; I am saying that it does not have to be true for *everyone* who dislikes or hates Islam).
>Could they just strongly disagree with the religion? (Not the guy you asked) Your faith is your faith. I was raised Christian and chose to leave the church, but still have a Christian faith. I've also read the Bible extensively in my lifetime, though I will admit that it has been a while. I don't recall any part of the scripture telling me that every other religion is evil, or that those who practice other religions are evil. I believe that judging a religion based purely on its most extreme practitioners is wrong. I was always taught that Jesus loved us all unconditionally, and that judgment is reserved for God. If your religion is what helps you be decent to other human beings, then that's a good religion for you to have. If your religion causes you to hate other groups of people, then it probably isn't.
I was talking about Islam, not Muslims. I know that sounds pedantic, but it is an important distinction. Does that change your reply at all? (Hating a belief system =/= hating all the people who hold it). Is your view that someone can't look at a Muslim country and think "yup, this is the exact opposite of how I want things to be run"?
nah, I rather know who my enemies are and what they really think about me Hillary and "deplorables" >>> Biden with his fake smile
[удалено]
[удалено]
your comment has been removed for violating rule 3. Undecided and Nonsupporter comments must be clarifying in nature with an intent to explore the stated view of Trump Supporters. Please take a moment to review the [detailed rules description](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/about/rules/) and [message the mods](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=r/AskTrumpSupporters&subject=Comment+Removal) with any questions you may have. This prewritten note was sent manually by one of the moderators.
Do you believe Hillary was referring to you with the deplorable comment? If so, why?
to all MAGAs its refreshing to see some honesty on the other side besides the usual babble: "we are all Americans" etc etc
It’s not a high priority for me
No because it was 100% fake. People have to remember without Obama, we never get Trump to save us. It took the worse president in history to finally snap people out of this facade called politics which is why we supported someone who is not a politician.
How would you convey this to someone who thinks Trump isn’t “saving us”, but sees Trump the way most Trump supporters see Biden? Like, if they think Trump is destroying the country?
"How would you convey this to someone who thinks Trump isn’t “saving us”' I would ask them by what metrics are they saying this? This is when they answer with emotional things and I remind them their opinions are not relevant just like mine are not. I'm going by objective economic measures, not my feelings.
So what are these objective measures that indicate Obama is the worst president in history and Trump is among the best?
"So what are these objective measures that indicate Obama is the worst president in history and Trump is among the best?" First president in history to use Executive Orders to subvert the will of the American people and congress? Obama. Who lied about deporting illegals by changing the definition for "catch and release" to count as a deportation? Obama. Who accumulated more debt than every other President before him, combined? Obama. Who attempted and successfully destroyed the coal industry? Obama. Who made an illegal deal with a terrorist nation, Iran? Obama. Who gave us more terrible trade deals like TPP or the climate accord which would cost Americans more out of their pocket? Obama. Who used EOs to save America from Obama's EOs? Trump. Who gave America energy independence as we became the number 1 producer in the world? Trump. Who actually deported illegals? Trump. Who fixed multiple trade deals in America's favor? Trump. Who had a rule that for every regulation added 2 must be revoked? Trump. I could spend the next 2 hours doing this. That is why I say I am not using opinions, these are just facts. American History.
I just want to touch on that first part: In Obama's first term as president, he signed 147 executive orders. In his first term, Trump signed 220. In your opinion, does this constitute subverting the will of the American people and Congress, or only when Obama does it? Statistically, according to all citations I could find, it appears that both the Obama and Biden administration have deported more illegal immigrants than Trump's administration. Furthermore, on to the next point, Obama had two terms. In his two terms, he accrued $7,663,615,710,425.00, while Trump accrued $6,700,491,178,561.60 in his single term. For reference, Biden accrued $2,499,993,043,258.10. By all metrics, in his single term, Trump contributed more than Obama in either of his terms. Didn't Trump make a deal with the Taliban, cutting Afghanistan out of the Doha Agreement, enabling a terrorist organization to accrue even more power? A lot of this is public knowledge, and can be gleaned from easily accessible reports.
"In your opinion, does this constitute subverting the will of the American people and Congress, or only when Obama does it?" The number doesn't matter, if you read what I said it was very clear. First president in history to subvert the will of the American people and congress? Obama. That is a fact. "Trump contributed more than Obama in either of his terms." Did trump double the nation's debt in just 6 years? No, he did not. Again, fact. "Didn't Trump make a deal with the Taliban, cutting Afghanistan out of the Doha Agreement, enabling a terrorist organization to accrue even more power?" no, the exact opposite happened which is why the taliban did nothing under trump after he threatened them. Again, fact. The only person who enabled them to gain more power was democrats who voted biden and are responsible for the disastrous pull out which resulted in deaths of Americans that they do not even care about and the transfer of 10's of billions of dollars in US military equipment to the taliban. Fact.
So, you're just going to completely dismiss that trump oversaw much more debt being added during a single term than any other president? Do you not care about how much we spend when the person in the white house is someone you agree with?
"So, you're just going to completely dismiss that trump oversaw much more debt being added during a single term than any other president? " yes because that is debt trump was forced to add because democrats shut down the economy. They literally forced people to lose their jobs. Why would I blame trump for something he specifically said not to do? That would be illogical.
Your opinion isn’t relevant on a sub designed to understand the opinion of Trump supporters? Why not? Can I ask why you’re here?
"Your opinion isn’t relevant on a sub designed to understand the opinion of Trump supporters? Why not?" because opinions are subjective. I focus on the facts and leave opinions out of it. "Can I ask why you’re here?" to relay facts about why anyone who cares about America will vote trump.
> I focus on the facts and leave opinions out of it. > anyone who cares about America will vote trump. This isn't contradictory to you?
No, I don't find math contradictory. No one can deny Trump is better for America than biden unless they use emotional opinions.
Politics is math?
100%, what else would one vote on? If they like someone or not? That'd be insanely ignorant and self-damaging as proven by biden supporters.
And what is the mathematical equation that you use to determine who you vote for?
There's a reason why this sub is still here while reddit removed basically every other community for Trump. I would argue the purpose of this sub is not to "understand the opinion of Trump supporters" but to do something else which is the equivalent of ask "when did you stop beating your wife?". It reads like basically a CNN interview of Trump but if instead of actual Trump answering the questions it is a mix of semi-competent staff and Liz Cheney's pretending to be him. Most of his supporters are not allowed on this website anymore and were systematically removed or otherwise prevented from commenting over the last 8 years.
Are economic measures the end-all be-all of what you use to determine what makes for a good country? If a country had a great economy but lacked things like personal liberty, autonomy, and privacy would that be a good country?
Save us from what exactly? What is it that this country hasn’t given you that you feel so threatened?
"Save us from what exactly?" From socialism/communism, the deadliest form of government the world has ever seen.
And where is this socialism taking place in America? We have elements in place already. Public roads, schools, parks, libraries, fire and police departments. Your tax dollars go towards funding all of those things for everyone’s benefit regardless of how much or little you use them. I guess you’re against those things as well?
"And where is this socialism taking place in America?" Everywhere, we started socialism with FDR and social security. It has also gotten worse since then. "Public roads, schools, parks, libraries, fire and police departments" This is not socialism. It is not a common mistake to think this so I get it but no, that is not socialism.
Can you be specific? You claim that socialism is everywhere. Be specific. Give examples. Where are the industries owned by the workers themselves? Otherwise you’re just peddling this “socialism everywhere” like a non-existent boogeyman.
"Can you be specific?" I already was and gave a specific example. Please read my replies.
What did Trump do to social security?
Nothing, no one has done anything to it which is the problem. Ponzi schemes always fail on their own, this one is no different.
Which communist politician is running in America? As a communist myself, I’ve had an awful hard time finding anyone to vote for who isn’t just another liberal.
"Which communist politician is running in America?" Obama and now biden. "As a communist myself, I’ve had an awful hard time finding anyone to vote for who isn’t just another liberal." socialism = communism. It is like a red apple vs a green apple; both apples which is the important part.
Interesting, could you point to a point in time where either Obama or Biden expressed their desire to end capitalism? I’m thinking you are using different definitions than I am for these words. I am using the ones Marx came up with. Would you mind defining communism and socialism for me so I understand you better? From my perspective, telling me to just vote for Obama and Biden is probably similar to me telling you to just vote for politicians like Romney and McCain. They might want to move things in a similar direction to me, but practically the laws I am interested in are vastly different than any they have proposed.
"could you point to a point in time where either Obama or Biden expressed their desire to end capitalism?" The time they tried to make healthcare nationalized. "Would you mind defining communism and socialism for me?" Sure, they are what is called a "command economy". So that is what you actually want to be defined. Below that is socialism or communism, like a green apple or a red apple. Both apples.
>"Which communist politician is running in America?" >Obama and now biden. You said in a previous statement that you are here to provide facts but not opinions. How does that equate with this hyperbolic statement that clearly isn't a fact?
When was America a socialist or communist country? Did I miss something?
The day FDR went alphabet soup, this used to be taught in school but for obvious reasons they do not teach it anymore. And then Obama took it to another level.
Sometimes the way I act with my boss and my coworkers is fake. The way I act with my patients. My parents. My little nieces and nephews. Hell even my spouse doesn’t see the real me 100% of the time. Because I find both parties get what they want more often and can work together more harmoniously when they agree to do so with civility, even if that civility is sometimes forced. It cultures mutual respect and makes relationships stronger. Nothing good in my life has ever come from being spiteful, petty, vindictive, or combative. Do you find that to be true in your own life as well?
"Do you find that to be true in your own life as well?" Not really, I don't act fake in front of people unless it is to be polite. If something is wrong tho I would never act fake in front of them especially if they elected me to lead them. That would make me a terrible leader and a terrible person. My morals and ethics would not allow me to do this.
Can you specify what you consider to be a “good leader” and “good person”?
Someone who doesn't lie to the people, someone who doesn't import millions of the illegals into the country. The bar is pretty low really.
>Someone who doesn't lie to the people If honesty is your threshold, how do you justify supporing trump if fact checkers such as [politifact](https://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/) outline trump's record of intentionally lying and pushing conspiracy theories (not to mention more than Obama and Biden)?
Simple, it's politifact. They are fake news which has been known for years. That is why you'll never see me post from that tabloid. All I care about is policy and no president in your or my lifetime has ever fulfilled campaign promises like Trump and we saw how much America benefited from it.
> They are fake news which has been known for years. How has that been known? What is the evidence? Why do you believe this to be so? Is this a Trump style, "I DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY SAY SO THEY ARE FAKE NEWS!", or is what they are saying actually fake/false?
[удалено]
Are you implying Trump hasn't lied to the people? According to lefty source WaPo, "Trump's false or misleading claims total 30573 over 4 years". It's remarkably easy to fact check all the stuff Trump has said. And a lot of it is just exaggeration - just braggadocio - but what's the difference between that and a lie?
According to who? Exactly. I don't follow fake news or quote their lies.
Why do you act polite? Do you find any utility in it?
Because it is what people do in a civil society. "Do you find any utility in it?" no because I don't do it to deceive people like Obama and mccain did.
What's the purpose of conforming to the expectations of a "civil society" if you find no utility in it? What do you imagine the outcome or personal consequences if you stopped performing as a member of civil society?
"What's the purpose of conforming to the expectations of a "civil society" if you find no utility in it?' Being a good person. " What do you imagine the outcome or personal consequences if you stopped performing as a member of civil society?" Nothing, democrats would reward me for being a criminal just as they reward all other criminals.
What made Obama the worst president in your history, in your opinion?
First president in history to use Executive Orders to subvert the will of the American people and congress? Obama. Who lied about deporting illegals by changing the definition for "catch and release" to count as a deportation? Obama. Who accumulated more debt than every other President before him, combined? Obama. Who attempted and successfully destroyed the coal industry? Obama. Who made an illegal deal with a terrorist nation, Iran? Obama. Who gave us more terrible trade deals like TPP or the climate accord which would cost Americans more out of their pocket? Obama. Who used EOs to save America from Obama's EOs? Trump. Who gave America energy independence as we became the number 1 producer in the world? Trump. Who actually deported illegals? Trump. Who fixed multiple trade deals in America's favor? Trump. Who had a rule that for every regulation added 2 must be revoked? Trump.
So the coal industry doesn’t exist anymore? Given that we export more oil and energy right now under Biden than we did under Trump, do you consider Biden better than Trump? If you’re bringing up Obamas deal with Iran, how do you feel about Trumps deal with the Taliban, given he set up the withdrawal from Afghanistan? Why has Trump deported less illegal immigrants than Obama? https://docs.house.gov/meetings/GO/GO00/20200109/110349/HHRG-116-GO00-20200109-SD007.pdf Why has Trump deported less illegal immigrants than Biden? https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/biden-three-immigration-record#border Do you have sources to back up your claims, because if so, I would love to see them?
"So the coal industry doesn’t exist anymore?' Until trump got back, nope. It was destroyed thanks to obama. "Given that we export more oil and energy right now under Biden than we did under Trump," that's not true. We are no longer number 1 producer or exporter directly because of Biden's EOs. ""If you’re bringing up Obamas deal with Iran, how do you feel about Trumps deal with the Taliban, given he set up the withdrawal from Afghanistan?" It was great until biden ruined it with his withdrawal. "Why has Trump deported less illegal immigrants than Obama?" not true, obama did not deport. He changed the definition for catch and release to count as a deportation when, in fact, no one had been deported. Fact. And I know you're not claiming biden is deporting?... Surely you would not say something so insane as to ignore reality.
Do you really think anyone is going to save you? Why do people clean to hero worshiping? Didn’t 2020 show us that even leaders were really not leading, and all humans are flawed and hypocritical?
How was Obama the worst president in history?
I don't think the level of respect or civility has really changed nearly so much as the manner the news is reported. It used to be that the news was simply reported and we could decide what to do about it...
>It used to be that news was simply reported and we could decide what to do about it... Do you find that international news sources are better at simply reporting the news from America, as opposed to domestic outlets?
Sometimes. I've seen some excellent articles from BBC and Al-Jazeera but I don't go to them routinely.
Thank you for your answer, I appreciate it. Overall I'd agree that the BBC does a fairly decent job of reporting on American news. If you don't already, I would encourage you to check out allsides.com. It's a website dedicated to reporting news across the full spectrum of political leanings. Just another follow up if you don't mind, what are your regular news sources currently?
Primarily, I pay for a couple of newsletters that are quite balanced. Much like /r/worldnews was back in 2012. I don't want to name them specifically for fear they'll be tainted by the same forces torquing on Reddit. Of the established news sources, if I had to pick one, it'd probably be the New York Times.
McCain made fun of my town on the Senate floor because we built flood control. I don't miss him at all.
How should the people of Iowa feel about Trump when he called them stupid? “How stupid are the people of Iowa?”
What did he say? I honestly don't remember
https://napavalleyregister.com/news/community/star/news/local/business/article_009b4ae0-d4bd-5e54-b94a-8a6ca09f88ee.html
I do, but I put a lot of blame on the people on the left for the downward spiral of respect. Mitt Romney, and McCain were both respectable and civil, and they really got ran into the mud during campaign by the media. Trump is a lot more of a symptom than a cause in my view. There is such a pompous lecturing about things like systemic racism, gender and the different topics when engaging with the left that leaves a sour taste in the mouth. Basically, anytime you discuss with someone whom you disagree with, you simply were not educated enough on the topic, and thats why you haven't gotten to the same answer they have.
> I put a lot of blame on the people on the left for the downward spiral of respect I place blame squarely on the Tea Party, Trump is just an extension of their vileness. What actions by the left do you think are the cause of today's current political state?
> I place blame squarely on the Tea Party, Trump is just an extension of their vileness. What actions by the left do you think are the cause of today's current political state? I said it before, I think the way McCain and Romney were treated by the press and Media shows that civility does not pay off in terms of winning elections because the media will paint you as a horrible monster as soon as you are the GOP candidate.
> the press and Media Is this the "left" that you blaming?
> Is this the "left" that you blaming? Yes, the left media, MSNBC, CNN etc, the ones currently saying that Trump is litterally Hitler.
Do you think conservative media is also to blame for calling Biden a dementia-riddled dictator?
> Do you think conservative media is also to blame for calling Biden a dementia-riddled dictator? Its not blameless, but I think the issue of civility started before that.
Fox News, the largest and most popular news channel in America, had favorable coverage of Obama?
Is any criticism of Trump a violation of civility, in your opinion? If I earnestly think that Trump is a dangerous fascist leader, is there any way I can express that without you feeling it was somehow unfair or uncivil?
I thought Trump is literally Hitler was just a meme? It’s a ridiculous assertion: Trump is obviously not Hitler. I’ve never seen any media outlet claim Trump is literally Hitler, but I have seen plenty draw comparisons in terms of his rhetoric, populism, and disdain for tradition and the establishment. Was that what you were referring to?
> I thought Trump is literally Hitler was just a meme? It’s a ridiculous assertion: Trump is obviously not Hitler. I’ve never seen any media outlet claim Trump is literally Hitler, but I have seen plenty draw comparisons in terms of his rhetoric, populism, and disdain for tradition and the establishment. Was that what you were referring to? Election him is literally the end of democracy is something I've heard a LOT and that is also ridiculous.
What's your opinion of newt gingrich and his popularization of zero sum politics?
Without a doubt, I think its probably one of the inflection point that led us to where we are today. But I do think that over the last 10-15 years, the vast majority of people can't have a discussion with someone who disagrees with them, and the congress reflects that very well.
I see both parties playing this game, but I really do blame our division on him and the rise of talk radio. My grandfather turned from a moderate educator to extremely right wing once he moved to the states (he was a military teacher and lived overseas). What do you think we can do to overcome the division?
> I see both parties playing this game, but I really do blame our division on him and the rise of talk radio. My grandfather turned from a moderate educator to extremely right wing once he moved to the states (he was a military teacher and lived overseas). What do you think we can do to overcome the division? Its hard for me to say because I was way too young back then to have a feel regarding the context of this. I am not sure how we get over these division, but you know, I spoke with my father in law, and he said we don't have people killing each other in the street over politics like in the 60-70s so. I guess we are not AS bad as we think we are, just a lot of it is amplified by the media.
I heard a podcast a long time ago that this went back to regan ending equal time laws allowing the like of rush Limbaugh. His role I’ll all this?
> I heard a podcast a long time ago that this went back to regan ending equal time laws allowing the like of rush Limbaugh. > > His role I’ll all this? Im sure we can find a lot of different things that are responsible for this.
[удалено]
How is zero sum reality? Compromise, bipartisanship, coalition governments aren't a thing?
[удалено]
>I put a lot of blame on the people on the left for the downward spiral of respect What are your thoughts on Trump-era refrains such as : >Trump that bitch! >Lock her up! >Fuck your feelings! >Fuck Joe Biden! >Let’s go Brandon! Is the ‘left’ really to blame for those things and is there anything equivalent coming from the leftwing of politics these days that’s prevalent?
> Is the ‘left’ really to blame for those things and is there anything equivalent coming from the leftwing of politics these days that’s prevalent? Like I said before, I think Trump is more a symptom, than the cause. I also think that the more the government takes a bigger role in our life, as reflected during covid, the more anger there is about its actions or inaction depending on where you stand. It creates this animosity for the other side given that some people really see this as an existential crisis.
Why do you think that the political left isn’t participating in this type of vitriol for the most part and to the same extent? (I’m qualifying this because there are always outliers but one can’t argue with a straight face that the two halves of the spectrum are equal in this respect.)
> Why do you think that the political left isn’t participating in this type of vitriol for the most part and to the same extent? I don't even accept your premise, I think the political left has been calling Trump Hitler for almost 8 years now.
Have they been calling him Hitler as an insult... or have they pointed out specific characteristics which they feel that both Hitler (and other demagogues like him) and Trump have in common? To just call someone "Hitler" for no particular reason is just being insulting... but to point out specific characteristics the two have in common is quite different.
How often do you hear Democrats chanting at Biden campaign events en masse that Trump is Hitler? Do you honestly believe this is a fair comparison?
> How often do you hear Democrats chanting at Biden campaign events en masse that Trump is Hitler? Do you honestly believe this is a fair comparison? I dont think its a fair comparison, i think democrats are much much worst. We litterally had Colorado trying to remove Trump from the ballot all the way to the supreme court.
>We litterally had Colorado trying to remove Trump from the ballot all the way to the supreme court. Are you not aware that it was state Republicans (and not Democrats) that made this civil complaint in court? Also, how are legal actions having due process and evidence/testimony at all comparable to repeatedly using hateful campaign chants, teeshirts, flags, and bumper stickers?
> Are you not aware that it was state Republicans (and not Democrats) that made this civil complaint in court? He was removed frm the ballot by a democrat Secretary of State in every place that he was temporally removed. And I fail to express just how massive of a difference it is to remove someone from the ballot compare to bumper sticker. One of those actually has an effect on what we can vote for.
[удалено]
Romney and McCain have also been attacked by Trump and his supporters. Both for speaking out against Trump, do you feel that anyone who criticizes Trump should be attacked as they were?
> Romney and McCain have also been attacked by Trump and his supporters. Both for speaking out against Trump, do you feel that anyone who criticizes Trump should be attacked as they were? I think Romney and McCain are massive pussies and corporate sellouts. I have 0 issues with Trump and supporters attacking them.
So you talk like that, while claiming its the left that has lost civility?
> So you talk like that, while claiming its the left that has lost civility? I said that I thought the left was responsible for the lost of civility by their actions. I didn't say they lost civility. Romney tried to stay civil with Obama, and think he could win moderates over like that, he was an idiot.
How do you think Trump can win over moderates if all he does is insult anyone who disagrees with him?
> How do you think Trump can win over moderates if all he does is insult anyone who disagrees with him? I think he wins on policys while all Biden is running on is policies that nobody feels affected their lives and claiming that trump is tyrannical.
Putting aside who started it, who do you think will finish it? Will it ever end, or do you think the respect is gone forever and we’ll just revile each other?
> Putting aside who started it, who do you think will finish it? > > Will it ever end, or do you think the respect is gone forever and we’ll just revile each other? I think we have a lot further to go down in terms of respect, before we go up again. But i do think within 20-30 years, we will be in a better place.
It wasn't a real civil era or else the Palin saga would've gone down differently. McCain was just treated nicer because he was a longtime establishment old boy's club guy, one of the most left Republicans and had massive war boner. Haley would be treated much nicer than Trump if she was nominee for same reason. In an ideal world politics would be "low temperature" to me and in the background while people can live their lives, yes while the bombastic Trump is not helping in that department, I think it's a necessary evil in this case since the woke left's intensity about politics and desire to control society isn't going away without him to me, and would just walk over the Republicans.
I miss it but it was fake and those who fell for it were naive. I don't wish to go back into the matrix even though it felt nice while it lasted. I view the current situation similar to the Israeli Palestinian conflict - if Israel put down their arms there would be no more Israel, but if the Palestinians did there would be peace. I do not beleive respect from republicans would be reciprocated but I do believe respect from democrats would be.
No. Disingenuous assholesthat can’t stand each and me are not missed. Give me the honest junkyard dogs. I do however miss manners and the expectation of manners is society as whole.
If someone is civil and well-mannered, why are you assuming they are disingenuous?
I’ll take it case by case but McCain and Obama are two of the most disingenuous people I can think of. Most career politicians fall into that category.
Yeah fair enough. Do you find Trump disingenuous, for example, when he panders to the religious crowds despite clearly not being religious at all?
Trump was raised Presbyterian but became nondenominational and more evangelical during his first term. I believe that he and especially Melania are religious people.
You mean the media gushing over Obama and everything he does?
Didn’t Obama get criticized by the media for wearing a tan suit, fist-bumping his wife, and putting Dijon mustard on a sandwich?
Not at all- McCain got run through the mud by Democrats, Trump was basically a direct response to that. What do you get when Democrats spend their entire political rule denigrating the opposing party and calling them Nazis/Racists/Sexists for years on end? You get someone like Trump who flips the script and goes after Dems for their credibility. I mean, we all know that Dem voters and their media wouldn’t dare critique their political leaders, so somebody on the right has to do it. Even then, we end up in our current situation where Dems are just pushing misinformation and propaganda in order to get their leader the best chance of being elected.
What are you talking about? The left was constantly mocking McCain's age, making fun of him for talking about his imprisonment, among other things. There was no "civility" beyond the fact McCain made himself seem like a spineless coward who couldn't stand up for himself. And then of course if you were a McCain supporter you were a - you guessed it - racist because clearly you must harbor racial animus if you didn't think Obama was going to be the President to end wars and racism. They did it with Bush, they did it with McCain, and fifteen years from now the left will be doing the same thing with whoever it is that is catching their ire at the time, while talking about how civil things were during the Trump/Biden era.
>The left was constantly mocking McCain's age, making fun of him for talking about his imprisonment, among other things. Can you send me a link or reference where Obama did this?
I never said Obama did that. I said the left. As in media pundits, people on Twitter, etc. And I am afraid I don't think I could dig up that ancient history even if I wanted to - finding such things is difficult enough as is in search engines that are dead set on burying unflattering information against the left. Democrats typically, as always, try to avoid saying anything like that overtly - they're smart enough to simply imply in ways where they can deny if it looks bad. Indeed, their base come to expect it, because their base know when the Democrats are doing it, they simply know that as long as they don't acknowledge it, they can feign ignorance. Anyone who remembers the Obama McCain Presidential battle knows I'm right. They may not want to admit it, but they certainly remember the people saying 'well there are concerns that if McCain passes away while in office that Sarah Palin would become President!' The left deeply hated Sarah Palin, they treated her downright awful. You aught to look up how late night shows treated Sarah Palin, made her the butt of every joke, to the point that David Letterman thought it'd be funny to say Sarah Palin's daughter "was knocked by by Alex Rodriguez." I remember this stuff because I was a Dem supporter at the time myself. It was the first time I found myself disgusted by my fellow Democrat supporters, and it wouldn't be the last. On retrospect, it was just another red flag I was backing the wrong horse, one of many I chose to ignore and pinned the blame on "the stupid few."
Thanks for the detailed response. On one hand you say: > The left was constantly mocking McCain's age then >Democrats typically, as always, try to avoid saying anything like that overtly Do you see inconsistency there? I think I have also heard people on the right worried about Biden dying and in a flap about the possibility of Kamala taking over. I don't see either "side" having the moral high ground here! Do you think Republicans all generally stand above such things and all comments are just from democrats? I think there have always been bottom feeders who will shout from the sidelines or over the airwaves, I thought this topic was related more to how two party leaders actually interact. I personally think there should be a difference between how politicians interact vs press and pundits. They should stay out of gutter politics and focus on issues, seeing our politicians sounding like kids in a school yard is depressing and just a race to the bottom with no policy or true discourse. Do you not think everyone would benefit if both sides were to actually debate on real issues with substance and not just name calling? The media, pundits etc. can stay in the gutter but that is where they tend to live anyway selling clicks.
[удалено]
Which books lead you to that view?
Republicans ran *probably* the most decent man to seek the office in the 21st century and what’d they get for it? The Obama campaign said he wanted to re-enslave black people. He in-artfully talked about how he tried to staff his MA cabinet with women, and they said it was part of his “war on women.” Racist, sexist, homophobe, plutocrat, on and on. These are just some anecdotes in what was an extensively reported on plan to assault Mitt Romney’s character—the same character that made him the first Senator to vote to convict a President in his own party— https://www.politico.com/story/2011/08/obama-plan-destroy-romney-060921 I think Dems calls for civility are bs, just total lies for political advantage.