By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Should Trump Become President?

thranx on 23 January 2016

Trump is the kind of president america needs. we dont need a president that is going to bow down to the world like obama has. we are the world leader, and we need a president that acts as such. Not one out to be the cool guy like obama. We need to take action in the middle east, and we need a president with a strong arm to do that, not a weak back bone. And we need a president that can speak his mind freely, and stand by what he says. And lastly we need a president willing to negotiate, and that has experience at it, like a businessman would. Lets go Trump



Around the Network
Soleron on 23 January 2016

He's the least bad Republican option.



hershel_layton on 23 January 2016
Soleron said:
He's the least bad Republican option.

 





 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12/22/2016- Made a bet with Ganoncrotch that the first 6 months of 2017 will be worse than 2016. A poll will be made to determine the winner. Loser has to take a picture of them imitating their profile picture.

hershel_layton on 23 January 2016
thranx said:
Trump is the kind of president america needs. we dont need a president that is going to bow down to the world like obama has. we are the world leader, and we need a president that acts as such. Not one out to be the cool guy like obama. We need to take action in the middle east, and we need a president with a strong arm to do that, not a weak back bone. And we need a president that can speak his mind freely, and stand by what he says. And lastly we need a president willing to negotiate, and that has experience at it, like a businessman would. Lets go Trump

 

Moderated by - PwerlvlAmy



 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12/22/2016- Made a bet with Ganoncrotch that the first 6 months of 2017 will be worse than 2016. A poll will be made to determine the winner. Loser has to take a picture of them imitating their profile picture.

Robert_Downey_Jr. on 23 January 2016

As a conservative that is the last thing I want. He's appealing to all the worst parts of the party and tricking others. Kasich has balanced the federal and Ohio state budgets which i think is the single most important thing to do in Washington right now other than improve education. I think it's the thing we can fix the fastest though. Chris Christie wouldn't be bad either as he has been a competent governor who knows how to play ball across the aisle and Rubio is certainly the most well spoken candidate on either side (since Obama supporters like to make such a big deal of speaking ability I guess that's worth a mention even though I care more about policy). I certainly think any of those 3 would be better than who we have currently or Sanders or Clinton



I am Iron Man

Around the Network
Vyse_Blue_Rogue on 23 January 2016
SecondWar said:
Vyse_Blue_Rogue said:
DivinePaladin said:
What does it say to you that our greatest ally devoted a good chunk of a real Parliament session to the idea of banning Trump from the UK? Not just as a joke, but because they HAD to due to a petition passing the required votes to hold a debate about the issue.

If England hates Trump and Putin loves Trump, maybe that's a sign that Trump isn't a good idea.

I won't go any further with the rest of your comment because I'd probably come off as rude no matter how respectfully I try to word my response. I'll simply reiterate: Our sister country held a vote to ban a potential President from the country. There's no irrational twist you can put on that to make it seem good; nothing you can say about England politically can change the fact that a country that's been by our side for the majority of our existence has to consider potentially cutting ties over this man.

 

That pathetic waste of time debate brought shame upon the UK. Trust me, most of the UK does not feel that way. It's just the very vocal P.C brigade. The whole thing was a sham - there was another petition arguing for the right for Trump to enter the coutry. I signed the petition (I don't really care for Trump but i believe in freedom of speech) when there wear about 60,000 other signatories. About an hour later when i went to check to see how many new votes there were, it had magically dropped to 22,000. The whole system is corrupt. 

So you support free speech but it was a 'pathetic waste of time' for the government to debate a petition on their own website that was set up for that very purpose. Seems a bit of a contradiction to me.

 

There's no contradiction there. it was a pathetic waste of time.  If they spent parliarmentary time discussing what colour nail varnish Theresa May should wear (based on a petition that people signed) would you support that too and say it was worthwhile due to Freedom of Speech?

They were debating whether to allow someone into the country purely because he expressed contrary views to theirs. it was disgraceful and an affront to Freedom of Speech. 



dr3b on 23 January 2016

No, he would probably cause the extremist problem to escalate, damage international relations, and cause divide. Hell he could probably bring about WWIII (moderate sarcasm).



Soleron on 23 January 2016
hershel_layton said:
Soleron said:
He's the least bad Republican option.

 

You'd rather a genuine conservative was president? Even Rubio is to the right of all past Republican presidents.





SecondWar on 23 January 2016
Vyse_Blue_Rogue said:
SecondWar said:
Vyse_Blue_Rogue said:
DivinePaladin said:
What does it say to you that our greatest ally devoted a good chunk of a real Parliament session to the idea of banning Trump from the UK? Not just as a joke, but because they HAD to due to a petition passing the required votes to hold a debate about the issue.

If England hates Trump and Putin loves Trump, maybe that's a sign that Trump isn't a good idea.

I won't go any further with the rest of your comment because I'd probably come off as rude no matter how respectfully I try to word my response. I'll simply reiterate: Our sister country held a vote to ban a potential President from the country. There's no irrational twist you can put on that to make it seem good; nothing you can say about England politically can change the fact that a country that's been by our side for the majority of our existence has to consider potentially cutting ties over this man.

 

That pathetic waste of time debate brought shame upon the UK. Trust me, most of the UK does not feel that way. It's just the very vocal P.C brigade. The whole thing was a sham - there was another petition arguing for the right for Trump to enter the coutry. I signed the petition (I don't really care for Trump but i believe in freedom of speech) when there wear about 60,000 other signatories. About an hour later when i went to check to see how many new votes there were, it had magically dropped to 22,000. The whole system is corrupt. 

So you support free speech but it was a 'pathetic waste of time' for the government to debate a petition on their own website that was set up for that very purpose. Seems a bit of a contradiction to me.

 

There's no contradiction there. it was a pathetic waste of time.  If they spent parliarmentary time discussing what colour nail varnish Theresa May should wear (based on a petition that people signed) would you support that too and say it was worthwhile due to Freedom of Speech?

They were debating whether to allow someone into the country purely because he expressed contrary views to theirs. it was disgraceful and an affront to Freedom of Speech. 

I can't see such a petition gaining 100,000 signatures but in regards to your other point, the UK has laws against hate speech. Recently it was used to imprison 2 men who distributed leaflets supporting Islamic terrorism on Oxford Street in London, and previously to ban the WBC from entering the country. To me, there is a fair distinction between free speech and hate speech.





SecondWar on 23 January 2016
thranx said:
Trump is the kind of president america needs. we dont need a president that is going to bow down to the world like obama has. we are the world leader, and we need a president that acts as such. Not one out to be the cool guy like obama. We need to take action in the middle east, and we need a president with a strong arm to do that, not a weak back bone. And we need a president that can speak his mind freely, and stand by what he says. And lastly we need a president willing to negotiate, and that has experience at it, like a businessman would. Lets go Trump

Seriously? Obama has been rational with the world, rather than trying to dictate Americas will on other countries (well, to a lesser extent at least). Strong arming the world to agree with you is not the path to anything except war.

And what about Trump makes you think he'll negotiate? From what he says, it's his way or the highway. Again, a poor way to act on the world stage. With Trump as President, America will be pushed towards isolationism.