| fatslob-:O said: Problem is those professions DO have clear criteria, being a "great" president or a leader on the other hand does NOT, that is FINAL! You are right that WE as CITIZENS do have an obligation but that does NOT mean we have or share a COMMON GOAL! If you know what democracy doesn't guarantee then why fucking fight about it when your at the mercy at the decision of millions of other people ? Again, that's their decision to make and you should hold higher standards for every voter out there BECAUSE THEIR THE ONES WHO'S GOING TO FUCK SHIT UP DAMNIT IF THEY DEMAND IT! No you DO have something against legitimate Drumpf supporters if you think they're "TOO GOD DAMN STUPID" to be angry at but real life isn't quite as noble or rosy as you even remotely make it out to be since there are people out there other than Drumpf who ACTUALLY think like that and ignoring a problem is just stupid when you see tens of millions of them which isn't going away for a long time and quite frankly the president being better than the common man is a load of BULL-FUCKING-SHIT when the guy that you put in the office is only reflects what the citizens their BEST WISHES. The ONLY way your concerns will ever be put to rest is if you start by directly IMPROVING THE COMMON MAN and not just you but that goes for EVERY one of Drumpf's detractors otherwise you will get something like #Brexit which was also based on hate or fears ... EVERYONE IS ALWAYS AT THE MERCY OF HOPE FROM OTHERS IN A DEMOCRACY ... As it is if you don't want to face the problem at hand then just hope that they don't vote Drumpf much like how the others do hope that they do vote for him as if this is a NEVER ENDING CYCLE ... |
First off, I mainly just needed to rant about Trump, and that just happened to be an opportunity. So, don't take it too personally.
We actually do have a clear criteria about what being the best president means. The president's jobs are very clearly laid out in the constitution. You can argue about what the best way to go about these duties is, just like you could argue about which quarterback gives you the best chance of winning. But, arguing that we violate the first amendment by putting Muslims on a registry is objectively bad presidenting. Not knowing that Russia has already invaded the Ukraine is objectively bad presidenting. Arguing that we deport US born citizens in defiance of the 14th amendment is objectively bad presidenting.
And if you support the things Donald Trump actually says, yes you are too god damn stupid to get mad at. If you support things like, "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best... they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." If you think actually support statements like that and the others I mentioned, then you're too stupid to be angry at. And I don't have anything against them. I don't have anything against stupid people. You have to work with what you have.
But, I don't think you're stupid. I think you are fully capable of rationally evaluating Trump's statements, yet you refuse to. You said that people are being unfair to Trump, but you refuse to address any of the horrible things he's said or suggested that I've brought up, or that anyone else has. You've accused of us demonizing Trump, yet you haven't been able to refute anything we've said.
Instead you're going off on nonsense telling me that people choose who they want in a democracy which is like no shit Sherlock. I know I'm at the mercy of others, you being one of them, and that is the reason I'm fighting about it. Because I want you to actually think about what the candidates are saying, and whether or not you support those things, so you'll actually make a rational and informed decision. Yet for some reason, you seem completely unwilling to run Trump's statements through your brain and seem to be implying that it's ok for him to say whatever he wants and we shouldn't be upset because we're at the mercy of voters or some such shit.
