I'm starting to sour on Trump

[Boss]

The Senate will vet all the top positions that are advisers to the president. The rest of the positions are rubber stamped.

Which is basically what I said, Flapper.

You said,
"Most of which will NOT require Congress to confirm." which is incorrect. Congress confirms between 80% and 90% of all presidential appointments. Those that don't require confirmation are not advisers to the president and do not work directly for him.

Big Fucking Woop! Give yourself a fucking cookie! 99.9% of all presidential appointments (other than SCOTUS or cabinet) are rubber stamped. AND... Technically, "CONGRESS" is NOT required... only the Senate! Really, the ONLY reason they have the process at all is political control of power. The Senate can actually streamline the process and they have in recent years... I think they passed a bill in 2011 that reduced the number of appointees requiring approval. Nothing is written in stone requiring this, it's all at the discretion of the Senate who doesn't like ceding their power to a president...(unless it's a Republican Senate run by Mitch McConnell.)

 

[jc456]

Gary Johnson is running as a Libertarian. Prolly ain't got a shot in hell, but at least I can vote for him without feeling dirty.

so you're the kind that gets on a sinking ship, funny stuff.

I'm the kind that actually lives by the principles I allegedly have...rather than simply paying lip service. The lesser of two evils is still evil...and voting for evil means you condone evil. If a man can't live by his principles, he ain't much of a man.

Wait, don't tell me....you're one of those useful idiots who thinks he's "exercising his freedom" by going grovelling to the government for permission to carry a concealed firearm....right?

to think that that many people believe everything you do, is out there. I compromise to make a difference. you, I supposed, are not willing to compromise and would rather watch the ship sink. Hey your prerogative, but when you waste a vote, no need to come in here any longer.

 

[Dan Daly]

Gary Johnson is running as a Libertarian. Prolly ain't got a shot in hell, but at least I can vote for him without feeling dirty.

so you're the kind that gets on a sinking ship, funny stuff.

I'm the kind that actually lives by the principles I allegedly have...rather than simply paying lip service. The lesser of two evils is still evil...and voting for evil means you condone evil. If a man can't live by his principles, he ain't much of a man.

Wait, don't tell me....you're one of those useful idiots who thinks he's "exercising his freedom" by going grovelling to the government for permission to carry a concealed firearm....right?

to think that that many people believe everything you do, is out there. I compromise to make a difference. you, I supposed, are not willing to compromise and would rather watch the ship sink. Hey your prerogative, but when you waste a vote, no need to come in here any longer.

Men of principles do not compromise their core principles. Tell me, if the choice was between the child molester Republican, the neo-Nazi Democrat, or the guy that actually seems normal but is an independent and has no chance...which would you vote for? You obviously wouldn't waste your vote on the normal guy...so which would you support...being the compromising good guy you are...the child-molester or the skin-head? What "difference" would you make by voting for either, other than to selling our your country so you could feel good that you voted for a winnah!

The crying orange man and the bearded wonder have been compromising to make a difference...how's that been working out, sunshine? Don't forget the kneepads and mouthwash...you're gonna need em.

 

[Slyhunter]

He's a manager, he hires people who know how to make things happen. And if it's possible, his people will do so.

He won't have "people" and he won't be able to "hire" anyone into a position to do any of that. Anyone he wants will have to be confirmed by Congress.

He'll have both people confirmed by Congress holding Cabinet positions and he'll have those not confirmed by congress via other methods.

 

[jc456]

Gary Johnson is running as a Libertarian. Prolly ain't got a shot in hell, but at least I can vote for him without feeling dirty.

so you're the kind that gets on a sinking ship, funny stuff.

I'm the kind that actually lives by the principles I allegedly have...rather than simply paying lip service. The lesser of two evils is still evil...and voting for evil means you condone evil. If a man can't live by his principles, he ain't much of a man.

Wait, don't tell me....you're one of those useful idiots who thinks he's "exercising his freedom" by going grovelling to the government for permission to carry a concealed firearm....right?

to think that that many people believe everything you do, is out there. I compromise to make a difference. you, I supposed, are not willing to compromise and would rather watch the ship sink. Hey your prerogative, but when you waste a vote, no need to come in here any longer.

Men of principles do not compromise their core principles. Tell me, if the choice was between the child molester Republican, the neo-Nazi Democrat, or the guy that actually seems normal but is an independent and has no chance...which would you vote for? You obviously wouldn't waste your vote on the normal guy...so which would you support...being the compromising good guy you are...the child-molester or the skin-head? What "difference" would you make by voting for either, other than to selling our your country so you could feel good that you voted for a winnah!

The crying orange man and the bearded wonder have been compromising to make a difference...how's that been working out, sunshine? Don't forget the kneepads and mouthwash...you're gonna need em.

well, if those were indeed the choices it didn't matter anyway.

 

[Flopper]

All through this campaign I've enjoyed the Trumpster keeping the Establishment goobs on their heels, putting forward the issues the American people want addressed and making fools of those who attempt to smear and jeer him. I've admired the way he has taken the typical personal attacks and turned them into political points. The way he has turned political correctness on it's ear is something to behold. I've gone on record to say that he's not my first choice but if he wins the nomination I will support him. However, I am now couching that statement with the fact that I will be most definitely holding my nose if I have to vote for Trump in the general election.

In recent weeks he has changed me from being a tacit supporter to someone who certainly doesn't want him to win the nomination or be the next president. This has nothing to do with anything the liberals or establishment GOP has hurled at him. it's all based upon his own words and actions. I can accept his rhetoric, even when it has been extreme and over the top. Mostly because I realize he is saying things that are resonating as a populist and when it comes down to brass tacks, he will have to work with Congress who isn't going to support extremist rhetoric. So it's not the "far-out" shit that he says sometimes, I can accept all of that.

It started when he began the liberal left tactic of attacking Ted Cruz on his citizenship. He made other comments regarding Cruz and I sort of shrugged those off as typical campaigning. I can overlook a few personal digs here and there but to instigate this sleazy left-wing tactic of criticizing his "natural born" status is too much. Add to that, his most recent call for massive taxation on Wall Street, and I have to pull the plug. That is simply buying into the Marxist rhetoric of the left and not a Conservative principle. I can dig that we need to reform some laws and make it more difficult for hedge fund managers to exploit tax loopholes but to introduce a plan to massively increase taxes across the board is not something I can support.

While I can appreciate that he doesn't employ speech writers or use a teleprompter, he repeatedly ends up contradicting things he said previously. For instance, one week he is supporting Obama's bringing Syrian refugees here... "We've gotta do it!" The very next week he calls for a ban on all Muslims entering the country. He is constantly putting his supporters in the embarrassing position of having to defend his contradictions... not to mention his brash statements.

His latest "tax Wall Street" nonsense sounds more like Bernie Sanders than anything else. This guy is NOT a Conservative and he is proving it for everyone to see. If it all comes down to Trump vs. whatever liberal idiot the Democrats nominate, I'll probably still vote for him with reservations. I don't believe he would nominate radical left wing activists to the court, but maybe I'm wrong about that too? Who knows with this guy? He could very well be working with the Clintons and simply be 'punking' the GOP.

If you insist on a perfect candidate you're going to assure Democrats win.

This is a flaw in the GOP base. Point out any flaws at all in a Republican and he all of the sudden loses support.

On the other hand, Democrats aren't so choosy. All they want is their free shit. That's all they're concerned about. Give em a piece of paper that says they can marry or give them a false promise and they're happy. This is why it's so easy to run as a Democrat. Their voters have low standards and no principles. How do you expect any Republican to fight that.

I don't insist on a perfect candidate, I want a conservative candidate. IF all I have are the choices between a Democrat (socialist) or a big steaming pile of dog shit... I'll vote for the dog shit but I will be holding my nose. However, I am not everyone.

One way I would hope a Republican would fight Democrats is by not being like them. Like not using phrases such as "we're going to raise taxes on Wall Street!" OR attacking the most Conservative candidate in the primary with birtherism or a litany of other superficial criticisms.

The way I see it, Trump can attack liberals and liberal policies all day long... liberals aren't ever going to vote for him so it doesn't matter. Attacking conservatives and making statements contradictory of conservative principles is foolish because he will need their support to defeat the Democrat.

Attacking conservatives comes easy for Trump, who certainly is no conservative. Voting for Trump would be a bitter pill to swallow for social conservatives, with his back and forth support for pro-life issues, little or no support for traditional marriage, his divorces, and his lack of religious commitment. Fiscal conservatives shutter when they consider what a Trump administration would do to government spending. Compassionate conservatism is as alien to Trump's political views as multiculturalism.

However, what the GOP leaders really fear is his erratic temperament, his ignorance of public affairs, and his scary sympathy for authoritarianism will create a crises that will send control of government into the hands of democrats. With minorities moving rapidly toward becoming the majority, Trump's actions which would move the party toward racial and religious exclusion is the exact opposite of the direction party leaders want to go.

 

[Flopper]

The Senate will vet all the top positions that are advisers to the president. The rest of the positions are rubber stamped.

Which is basically what I said, Flapper.

You said,
"Most of which will NOT require Congress to confirm." which is incorrect. Congress confirms between 80% and 90% of all presidential appointments. Those that don't require confirmation are not advisers to the president and do not work directly for him.

Big Fucking Woop! Give yourself a fucking cookie! 99.9% of all presidential appointments (other than SCOTUS or cabinet) are rubber stamped. AND... Technically, "CONGRESS" is NOT required... only the Senate! Really, the ONLY reason they have the process at all is political control of power. The Senate can actually streamline the process and they have in recent years... I think they passed a bill in 2011 that reduced the number of appointees requiring approval. Nothing is written in stone requiring this, it's all at the discretion of the Senate who doesn't like ceding their power to a president...(unless it's a Republican Senate run by Mitch McConnell.)

True, only the Senate approval is required. Senate Advice and Consent is written in stone, Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution. I think the bill you are referring to is Presidential Appointment and Streaming Act of 2012 which created 326 positions that did not report directly to the president and did not require Senate approval.

Consent is in constitution because the founders felt it would prevent abuse of power by a president, appointment of unqualified people as political favors.

 

[Boss]

The Senate will vet all the top positions that are advisers to the president. The rest of the positions are rubber stamped.

Which is basically what I said, Flapper.

You said,
"Most of which will NOT require Congress to confirm." which is incorrect. Congress confirms between 80% and 90% of all presidential appointments. Those that don't require confirmation are not advisers to the president and do not work directly for him.

Big Fucking Woop! Give yourself a fucking cookie! 99.9% of all presidential appointments (other than SCOTUS or cabinet) are rubber stamped. AND... Technically, "CONGRESS" is NOT required... only the Senate! Really, the ONLY reason they have the process at all is political control of power. The Senate can actually streamline the process and they have in recent years... I think they passed a bill in 2011 that reduced the number of appointees requiring approval. Nothing is written in stone requiring this, it's all at the discretion of the Senate who doesn't like ceding their power to a president...(unless it's a Republican Senate run by Mitch McConnell.)

True, only the Senate approval is required. Senate Advice and Consent is written in stone, Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution. I think the bill you are referring to is Presidential Appointment and Streaming Act of 2012 which created 326 positions that did not report directly to the president and did not require Senate approval.

Consent is in constitution because the founders felt it would prevent abuse of power by a president, appointment of unqualified people as political favors.

Which again, is essentially what I said.

The stupid liberal argument was raised that President Trump wouldn't be able to hire his own people to get things done. Well, that's simply not true. He will make his appointments like every other president and they will be rubber stamped by the Senate, just like they do with every president. There is almost never a controversy over an appointment by the president, aside from high-level cabinet and judicial selections.

 

[mudwhistle]

All through this campaign I've enjoyed the Trumpster keeping the Establishment goobs on their heels, putting forward the issues the American people want addressed and making fools of those who attempt to smear and jeer him. I've admired the way he has taken the typical personal attacks and turned them into political points. The way he has turned political correctness on it's ear is something to behold. I've gone on record to say that he's not my first choice but if he wins the nomination I will support him. However, I am now couching that statement with the fact that I will be most definitely holding my nose if I have to vote for Trump in the general election.

In recent weeks he has changed me from being a tacit supporter to someone who certainly doesn't want him to win the nomination or be the next president. This has nothing to do with anything the liberals or establishment GOP has hurled at him. it's all based upon his own words and actions. I can accept his rhetoric, even when it has been extreme and over the top. Mostly because I realize he is saying things that are resonating as a populist and when it comes down to brass tacks, he will have to work with Congress who isn't going to support extremist rhetoric. So it's not the "far-out" shit that he says sometimes, I can accept all of that.

It started when he began the liberal left tactic of attacking Ted Cruz on his citizenship. He made other comments regarding Cruz and I sort of shrugged those off as typical campaigning. I can overlook a few personal digs here and there but to instigate this sleazy left-wing tactic of criticizing his "natural born" status is too much. Add to that, his most recent call for massive taxation on Wall Street, and I have to pull the plug. That is simply buying into the Marxist rhetoric of the left and not a Conservative principle. I can dig that we need to reform some laws and make it more difficult for hedge fund managers to exploit tax loopholes but to introduce a plan to massively increase taxes across the board is not something I can support.

While I can appreciate that he doesn't employ speech writers or use a teleprompter, he repeatedly ends up contradicting things he said previously. For instance, one week he is supporting Obama's bringing Syrian refugees here... "We've gotta do it!" The very next week he calls for a ban on all Muslims entering the country. He is constantly putting his supporters in the embarrassing position of having to defend his contradictions... not to mention his brash statements.

His latest "tax Wall Street" nonsense sounds more like Bernie Sanders than anything else. This guy is NOT a Conservative and he is proving it for everyone to see. If it all comes down to Trump vs. whatever liberal idiot the Democrats nominate, I'll probably still vote for him with reservations. I don't believe he would nominate radical left wing activists to the court, but maybe I'm wrong about that too? Who knows with this guy? He could very well be working with the Clintons and simply be 'punking' the GOP.

If you insist on a perfect candidate you're going to assure Democrats win.

This is a flaw in the GOP base. Point out any flaws at all in a Republican and he all of the sudden loses support.

On the other hand, Democrats aren't so choosy. All they want is their free shit. That's all they're concerned about. Give em a piece of paper that says they can marry or give them a false promise and they're happy. This is why it's so easy to run as a Democrat. Their voters have low standards and no principles. How do you expect any Republican to fight that.

I don't insist on a perfect candidate, I want a conservative candidate. IF all I have are the choices between a Democrat (socialist) or a big steaming pile of dog shit... I'll vote for the dog shit but I will be holding my nose. However, I am not everyone.

One way I would hope a Republican would fight Democrats is by not being like them. Like not using phrases such as "we're going to raise taxes on Wall Street!" OR attacking the most Conservative candidate in the primary with birtherism or a litany of other superficial criticisms.

The way I see it, Trump can attack liberals and liberal policies all day long... liberals aren't ever going to vote for him so it doesn't matter. Attacking conservatives and making statements contradictory of conservative principles is foolish because he will need their support to defeat the Democrat.

Attacking conservatives comes easy for Trump, who certainly is no conservative. Voting for Trump would be a bitter pill to swallow for social conservatives, with his back and forth support for pro-life issues, little or no support for traditional marriage, his divorces, and his lack of religious commitment. Fiscal conservatives shutter when they consider what a Trump administration would do to government spending. Compassionate conservatism is as alien to Trump's political views as multiculturalism.

However, what the GOP leaders really fear is his erratic temperament, his ignorance of public affairs, and his scary sympathy for authoritarianism will create a crises that will send control of government into the hands of democrats. With minorities moving rapidly toward becoming the majority, Trump's actions which would move the party toward racial and religious exclusion is the exact opposite of the direction party leaders want to go.

Yes......you think he's batshit crazy.

Problem is, he's really not the divider that Obama proved to be.

So STFU.

 

[Flopper]

All through this campaign I've enjoyed the Trumpster keeping the Establishment goobs on their heels, putting forward the issues the American people want addressed and making fools of those who attempt to smear and jeer him. I've admired the way he has taken the typical personal attacks and turned them into political points. The way he has turned political correctness on it's ear is something to behold. I've gone on record to say that he's not my first choice but if he wins the nomination I will support him. However, I am now couching that statement with the fact that I will be most definitely holding my nose if I have to vote for Trump in the general election.

In recent weeks he has changed me from being a tacit supporter to someone who certainly doesn't want him to win the nomination or be the next president. This has nothing to do with anything the liberals or establishment GOP has hurled at him. it's all based upon his own words and actions. I can accept his rhetoric, even when it has been extreme and over the top. Mostly because I realize he is saying things that are resonating as a populist and when it comes down to brass tacks, he will have to work with Congress who isn't going to support extremist rhetoric. So it's not the "far-out" shit that he says sometimes, I can accept all of that.

It started when he began the liberal left tactic of attacking Ted Cruz on his citizenship. He made other comments regarding Cruz and I sort of shrugged those off as typical campaigning. I can overlook a few personal digs here and there but to instigate this sleazy left-wing tactic of criticizing his "natural born" status is too much. Add to that, his most recent call for massive taxation on Wall Street, and I have to pull the plug. That is simply buying into the Marxist rhetoric of the left and not a Conservative principle. I can dig that we need to reform some laws and make it more difficult for hedge fund managers to exploit tax loopholes but to introduce a plan to massively increase taxes across the board is not something I can support.

While I can appreciate that he doesn't employ speech writers or use a teleprompter, he repeatedly ends up contradicting things he said previously. For instance, one week he is supporting Obama's bringing Syrian refugees here... "We've gotta do it!" The very next week he calls for a ban on all Muslims entering the country. He is constantly putting his supporters in the embarrassing position of having to defend his contradictions... not to mention his brash statements.

His latest "tax Wall Street" nonsense sounds more like Bernie Sanders than anything else. This guy is NOT a Conservative and he is proving it for everyone to see. If it all comes down to Trump vs. whatever liberal idiot the Democrats nominate, I'll probably still vote for him with reservations. I don't believe he would nominate radical left wing activists to the court, but maybe I'm wrong about that too? Who knows with this guy? He could very well be working with the Clintons and simply be 'punking' the GOP.

If you insist on a perfect candidate you're going to assure Democrats win.

This is a flaw in the GOP base. Point out any flaws at all in a Republican and he all of the sudden loses support.

On the other hand, Democrats aren't so choosy. All they want is their free shit. That's all they're concerned about. Give em a piece of paper that says they can marry or give them a false promise and they're happy. This is why it's so easy to run as a Democrat. Their voters have low standards and no principles. How do you expect any Republican to fight that.

I don't insist on a perfect candidate, I want a conservative candidate. IF all I have are the choices between a Democrat (socialist) or a big steaming pile of dog shit... I'll vote for the dog shit but I will be holding my nose. However, I am not everyone.

One way I would hope a Republican would fight Democrats is by not being like them. Like not using phrases such as "we're going to raise taxes on Wall Street!" OR attacking the most Conservative candidate in the primary with birtherism or a litany of other superficial criticisms.

The way I see it, Trump can attack liberals and liberal policies all day long... liberals aren't ever going to vote for him so it doesn't matter. Attacking conservatives and making statements contradictory of conservative principles is foolish because he will need their support to defeat the Democrat.

Attacking conservatives comes easy for Trump, who certainly is no conservative. Voting for Trump would be a bitter pill to swallow for social conservatives, with his back and forth support for pro-life issues, little or no support for traditional marriage, his divorces, and his lack of religious commitment. Fiscal conservatives shutter when they consider what a Trump administration would do to government spending. Compassionate conservatism is as alien to Trump's political views as multiculturalism.

However, what the GOP leaders really fear is his erratic temperament, his ignorance of public affairs, and his scary sympathy for authoritarianism will create a crises that will send control of government into the hands of democrats. With minorities moving rapidly toward becoming the majority, Trump's actions which would move the party toward racial and religious exclusion is the exact opposite of the direction party leaders want to go.

Yes......you think he's batshit crazy.

Problem is, he's really not the divider that Obama proved to be.

So STFU.

Yes, I think he's nutty as a fruit cake but damn smart. It seems likely he will divide the Republican party at this point. However, if he get's elected he could unite the parties in an impeachment and that would certainly be a step in the right direction.

 

[Synthaholic]

Stop being an idiot, of course he will have people, just like every president. Most of which will NOT require Congress to confirm. Those few positions which do require Congressional approval will be approved as they most always are.

I said any position that has any power to do the things he's talking about will need Congressional confirmation.

Name the position a president can fill unilaterally who can make policy change.

And you're calling me an idiot?

 

[Synthaholic]

And he won't need anyone to "make things happen" because he'll have a pen and phone just like Obama.

Getting a jump on being a hypocrite?

 

[Slyhunter]

Stop being an idiot, of course he will have people, just like every president. Most of which will NOT require Congress to confirm. Those few positions which do require Congressional approval will be approved as they most always are.

I said any position that has any power to do the things he's talking about will need Congressional confirmation.

Name the position a president can fill unilaterally who can make policy change.

And you're calling me an idiot?

Friend
Friend of a Friend.
The President can make the changes himself he simply needs advisers.

 

[Synthaholic]

99.9% of all presidential appointments (other than SCOTUS or cabinet) are rubber stamped.

That's total bullshit.

Republicans have fought on every nomination. And usually it's one Senator holding it up. Right now, while trying to get El Chapo extradited, we don't even have an Ambassador to Mexico, our next door neighbor.

Why? Because Ted Cruz, and only Ted Cruz, opposes it. Republicans in general have no issues with the guy.

 

[Synthaholic]

He'll have both people confirmed by Congress

You think so? You don't think a Democrat - or even a Republican - won't hold up every nomination they can?

If Ted Cruz can hold up the Ambassador to Mexico, and we can go 8 years without a confirmed Surgeon General, the knives will be out for Trump.

 

[Boss]

Stop being an idiot, of course he will have people, just like every president. Most of which will NOT require Congress to confirm. Those few positions which do require Congressional approval will be approved as they most always are.

I said any position that has any power to do the things he's talking about will need Congressional confirmation.

Name the position a president can fill unilaterally who can make policy change.

And you're calling me an idiot?

You're an idiot. NONE of the president's appointed positions require CONGRESS ...they may require Senate confirmation. Unless the person is question is some kind of foreign spy or ax murderer, the Senate generally rubber stamps the president's selections. The only exceptions are high-ranking cabinet positions... most of the time there is no problem there either... and judges.

And you really need to try and get this through your stupid head... Just as President Obama has made policy changes, so will a President Trump or President Cruz. We're not suddenly going to adopt a new standard.

 

[Boss]

And he won't need anyone to "make things happen" because he'll have a pen and phone just like Obama.

Getting a jump on being a hypocrite?

You can scream hypocrite all you like... when you set the precedent it's not hypocrisy it's getting a dose of your own medicine.

 

[Blackrook]

Trump is insane and if he is elected he will be the worst President of all time.

If there is choice between Trump and Hillary, I will vote for Mickey Mouse.

 

[Slyhunter]

Trump is insane and if he is elected he will be the worst President of all time.

If there is choice between Trump and Hillary, I will vote for Mickey Mouse.

Then you deserve Mickey Mouse.

 

[dannyboys]

Trump is insane and if he is elected he will be the worst President of all time.

If there is choice between Trump and Hillary, I will vote for Mickey Mouse.

Please do.
Trump won't need your vote.