Jonathan Isaac

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Trump is a fascinating candidate now that we know he can win. I think he's clearly egotistic, narcissistic, self-promoting, and cares about looking like he is "winning" as much as anything. I think his massive arrogance and harshness in the way he speaks, combined with how personal he is in his attacks is what drive people to hate him and then look at it as "if I don't respect the President as a person, how can I want him leading our country?" It would be like voting for the school bully to be class president.

Although I don't like the way he speaks and I disagree with many of his positions (such as complete deregulation on energy), I am able to look at the POTUS position as a matter of policy. In 20 years unless I'm convinced he's going to literally, by himself, create irreversible harm on critical infrastructure in this country, then I'm not going to let the tone of his Twitter-speak guide my decision. I voted in the Democratic primary because I believe Bloomberg, while not a perfect candidate himself, was someone who I believed would be fairly moderate and attempt to be pragmatic on getting things done. He got thrashed (mostly because he joined so late), and Biden was one of the more moderate democrats available. I look at Biden and he openly admits he's a 1 term President, so whoever he chooses as VP pick does matter to me. If he picks a progressive I think that would be a very dangerous thing given the state of this country (if the "Squad" actually starts passing their policies this country will be in a world of hurt, for instance).

I'm sure most will automatically disagree with me, but I don't believe Trump is racist. Classist, you can convince me on that for sure, but racist? I'd love to have an open conversation 1 on 1 about that with anyone over a beer or coffee, because I look at this from a larger view and believe he's an equal opportunity hater. I also don't believe Trump is all that far right. I think he plays to the base on things like Pro-Life and religion but I don't think those are stalwarts in his platform. He is a businessman, and you can read his book The Art of the Deal and you will see it play out through how he deals with everything. I'm not sure why so many people are surprised. Look at his position on anything... He starts out pushing for pie in the sky, then when his opponent gives in a bit, he ends up right where he wanted in the beginning (i.e. he starts at 10, other person starts at 3, they meet in the middle at 7, which seems like a win-win or lose-lose, when in reality Trump wanted to land at 7 from the beginning).

What will matter in 20 years is the policies of today, not who installed them. My voting history is almost directly down the middle, but depending on who Biden picks, I'll likely be leaning to vote Trump this year. Had Klobuchar been his VP pick, I would have had something real to think about, because although I don't agree with her on everything, I do on some and I respect her intelligence and willingness to get things done. And I also like her response to the "free college"...turning it into waiving tuition for trade schools (2 year degrees/less) in areas of need, for instance.

Back on Trump...is building a wall xenophobic? Is ICE? Is wanting to keep illegal immigrants out wrong? In the Trump presidency all of these are almost a resounding "yes" from both the media and many people I know. Yet were they when Obama was deporting more people than Trump or talking about the importance of protecting our borders against illegal immigration? Were they when Pelosi and Shumer both were pro-wall not 20 years ago? If all these riots weren't breaking out all over mostly democrat-led cities without virtually any pushback from local leaders, and if there weren't more and more hard left people in the legislative branch of government and in society (see the percentage of millennials that think socialism is a good idea and it's scary being they are the future), then I would be very likely to cast my vote on Biden this fall, but they are, and somehow Trump feels like the safer candidate.

Flame away :)

If Biden was truly running as a one-term President and wanted a "ready-now" VP than he certainly shouldn't limit himself to black female VP candidates only. That eliminates 90%+ of the pool of qualified VP candidates, including a lot of legit Democratic governors. Unfortunately, the left puts so much emphasis on one's gender and color, that there would be an insurrection in the party if he were to choose a white female, or heaven forbid, a white male.

As for Trump's racism (or lack thereof), 100% of his attitude toward someone is based on whether they say good things about him or not. The charges of racism against him stem from his winking and nodding at white nationalism. While he himself may not be a racist, he'll give honest-to-goodness racists a pass, so long as they flatter and profess their undying loyalty to him. But to your point, he's an equal opportunity hater if you say something negative about him.

[Monster]

Trump is a fascinating candidate now that we know he can win. I think he's clearly egotistic, narcissistic, self-promoting, and cares about looking like he is "winning" as much as anything. I think his massive arrogance and harshness in the way he speaks, combined with how personal he is in his attacks is what drive people to hate him and then look at it as "if I don't respect the President as a person, how can I want him leading our country?" It would be like voting for the school bully to be class president.

Although I don't like the way he speaks and I disagree with many of his positions (such as complete deregulation on energy), I am able to look at the POTUS position as a matter of policy. In 20 years unless I'm convinced he's going to literally, by himself, create irreversible harm on critical infrastructure in this country, then I'm not going to let the tone of his Twitter-speak guide my decision. I voted in the Democratic primary because I believe Bloomberg, while not a perfect candidate himself, was someone who I believed would be fairly moderate and attempt to be pragmatic on getting things done. He got thrashed (mostly because he joined so late), and Biden was one of the more moderate democrats available. I look at Biden and he openly admits he's a 1 term President, so whoever he chooses as VP pick does matter to me. If he picks a progressive I think that would be a very dangerous thing given the state of this country (if the "Squad" actually starts passing their policies this country will be in a world of hurt, for instance).

I'm sure most will automatically disagree with me, but I don't believe Trump is racist. Classist, you can convince me on that for sure, but racist? I'd love to have an open conversation 1 on 1 about that with anyone over a beer or coffee, because I look at this from a larger view and believe he's an equal opportunity hater. I also don't believe Trump is all that far right. I think he plays to the base on things like Pro-Life and religion but I don't think those are stalwarts in his platform. He is a businessman, and you can read his book The Art of the Deal and you will see it play out through how he deals with everything. I'm not sure why so many people are surprised. Look at his position on anything... He starts out pushing for pie in the sky, then when his opponent gives in a bit, he ends up right where he wanted in the beginning (i.e. he starts at 10, other person starts at 3, they meet in the middle at 7, which seems like a win-win or lose-lose, when in reality Trump wanted to land at 7 from the beginning).

What will matter in 20 years is the policies of today, not who installed them. My voting history is almost directly down the middle, but depending on who Biden picks, I'll likely be leaning to vote Trump this year. Had Klobuchar been his VP pick, I would have had something real to think about, because although I don't agree with her on everything, I do on some and I respect her intelligence and willingness to get things done. And I also like her response to the "free college"...turning it into waiving tuition for trade schools (2 year degrees/less) in areas of need, for instance.

Back on Trump...is building a wall xenophobic? Is ICE? Is wanting to keep illegal immigrants out wrong? In the Trump presidency all of these are almost a resounding "yes" from both the media and many people I know. Yet were they when Obama was deporting more people than Trump or talking about the importance of protecting our borders against illegal immigration? Were they when Pelosi and Shumer both were pro-wall not 20 years ago? If all these riots weren't breaking out all over mostly democrat-led cities without virtually any pushback from local leaders, and if there weren't more and more hard left people in the legislative branch of government and in society (see the percentage of millennials that think socialism is a good idea and it's scary being they are the future), then I would be very likely to cast my vote on Biden this fall, but they are, and somehow Trump feels like the safer candidate.

Flame away :)

If Biden was truly running as a one-term President and wanted a "ready-now" VP than he certainly shouldn't limit himself to black female VP candidates only. That eliminates 90%+ of the pool of qualified VP candidates, including a lot of legit Democratic governors. Unfortunately, the left puts so much emphasis on one's gender and color, that there would be an insurrection in the party if he were to choose a white female, or heaven forbid, a white male.

As for Trump's racism (or lack thereof), 100% of his attitude toward someone is based on whether they say good things about him or not. The charges of racism against him stem from his winking and nodding at white nationalism. While he himself may not be a racist, he'll give honest-to-goodness racists a pass, so long as they flatter and profess their undying loyalty to him. But to your point, he's an equal opportunity hater if you say something negative about him.

I don't know if the "left" is clamoring for a black female VP nomination I think it's more of a strategic selection which I think could pay off or it could end up being a poor decision. I'll look into both Biden and his running mate more deeply when I know what the ticket actually is.

[AbeVigodaLive]

One thing interesting about how people discuss the president today... vs... just a few years ago.

There was a real groundswell of assumption that the president was just a figurehead. We're seeing the opposite of that today. I think it started a bit with Obama and his platform of "change." I think Trump has taken it to new levels. Now, is that in part because of the "brilliance" I described with Trump earlier? Obviously, his ego is substantial, so he very clearly lets people know he's in charge. But he's been pretty consistent on what his platform is and what his policies are.

Is that part of his appeal? Those people who previously thought the POTUS was largely a figurehead never really wanted that? Or, is this turn away from figurehead and into policy just a way to justify a very petty, hypocritical, largely terrible* person in the WH?

This issue is even more pronounced this election cycle because Joe Biden is about as big of a figurehead as you could ever imagine -- even before he lost his fastball... and splitter... and change up.



* That is if you believe him banging porn stars and then paying them off while married with an infant are actually true... and not more "fake news."

[BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520]]

Abe, "people gonna hear what they wanna hear" is absolutely right. Even if they tear gas a crowd to capture a photo op with an upside down Bible.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Abe, "people gonna hear what they wanna hear" is absolutely right. Even if they tear gas a crowd to capture a photo op with an upside down Bible.

I wrote that because I get frustrated with people who go on and on and on about all the terrible things a particular party does and wonder "how anybody could vote for those despicable people" ... while conveniently -- and disingenuously -- and completely ignoring the shady shit in their own tribe.

C'mon.

The moment those kinds of tirades become that one-sided, I tune those people out. They're unwilling to be serious about the topic at hand. Or honest. And sorry if I sound like a dick... but they're not worth my time.

[BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520]]

Abe, "people gonna hear what they wanna hear" is absolutely right. Even if they tear gas a crowd to capture a photo op with an upside down Bible.

I wrote that because I get frustrated with people who go on and on and on about all the terrible things a particular party does and wonder "how anybody could vote for those despicable people" ... while conveniently -- and disingenuously -- and completely ignoring the shady shit in their own tribe.

C'mon.

The moment those kinds of tirades become that one-sided, I tune those people out. They're unwilling to be serious about the topic at hand. Or honest. And sorry if I sound like a dick... but they're not worth my time.

You're not a dick. I was agreeing with you about how people are usually unwilling to acknowledge anything wrong with their party affiliation.

What did I have wrong about that story? Even the SecDef was embarrassed.

[bleedspeed]

My view is we have a nation that's very easily swayed by aunt Lilliath's random Facebook posts/reports without doing any fact checking. I'm being funny here but it's also a thing...lol I think we can do a lot better in terms of teaching critical thinking. There is little to no learning when it comes to how our brain actually works. I've seen so many students come to college and they really have no idea how they learn. The school system isn't going to reach every student but what exactly is it doing well? We lag behind many countries in most subjects. Opportunity? If we aren't educating well then we are not really offering a high level of opportunity to both individuals and to drive the countries success. I think we are lagging and can do much better. Can people rise above? Sure but why not make it so it's more likely that more people do so? We can do better. I believe part of the resistance to change is simply because various people do not want to do something different and they think it's pretty much ok the way it is. That happens all the time people are resistant to change.

You bring up a lot of good points. I think the teacher's unions certainly play a huge role and slowing the adoption of advancing education. A good number of teachers are waiting to retire and have no desire to improve the process of teaching and learning. It all can't be put on the teachers though. Students and parents have a huge iinput here too. Like my wife told my stepdaughter. When you go to the gym you need to make the impression that you are there to workhard and are driven. The coaches and gym owner wants to see that. Don't get caught up in the drama of your teammates. You all have the same goals and only a few of you will make it. The little things count.

[mrhockey89]

Easier if I reply to the posts I was going to reply to in one swoop:

-Monsterpile, I don't disagree that Trump throws others under the bus, which would make him tough to work for (directly). I think he's results driven completely (i.e. don't tell me how you got it done, just get it done).
With that said, a LOT of political candidates are nightmares to work for. Kamala Harris had her friend/top campaign manager on a non-disclosure after firing her I believe. Amy Klobuchar had all sorts of people that worked under her coming out with stories about how degrading she was to them (but I'd still vote for her over many alternatives). I also went on a couple dates with a corporate flight attendant a few years ago who used to fly around with Obama. She said Obama was very nice, but that her colleagues that flew Hillary Clinton's plane said that Hillary was extremely insulting and unnecessarily rude. So maybe that's a +1 for Obama, -1 for everyone else?

Q, I think that you're spot on with the identity politicking. I also forgot about the "white nationalist" ..not throwing people under the bus part. I can see it being read that way. I look at it as he won't throw anyone under the bus that will be voting for him unless it's so blatant that he has no choice (or he's perceived slighted by the person/group). Trump did actually denounce racism and white supremacy, but that doesn't get covered in most media. A true racist doesn't promote things like Opportunity Zones, doesn't have personal relationships with those of other races (Herschel Walker used to babysit his kids), doesn't promote opportunity for a minority. I believe Ben Carson is in his cabinet. A true racist wouldn't have put a focus on justice reform and pardoned many minorities based while requesting people make suggestions of people who are in prison unfairly. Can you imagine if he made a comment like Biden suggesting that blacks have no choices but to vote for him? Biden got into hot water with that comment, but it would have been off the charts if Trump said it. Trump said several months ago that people may not like him but they really have no choice because he is producing jobs and had the economy at an all-time high. That is extremely cocky. He's basically telling people he knows they don't like him but he's much better for them than any alternatives that it's still the right choice. Most of us wouldn't make the comment, most of us don't even respect the comment, but he wasn't entirely wrong in the mind of many Americans.

Abe: I think it's more and more difficult for a President to be a figurehead as the parties get further away from center. Tough to pass meaningful legislation when AOC and a Michelle Bachman are supposed to come to an agreement. This is another reason why moderate candidates are far more effective, representative, and good for our country than idealists.
"*That is if you believe him banging porn stars and then paying them off while married with an infant are actually true... and not more "fake news."" <--I believe this was true, don't really think it's overly relevant to the job itself given he wasn't even in office. I'm more concerned about things like using power for sexual persuasion (Weinstein), or something like a Jeffrey Epstein scandal (whoever is caught in that ring needs to go to prison, whether it's Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, or any actor/etc).

I probably come off as a Republican apologist right now, and if you ask those that know me, I probably came off as an Obama apologist before that. For me it's always about the issues and where this country is leading. If I had to list the thing I dislike most about both parties right now..for Republicans it would be their seemingly uncaring position on the environment. I reject the scare tactics that are being used on the far left, but I think the right isn't doing nearly enough (and if they think they are, they sure aren't explaining themselves well). On the left side, what I dislike the most is identity politics. I think it's divisive and driving the party towards things like socialism and creating problems where they don't actually exist. So for me, it's a combination actually of the issues and the trends of which is more dangerous (unfortunately I think it's a lesser of 2 evils conversation). Names are just the who and the how.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Abe, "people gonna hear what they wanna hear" is absolutely right. Even if they tear gas a crowd to capture a photo op with an upside down Bible.

I wrote that because I get frustrated with people who go on and on and on about all the terrible things a particular party does and wonder "how anybody could vote for those despicable people" ... while conveniently -- and disingenuously -- and completely ignoring the shady shit in their own tribe.

C'mon.

The moment those kinds of tirades become that one-sided, I tune those people out. They're unwilling to be serious about the topic at hand. Or honest. And sorry if I sound like a dick... but they're not worth my time.

You're not a dick. I was agreeing with you about how people are usually unwilling to acknowledge anything wrong with their party affiliation.

What did I have wrong about that story? Even the SecDef was embarrassed.

You didn't. I was just clarifying my pithy post from earlier.

[mrhockey89]

monster, I also agree with you that people tend to not actually research things they read as well. Anything that sounds even remotely out there I will research. Even if I see a Facebook post from a FB friend I will often send them a private message (regardless of position) if they're pushing something that is not in context to make sure they know what they're doing.

In terms of opportunities to learn, assuming I'm understanding your meaning correctly, I think there is a lot of meaningful discussion on the topic. Right now Trump wants to have the option for inner city kids to go to other schools, while many Dems want to pump money into the inner city schools. I think that if a child is going to be moved to another school, it needs to happen at an early age when they're still learning their morals and values. I think that you can't just throw money at inner city school systems and think it will improve education (Detroit tried it and it's failed miserably, for instance). Parenting is incredibly important in child development. That HAS to be part of the discussion, and any conversation that doesn't include that is a proposition that will ultimately fail and that's one opinion that I have that I really don't see myself budging on. People NEED to be better parents, their kids lives depend on it. All the legislation in the world won't make a child successful if they don't have the right view of the world in their base person. If a parent isn't able to get a child to buy-in that education is their key to success then it doesn't matter what schooling is available to them. With that of course is personal influence/persuasion from those they grow up around. If, and only if, that is in place, then schooling is the next most important, especially early childhood education. Get the child understanding things, interested in learning, etc. These are the building blocks. If people really, truly want equality, equality needs to come in the form of allowing people access to the things that can get them out of poverty and into riches, not by affirmative action. Will further changes take generations? Yes, but that's it will take. After all, would you want a brain surgeon to operate on you because we have too few 18 year olds doing brain surgery, or the 50 year old with 20 years experience because they're actually qualified? Going on a further tangent, this is the same reason I think Biden is going the wrong direction by only looking at black, female VP candidates. IF they are the most qualified candidate then by all means select them. But right now he's already limited his choices to that demographic which suggests to me that it's a political reason rather than a qualification reason. Some would argue that makes them uniquely qualified to handle the issues of this time, but we all could shoot a million holes into that argument without so much as a blink in between. When I voted for Obama, I was fully open to the idea of McCain. McCain was likely the better choice on foreign policy, but it felt (for me) that was about all he presented better on. Then, when McCain chose Palin as his running-mate, that sealed it for me. My mom was a hockey mom just like Sarah Palin, and I love my mom, but I wouldn't vote her for President of the US. If Palin wasn't quite so conservative or didn't come across so clueless on the issues that she was routinely asked about (see Bush Doctrine as an example, or being able to see Russia from Alaska as her foreign policy experience), I might have had more of an open mind.