Why Trump would make a Bad POTUS
 

the Latest of many statements which shows his lack of understanding ...



"Saddam Hussein was a bad guy," Mr Trump said. "But you know what he did well? He killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn't read them their rights."

I heard the folks at MSNBC were having a hissy fit over that statement. When we toppled Saddam, a lot of people who are experts in that part of the world, were concerned that while Saddam was awful, he did provide some stability, and certainly Al Queda had no major presence in Iraq when he was running things.

That being said, what's the big deal with what Trump said, exactly? He explicitly said Saddam was a bad guy.

I remember Hilary said something about coming under sniper attack, and has never admitted she lied. Why doesn't THAT, mean that she'd be a bad POTUS?

Two morally repugnant choices this year.

Isn't that what we do with air strikes and drones ? . Even one American if I recall correctly
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You can interpret that statement as lack of understanding if you want to and give that one reason why he is not fit for the office. I interpret it differently. I also observe Fox news concentrating on Hillary's email lies and extreme carelessness=negligence issue while other news like CNN, MSNBC all fall over themselves at the audacity of Trumps' statement, which is pretty much true by the way. That is simply deflecting seeing how their side won and there will be no Grand Jury because the FBI is afraid to look bad when the Justice Dept. would just not prosecute sine it has already been pre-determined as plain as day.

I can think of a reason Trump might make a bad president, if we loose rights which are protected by the Constitution. But since that has not happened and I don't have a crystal ball, the same could be said for any candidate, however not likely for a Libertarian.

Was he wrong??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the threat of torture
carries allot of weight

recently isis skinned a man alive
barbarianism has come full circle

I agree with Trump 100% about saddam.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'd rethink that remark.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Saddam ruled Iraq with an iron fist. When people got out of line, he'd just have them killed. Don't forget that when people "get out of line" we can just call them terrorists now.
So yes, Saddam would have squashed any sort of terrorist activity in Iraq that threatened his power. Isis's main core of leadership is made up of saddam sold henchmen. Little known fact.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well known fact. He is right almost as much as he is wrong. Half his troubles would go away if he didnt suffer from political turrets.

We get what we deserve - horrible people on both sides and a (@*#@# Socialist.

some of you dont know your history do you

the man and his sons kills an unknown number of his own people and political enemies and because Trump uses the word terrorist and admits he was a Bad person then commends him for the way he handled things

all this thread gets is deflection on how his statement factual WOW ! did we forget we went after Saddam for supporting terror

a little more from the donald
from the WP

He also spoke dismissively in December about Hussein’s use of chemical weapons against the Kurds: “Saddam Hussein throws a little gas, everyone goes crazy. ‘Oh he’s using gas!’ ”

Trump has also repeatedly praised Russian President Vladi#^&mir Putin and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un as “strong” leaders “unlike what we have in this country,” citing the control they have over their people. When Putin complimented Trump last year, Trump called it “a great honor,”

In January, he also mused favorably about the North Korean strongman’s brutal consolidation of power in the country.

“If you look at North Korea, this guy, I mean, he’s like a maniac, okay? And you’ve got to give him credit,” Trump said during a campaign event in Iowa. “He goes in, he takes over, and he’s the boss. It’s incredible. He wiped out the uncle. He wiped out this one, that one.”

All truthful comments but scary when he is giving them a fist bumps in between the bad stuff

he should next commend Hillary for her success as a slippery criminal :hihi:

like an eel that one.

wdmso....explain to me Y it is anti semitic for trump to use the red star but not anti semitic if disney.... better yet explain this to me spence....:)


http://www.nbcnews.com/card/trump-go...r-book-n605016

Saddam and his sons killed hundreds of thousands (near a million?) of his own citizens, add Kuwait to that toll and you might hit the high number. He killed terrorists, he killed his adversaries, he killed those that wanted to be free, he killed those necessary for his entertainment.

So what part is deflection?

Now some of THOSE are stupid and offensive. Trump says plenty of genuinely stupid and offensive things.

I think there's a real chance he'd be a bad POTUS. To me, there's zero chance that Hilary won't be a horrible POTUS. So I will plug my nose and vote for him.

Both are arrogant, morally bankrupt liars. One's vision for the country is a lot more aligned with my values, than the other.

Ironically, Hilary and Obama are big reasons why Trump won. They spark a lot of the anger. When Obama says "Republicans gotta stop just hating all the time" (an exact quote, as if Romney and McCain do nothing except spew hate all the time), that angers a lot of people that Obama is supposed to represent. That anger gave rise to Trump.

For the same reason that Al Gore can be anointed as an environmental hero, while at the same time he lives in a way that spits in the face of the environmental movement.

For the same reason that Bernie Sanders can say that the wealthy don't pay their fair share, while his tax rate is lower than the average American, despite earning 3x the national average.

Because with liberals, it's ALWAYS do as I say, not as I do. The chosen elite can live like czars, the rest of us are supposed to live naked in the woods.

This is what we get when we have abandoned the Constitutional order. This might even be thought of as an end game. The thorough destruction of that order is needed to solidly replace it with an unlimited centralized power.

The Progressives are very bright. They constantly let us know how smart they are. How qualified they are to make our lives better because they know better. They are smart enough to know how destructive their policies have been to the old order over the last 100 years. They have very well demonstrated that there is no secret super smart method of constantly spending more than you have and winding up with a solvent government. And they are smart enough to keep the process going by mesmerizing us with rational sounding strings of words which promise a utopia if we just keep following the plan. Of course, they were smart enough to brain wash (that is a rather harsh phrase, oh well . . . ) our "educators" with smart strings of words on how to make us all smart by cookie--cutter methods which would mold us into a one-minded (but "diverse") people.

And they were smart enough to change us from a rough hewn people into followers of their dream. The well taught ones would, by their university bona fides of superior intelligence molded by the bright new egalitarian thinking, "qualify" them for influential positions in media and government. And they were smart enough to convince us, by beautiful strings of words crafted by the new Progressive leaders, that the old idea of a free market functioning under market forces, may have led to wealth, but a wealth spread too unevenly. They were smart enough to sprinkle their beautiful strings of words with "fair" and "equal" and "discrimination" and "racism" and others that struck at the feelings of a growing new, smarter, one-minded (but diverse) people. And they were smart enough to constantly preach the dream, but smart enough to see the nightmare results. But that was good.

It was good because transformation must first experience turmoil. The results were always smartly blamed on the unfair market system, on greed, on racism, on inequality. And the new, more smartly educated, population were conditioned to respond with right (but diverse) feelings to the emotional rhetoric sprinkled with the good words.

The process was long. No matter how smart the new, better, more diverse but egalitarian Progressives were, there was still that obstacle, the constitutional order, that kept them from freely ruling us with the total power their superior intelligence gave them a right to. Over time, with enough turmoil and destruction which necessarily facilitated their thefts of power from that document, they were able to get more and more of their smarter people into the gear box of government, especially the judiciary--and thus were enabled to twist the nuts and bolts of the Constitution, even eliminating, or eviscerating much of it.

Their were despicable Presidents in the past, but the constitutional order kept them in check. Our history is full of despicable people and rotten politicians. But one thing kept them all from turning this country and its people, into a totalitarian state--the power the constitutional order gave to its rough hewn, individualistic, and actually diverse people.

Destroying that power of the people and transferring it to a central power was necessary, in the smart minds of Progressive thinkers and politicians. Only in that way could good, fair, egalitarian, non discriminatory rule be imposed on a truly diverse unruly people. We are at that tipping point where that transfer of power can be completed. In the minds of the smartly educated, like-minded (but diverse) people, the President is the most important person in the government and the government is our protector against those bad emotional words. And the President, being the leader of an acknowledged all-powerful government, with the advice and consent of smart, Progressive Senators, can appoint the balance of Judges with those who believe that government prevails over individual rights. That government creates those rights. And government can control or remove those rights.

So here we are now, faced with having to choose between two unattractive (despicable to some) candidates. But, unlike in the past constitutional order, there is the potential that one will be able to impose things on us that those in the past were checked from doing. One, in my mind, will surely nominate Judges who will make that possible. The other probably will nominate Judges who will retain the remaining constitutional check against that possibility. And might, in the longer run, enable us to restore more fully that check.

really your going with that .. He is responsible for the information that gets put out maybe he is maybe he isn't anti semitic but he is not helping his cause. and blaming the media is getting old

star of david - money -corruption no way it can be seen by some as anti jewish really

Star of david - frozen - 50 stickers the same I guess if the cover came of a white supremacy site



I guess you didn't read or hear his tweet was taken from

The Star of David imagery used in a Twitter post by Donald J. Trump this weekend had previously appeared on a message board known for anti-Semitism and white supremacy, as well as on a Twitter account with a history of racially charged

This is how Trump treated a small arcitect who designed his Trump National Clubhouse. A small business almost went bankrupt because of the bully in the room. Its all about Trump and everyone else suffers...

http://www.rollcall.com/news/politic...-andrew-tesoro

Give me s break . It was a yellow 6 pointed star . Google yellow 6 pointed star , images , and see what comes up . Yea proof he hates Jews , ya know , except his grand children
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I can't believe the amount of time he spends on racist websites.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if these two are the best we can up with to lead and be the face of this nation - we are truly f^&k'ed.

Guess you need to take your own advice and use google .... its not just about the star...


Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan has denounced a recent Donald Trump tweet featuring Hillary Clinton and a six-pointed star, calling the image “anti-Semitic.”

I would not say he is surfing those sites... its the hired help ... lets just say his message and tone is attractive to those who would be more likely to surf those sites and willing to work for Him