| We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum. If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away. Click here to Register! If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk If you're already a member please log in to your account: |
| Why is Trump painted out to be much worse than Sanders or Clinton? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 16 2017, 12:53 PM (2,201 Views) | |
|
|
Aug 16 2017, 12:53 PM Post #1 |
![]()
|
The main argument against Trump seems to be "he's mean" I'll admit he's imperfect and a jack@ss alot of the time but still. Clinton wanted to go to war with Russia, enforce a no-fly zone, she's a criminal and Sanders is a socialist that would destroy the economy. How are these things undermined by "Trump is mean"? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 16 2017, 01:33 PM Post #2 |
![]()
|
Woah, woah, woah. What a loaded question. It would probably be best to take it point by point and back up a bit since your question seems to be based on quite a few personal opinions and illogical reasoning. 1. First and foremost, what does it matter who is worse when the election has already been won? Aside from their positions in the government, Clinton and Sanders don't matter anymore, especially when compared to Trump. If you had made this topic a year ago I wouldn't have had to mention this, but it's basically irrelevant at this point who is "worse." 2. "Clinton wanted to go to war with Russia." Proof of this? I've obviously heard this claim countless times, but I've yet to see anything that compels me to believe that Clinton did in fact want war with Russia. 3. "She's a criminal." This has already been dealt with by the head of the FBI. Comey found her to be not guilty of the crimes she was charged with. You can disagree with his decision all you want to, but that would be the equivalent of claiming that a defendant who was found "not guilty" by the jury is still a criminal; it just doesn't make sense, legally speaking. 4. "Sanders is a socialist that would destroy the economy." This is probably the most amusing point you bring up because it is based entirely on opinion mingled with misinformation. Sanders was socialist in many of his policies, but that doesn't make him a communist hell-bent on taking down the economy. Had he been made president, his policies would've had to have been approved by Congress, and we do not have a socialist Congress. Many of his better policies may have gotten through and been slowly integrated had they been approved, but there wouldn't have been an overnight change where we go to bed one night and wake up the next morning a communist nation. Even if Sanders were president, we would hardly have changed as a nation by the end of his term. That isn't how the presidency works. Policies are slowly accepted and integrated, and the majority of them aren't even accepted in the first place. Now that we've addressed some of the misconceptions in your post, I can attempt to address the question itself. "Why is Trump painted so much more negatively?" It's mainly due to the way he conducts himself on social media, the lack of knowledge he seems to possess in regards to foreign policy and the presidency in general, and his treatment of minorities and women. He is an incredibly disrespectful person with far less experience governing than Clinton or Sanders. That's not to say that I agree with all the negative press he gets. A lot of stories are taken out of context, "fake news" has in fact circulated about him (though not nearly as often as he seems to think), and I don't think that Clinton is beyond reproach herself; however, Trump is far from the best candidate the Republican party had to offer, and he was chosen purely out of respite for politicians and a desire for change. A change that, thus far, Trump has not granted his supporters. He seems to be full of empty promises, and his words rarely ever ring true, which is why so many of his voters have turned against him. |
![]() |
|
| + Emmeth | Aug 16 2017, 02:00 PM Post #3 |
![]()
I ♥ Yoeri
![]()
|
Donald Trump: - Media and many people claim he's a sympathiser of fascists, white supremacists and the KKK. Instead of 100% denying this right away, he flip-flops for days before he finally makes a statement where he condemns this, but a day later he seemingly supports them. I don't know about you, but "mean" and "jackass" doesn't seem to cover this, I'd use much worse words than that. - Instead of focusing on positives like trying to help the american people, he goes to war with the news (aside from Fox who supports him) and uses Twitter to blast people left and right. The guy has no filter, and it's not a good or charming thing. It's downright dangerous. - He lies constantly. Says things like he got phone calls from the Mexican President and the Boy scouts which apparently never happened. He's a proven liar, not only by the left, but also by his own house. - It's obvious he's using the presidency to promote his business. He was told he should leave his firm in a blind trust, but chooses to leave it in his kids' hands. This way he can still be the final word for all deals his firm/business might have. - RUSSIA COLLUSION. There's plenty of proof out there that he, his WH staffers and even his own kids have met with russian consultants and people. Pictures, statements and the like prove that there's a connection between him (and possibly connected to the election) and Russia. Hillary Clinton: - All we really got that is questionable are her e-mails. At worst she used a private server to send e-mails to promote her election. FBI went over these e-mails and found no proof of ill-will or collusion. Despite all the bad things we heard about Trump, she lost because of this which doesn't even prove anything. - She didn't want to buckle to Russia's demands on the Syria situation and suddenly she wants war with Russia? That's a ludicrous claim to base your opinion on. During her campaign she said she wanted to avoid conflict, but didn't want to let Russia take over the advantage in Syria. - Sure, in the past she was partially part of Bill Clinton's scandals, but in the end it all falls on her husband. She is not responsible for how it turned out. - There was also this case in the 70s where she was lawyering against a claimed rape victim. She was defending the rapist, but what it all comes down to is that she was doing her damn job. She doesn't choose her cases. Misinterpretations from there led to a bad (unfair) reputation. Bernie Sanders: - You claim that he would destroy your economy, but where's the proof of that? I know it's fear and americans don't like change, but in the long run it would be very good for you. Here's a good article on how it would benefit you: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/bernie-sanders-nordic-countries/473385/ I don't really have anything else on Bernie. He seemed like a great choice in the end, but his socialist approach didn't work out. |
![]() My Twitch Page | |
![]() |
|
| lazerbem | Aug 16 2017, 02:01 PM Post #4 |
![]() ![]()
|
I don't like Bernie because he was going around tooting the praises of Venezuela, something I find very insulting personally. He relied on populist rhetoric a whole lot and if he is better than Trump, it wouldn't have been by much. |
![]() Crazy cat cults in the woods | |
![]() |
|
| + Emmeth | Aug 16 2017, 02:06 PM Post #5 |
![]()
I ♥ Yoeri
![]()
|
Can you elaborate on why you think it's insulting personally? |
![]() My Twitch Page | |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 16 2017, 02:20 PM Post #6 |
![]()
|
“These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina, where incomes are actually more equal today than they are in the land of Horatio Alger.” - Bernie Sanders Proven incorrect by now in Venezuela's case, sure, but insulting? I really don't see it either. |
![]() |
|
| + Emmeth | Aug 16 2017, 02:27 PM Post #7 |
![]()
I ♥ Yoeri
![]()
|
Without going off-topic too much, I'll just quickly go over why Bernie's statement was destined to fail from the beginning: There's a long history of unrest in most of the south american countries, such as Ecuador, Colombia and even Brazil. There's been unrest in Venezuela for quite some time now and even if the socialist approach was something to admire, it's much better to look to countries that hasn't proven unrest such as the nordic countries (I live in one of them). There's plenty of examples of the socialist approach working, but looking to South America for examples will almost always backfire. |
![]() My Twitch Page | |
![]() |
|
| Copy_Ninja | Aug 16 2017, 02:31 PM Post #8 |
![]()
Novacane for the pain
![]()
|
No she didn't.
Bit of a weird thing to just throw in there as if this makes her terrible. A no fly zone is not an inherently bad idea.
'Cept she's not though no matter how many times the right wing screams that she is.
He calls himself a democratic socialist but not in the sense most people think of socialism. He doesn't want to seize the means of production.
Damn that Berne, wanting to give people healthcare and access to education. What a bastard! That would destroy the economy! (I mean, other countries manage to implement his programs without destroying themselves but w/e).
True, Trump is mean. He is the guy that made fun of a disabled reporter and attacked the family of dead soldier, so yeah pretty mean. He's also: - A moron that can barely string together a coherent sentence - An apologist for white nationalists - Removing protections for LGBT people - Openly encouraging people to stop trusting the press and only trust him like some dystopian dictator - Is completely unable to co-operate with members of his own party, never mind other countries - Is a liar of levels unseen even for politicians - Is openly attacking pivotal American institutions such as the judiciary - Treats America's allies like dirt and praises human rights abusers such as Putin's Russia and the current Phillipines - Thinks climate change is a hoax and is actively working to erode environmental protections - Makes a mockery of ethics by profiting off the Presidency. That's just off the top of my head. Tbh, anyone who still supports this scum bag should take a good long look at themselves and really consider what that says about them. |
We'll never be those kids again
| |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 16 2017, 02:39 PM Post #9 |
![]()
|
1. First and foremost, what does it matter who is worse when the election has already been won? Aside from their positions in the government, Clinton and Sanders don't matter anymore, especially when compared to Trump. If you had made this topic a year ago I wouldn't have had to mention this, but it's basically irrelevant at this point who is "worse." 2. "Clinton wanted to go to war with Russia." Proof of this? I've obviously heard this claim countless times, but I've yet to see anything that compels me to believe that Clinton did in fact want war with Russia. 3. "She's a criminal." This has already been dealt with by the head of the FBI. Comey found her to be not guilty of the crimes she was charged with. You can disagree with his decision all you want to, but that would be the equivalent of claiming that a defendant who was found "not guilty" by the jury is still a criminal; it just doesn't make sense, legally speaking. 4. "Sanders is a socialist that would destroy the economy." This is probably the most amusing point you bring up because it is based entirely on opinion mingled with misinformation. Sanders was socialist in many of his policies, but that doesn't make him a communist hell-bent on taking down the economy. Had he been made president, his policies would've had to have been approved by Congress, and we do not have a socialist Congress. Many of his better policies may have gotten through and been slowly integrated had they been approved, but there wouldn't have been an overnight change where we go to bed one night and wake up the next morning a communist nation. Even if Sanders were president, we would hardly have changed as a nation by the end of his term. That isn't how the presidency works. Policies are slowly accepted and integrated, and the majority of them aren't even accepted in the first place. Now that we've addressed some of the misconceptions in your post, I can attempt to address the question itself. "Why is Trump painted so much more negatively?" It's mainly due to the way he conducts himself on social media, the lack of knowledge he seems to possess in regards to foreign policy and the presidency in general, and his treatment of minorities and women. He is an incredibly disrespectful person with far less experience governing than Clinton or Sanders. That's not to say that I agree with all the negative press he gets. A lot of stories are taken out of context, "fake news" has in fact circulated about him (though not nearly as often as he seems to think), and I don't think that Clinton is beyond reproach herself; however, Trump is far from the best candidate the Republican party had to offer, and he was chosen purely out of respite for politicians and a desire for change. A change that, thus far, Trump has not granted his supporters. He seems to be full of empty promises, and his words rarely ever ring true, which is why so many of his voters have turned against him. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 16 2017, 02:50 PM Post #10 |
![]()
|
You quoted that backwards.
Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that people shouldn't criticize anyone. I'm just asking why these particular questions matter anymore. Who cares if Clinton wanted war with Russia (even though she didn't) or if Bernie wants a more socialist nation. Neither of them is president. Criticize them all you want, but it's pointless to make criticisms that are only relevant to the presidency when that has already been decided.
I can't watch this at work, so someone else may have to have a look at it for you.
"She's the most corrupt politician there is." Opinion. Show me facts and I may agree with you. OJ wasn't found guilty back in 1994 due to a variety of circumstances completely unrelated to the Clinton investigation. The comparison doesn't work because his was a high-profile murder case, whereas the Clinton investigation was about whether an old woman knowingly deleted important emails. If you think that comparison actually works, then you'll have to prove how.
What's a strawman? Your argument or mine? You're the one who said, "Sanders is a socialist that would destroy the economy." I agree. Socialism doesn't work in any extreme, but some socialist policies that Sanders was advocating may have worked. Free (or at least cheaper) education and healthcare would have been great for this country. Everything else we could probably do without. I'm not some raging socialist; I'm simply disagreeing with your argumentation. "Free stuff" isn't what Sanders was advocating. I won't bother to get you started on the minimum wage because I'm not in the mood to have a conniption.
Why is that a bad thing? I don't know that I should have to explain to you why that's a bad thing. He already does lie, so I'm not sure what you're arguing here. I agree that he could tone it down on being a jackass, among other things.
I'm not sure what you're responding to here since I only gave you four numbers.
He doesn't insult women as a whole? Really? I encourage you to do more research, although I'm amazed you missed out on the whole "pussy grabbing" fiasco. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 16 2017, 02:52 PM Post #11 |
![]()
|
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lu72p4p8cGI 2. Even Sanders scolded her for that, she's just asking for retaliation. 3. Cept she is though no matter how many times the left wing screams that she's not 4. your point? That's not the main issue. 5. Why should it be free and why should the rich pay so that you can have these things for free? You're giving them nothing in return, you're thiefs. Why should we help the poor when they contribute nothing to society, all they do is take and put us in debt. Can you explain to me how exactly they're not a burden? .He talks in laymen's terms so people understand. You care more about how it's said than what's said? How dense are you? .Might as well just scream bigot at the top of your lungs, it's just as nonsensical and what you people resort to when backed into a corner. I can't name a single republican candidate you lot haven't asserted was racist, sexist, etc. .He supports LGBT but it is a mental disorder so I can see why he banned them from the military. The suicide rate is too high and they're not discriminated against enough for it not to be. .Oh you mean as opposed to liberals who just call everyone who disagrees a racist? .Vague, can say that about you too, stop being bias. .The f*ck? .So what? You get taxed for climate change, they keep moving the goalposts, the earth has cycles, etc so obviously its a hoax. And even if it is true so what if people don't believe in it? As if you do anything whatsoever to prevent or slow it down. .Right, as opposed to Bernie who advocates stealing from people LMAO |
![]() |
|
| * Yu Narukami | Aug 16 2017, 02:55 PM Post #12 |
|
Izanagi!
![]()
|
1. Is Hillary in public service? Sanders is, but Hillary's dropped out of pretty much everything at this point, so why she's constantly brought up whenever Trump is the topic, I have no idea. 2. Do you have another video of that? There's a cut there, and without seeing the full, unedited comment, there's not really much of a conclusion there. 3. ''She's the most corrupt politician there is''. Come on now, man, you're just making it clear that you don't like Clinton, instead of making factual, reasonable comments. 4. Ever wonder why there are so many poor people the rich people have to 'pay for'? 5. When he goes off-script and actual risks some kind of action from his opponents and allies when he makes ridiculously inflammatory and dangerous comments, yes, it's a serious issue. 6. Ever hear the excuse that he's 'getting used to being the President', and the fact that many of his moves and executive orders have been challenged and overruled because they're unconstitutional. Somebody who's informed doesn't make those kinds of mistakes. 7. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/donald-trump-sexism-tracker-every-offensive-comment-in-one-place/ It doesn't matter if he targets one particular woman or minority, the sexist and racist remarks he makes do have a huge impact, and they're telling as to exactly what kind of person he is. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 16 2017, 03:01 PM Post #13 |
![]()
|
PikUp, can you please edit your initial response to me so that I don't look like a fool and so that other members don't get confused by who actually said what? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 16 2017, 03:02 PM Post #14 |
![]()
|
1. No, that's just an excuse to get out of it. 2. You can't watch a 2 minute video but you can post long replies on threads? I don't think so, plug in headphones, listen, you don't have to watch. 3. Her entire campaign was based off of smearing Trump, that's evidence enough. 4. Even if it would (it wouldn't) that's not the point, it's still wrong, robbing the rich is wrong. 5. Your argument is more that he's mean, I'd rather someone whose mean than someone who sugarcoats. 6. You said he lacks knowledge. Show me how. 7. Show me the research, cause I haven't seen any. I've just seen the left twist things. The pussy grabbing thing was locker room talk and consensual, give me a break. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 16 2017, 03:07 PM Post #15 |
![]()
|
No, it isn't.
Oh really. First you peg me for a liberal, and now you peg me for a liar. I can do whatever I want to at work. Anything except watch your video because my computer doesn't have speakers. Nice try.
More empty words without any evidence to back them up.
Yes, robbing anyone is wrong. I would never break into a house or rob a store because I believe that sort of behavior to be immoral.
My argument is that he's an idiot more than anything, and not competent enough to run this country, but at the end of the day I truly don't care much for politics. I care about correcting obviously fallacious/illogical arguments because I'm a masochist.
You haven't shown me anything. Why am I the one who has to do all the work in educating you?
Show you what "research?" I never referred to any "research" proving that Trump is a misogynist. Surely you can see that easily enough by looking on YouTube, or by examining how he behaves. The locker room talk was consensual, eh? You've really blown my mind. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
4:28 PM Jul 13
|
Theme Designed by McKee91
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy


















4:28 PM Jul 13