Re: 2016 US Elections: Discuss and Debate
Obama executive orders were done so, and implemented, over a period of time so that the government could adjust and educate in a timely manner. This allowed time to object to them, before implementation. Trump on the other hand is acting like a dictator, issuing edicts without consultation, that are causing people and government to meltdown. His approach is a disaster, and nearly everything he does now will be protested and subject to law suits, because he is doing it unilaterally like a strong man.
First of all, let's forego the cries of "dictator!". Much like those using words like "Nazi" and "Hitler", this only serves to lessen the impact of the word, it doesn't serve to make Trump look worse. He is not a dictator. How can he be a dictator for undoing what Obama did? Wouldn't that mean that by necessity, Obama would have been a dictator for causing this mess in the first place? Wouldn't Trump be un-dictatoring?
But neither. Obama was an a$$hole, not a dictator.
I don't know where you're getting your information that Trump didn't consult with anyone. It's my understanding that he has. Also, the government isn't melting down.
On immigration, the problem is Trump is picking and choosing. He absurdly said Syrian Christians were welcome, an outrageous statement, and honestly, how can you prove someone's true religion? He also conveniently left off Saudi Arabia and Egypt, where Trump has business in, but who have exported several terrorists. Secondly, we are already vetting, in most cases it takes YEARS to get into the United States, refugee or not, legally. These people had done their due diligence, and Trump blocked them at the door, really for no good reason. He has no clue how government operates. As for best interest, most with experience feel that the ban will ultimately HARM US interests. Regardless, the vetting process now is about as good as it can be. To expect POOR refugees to even HAVE cellphones let alone to turn over the contacts and browsing history is pretty hilarious. Who is this going to catch? ROFL! These people are not just dumped onto the street, they are sponsored by relatives, as well as often religious groups, same as probably most Americans' ancestors were years ago. The vetting is extreme, unlike obtaining a gun, which is a hilariously easy thing to do, and has cost far more lives than "refugee terrorism." The point though, why couldn't this have been discussed first?
Actually, the wording of the order states that Christians, as well as other minorities in their countries who are especially persecuted. This is not unusual. In fact, when seeking asylum, it's pretty standard to establish religious reasons for persecution. Also, keep in mind that Obama also didn't allow Syrian refugees to come over on large numbers until 2016. In 2011, Obama admitted a whopping 29. Everyone else was blocked at the door.
As you say, how can one establish anyone's real religion? But that's kinda the problem with the current vetting process. It's hard to establish any real facts. Which is why Trump has enacted this *temporary* hold, until we can work out a proper vetting process.
Also, getting a gun isn't super easy. You have to pass a background check... in a country where that actually means something. Also, it is a Constitutional right. You might as well say that posting on the internet or protesting Trump are far too easy.
His moves on national security are frankly, frightening. He placed self-professed LENINIST (aka anarchist) Steve Bannon on the National Security Council, while limiting the participation of the UN Ambassador, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Director of National Intelligence. Here again, come the accusations that Trump doesn't give a damn about the facts on the ground OR diplomacy. Sorry, but this is unbelievably insane shit.
Is it even possible to be Leninist and anarchist? One is extreme left and the other is extreme right. I don't really follow this part. Sorry.
As for Obamacare, the Democrats made a calculation. Perhaps it was wrong, but the GOP were unwilling to agree to much of anything in healthcare. They decided that something HAD to be done about the system. They did it. Pre-existing conditions, loss of employment, kids aging but without work, and financial ruin from healthcare costs were ALL dealt with. No the solution wasn't perfect, but here again, Trump's demolish and "rebuild" approach is objected to by even many Republicans. Governors certainly don't want to blow up the system overnight the way he does.
So what you're saying is that when you agree with a wild, unilateral move that goes against everything that the people want, it is simply a "calculation" and fully acceptable, but when it's something that you disagree with, it is like a dictatorship? There was no exploration of healthcare. They passed something that even the democrats admitted to not reading! That is balls-out crazy! Of course it failed!
All those things that you claim were dealt with weren't. People still can't afford healthcare. Employers can't afford to pay for it, which resulted in businesses closing or jobs lost. For many people, the cost of healthcare went through the roof. My father had a stroke in 2009 and we've been riding this healthcare wave since it started. It's been a disaster for doctors, medical equipment providers, as well as patients. It's been horrible, which is why most people want it repealed. And if you'll notice, nobody just repealed it with no plan to replace. They're still working on how they're going to do it. It hasn't happened yet. Trump doesn't have a "demolish and rebuild" approach. He has always had a "repeal and replace" approach, which is the only way to do it.
Once more, the protests, which have been largely peaceful, will continue, because Trump's approach has been so awful. He won't change of course. He'll just fire people who tell him to.
You can't say that the protests have been largely peaceful when only some people have suffered brain damage because of them, or because only a few people have been lit on fire. These "protests", which aren't protests, they're riots, are not peaceful. They are not civil. They are not justified in their actions. They are responsible for holding people up at airports more than Trump was!
For someone who is supposedly not a manic Trump supporter, you do a pretty good impression of him. "I read the first bullet point of this plan and I can tell you it's terrible and we can do something better."
For someone who is supposedly way smarter than me, you do a pretty good job of avoiding everything I said in my post so that you don't have to think up an actual response. Go back. Re-read it. That's my response to you.
And I'm not going to waste my time trying to validate my Trump-doubter street creds. If you don't believe me, bully for you.