Deranged Progs Keep Saying Blumpf Is Ruining Democracy/The Constitution (lol). Examples?

SURE. what are you brainwashed?

just read pygmalion effect, jussieterry, decatur, etc.

They have none and don't care. All they know is they're told to hate him, so they do.

Had a conversation with a guy who seemed somewhat reasonable who went on and on about how he is disgusted by Trump's craziness and lack of "presidential bearing." Explained that's why he voted for Hillary despite leaning conservative.

So I asked if her criminal activity bothered him. He said that's all made up. Head in the sand syndrome.

quote:

---

They have none and don't care. All they know is they're told to hate him, so they do.

Had a conversation with a guy who seemed somewhat reasonable who went on and on about how he is disgusted by Trump's craziness and lack of "presidential bearing." Explained that's why he voted for Hillary despite leaning conservative.

So I asked if her criminal activity bothered him. He said that's all made up. Head in the sand syndrome.

---

That’s the point where you politely excuse yourself from the table and skip out, sticking him with the check.

I’m a known Trump-hater, but I’ll spare you the drivel about emoluments, enforcing the Voting Rights Act, demonizing the free press, bypassing checks and balances with “temporary” cabinet appointees. Those have already been dismissed as partisan bitching. Oh well.

But it is a little more concerning that Trump isn’t speaking out in favor of the Hong Kong democracy protesters. There’s a situation where any past US president would have made a firm statement against autocratic rule. Trump’s comments on the subject sound almost conciliatory to Communist China’s government.

I’d like to see Trump impose a firm warning against China before there’s a violent crackdown in Hong Kong.

These idiots think we're a pure democracy. You think they're going to be able to identify Trump's offenses against the Constitution via critical thinking?

quote:

---

You mean an empty warning they know he can't enforce?

---

Even if it’s symbolic, it has always been US policy to speak out in favor of democracy. Why shouldn’t we?

Besides, there are ways of imposing your will on an autocrat without military force, if that’s what you mean by enforcement.

As an observer of political history, Trump has been the most conservative President in the last 90 years when it comes to the exercise of executive authority.

This is especially true when you consider how much executive authority he has given up through his rescission of regulations and reversal of previous EOs.

(no message)

quote:

---

more concerning that Trump isn’t speaking out in favor of the Hong Kong democracy protesters. T

---

that's some sissified cuck stuff

quote:

---

These idiots

---

Believing that Trump is violating the emoluments clause doesn’t make you an idiot. Even though the courts have determined otherwise, I’m free to disagree.

Idiocy is pretending that wealthy people with billions of dollars at stake in global investments are willing to make self-destructive decisions for the benefit of the country. There is no Board of Directors in the world that would allow its CEO to operate with such a conflict of interest. They have bylaws that prohibit or mitigate obvious conflicts of interest.

I’m not just saying Orange Man bad. I’m saying that if we’re going to insist on billionaire POTUSES, we might want to take a look in the future at changing our laws about governmental conflict-of-interest ethics.

Ask yourself how you might feel about this issue if George Soros were POTUS.