Trump 2024 — The second term

[HKFaninCarmel]

Agreed mostly. He does have deeply held principles, they may not be yours. His are in international relations such as, immigration, trade, war, and the like. He has been writing and discussing these topics since I first heard of him in the early 80’s…

I don't think he does, whether they agree with me or not. He defended Planned Parenthood and spoke at the March for Life. He talks to the NRA like he's Charlton Heston but is as tough as butter on 2A. He wants a border wall unless you get a 4 year degree? I mean, the guy is a schmoozer.

 

[rbhargan]

I don't think he does, whether they agree with me or not. He defended Planned Parenthood and spoke at the March for Life. He talks to the NRA like he's Charlton Heston but is as tough as butter on 2A. He wants a border wall unless you get a 4 year degree? I mean, the guy is a schmoozer.

OK. Would you rather have Joe Biden as President? Because those are your choices. Deal with it.

 

[HKFaninCarmel]

OK. Would you rather have Joe Biden as President? Because those are your choices. Deal with it.

I'm choosing the orange man. I've dealt with it. I don't have to join the cult though.

 

[rbhargan]

I'm choosing the orange man. I've dealt with it. I don't have to join the cult though.

It isn't necessarily a "cult." It is a matter of looking at the other side and going, "How can you be that f*cked up and still expect people to vote for you?"

 

[foszoe]

Propaganda? WTF? I know, this is not what the guy on the u tubes said, but the guy on the u tubes is an ideologue who apparently gains something from conning you into thinking that a republic is mutually exclusive to a democracy.

Again, as if saying it again will make any difference at all, Democracy does not exclusively mean majority rule. It means self-rule. In a pure democracy it is majority rule. In limited democracies, like a representative and/or constitutional democracy, the power the people have is limited to prevent destruction of society.

Representative democracies make laws via democratically elected representatives who vote for legislation. That's still a democracy. This isn't propaganda. If you're listening or reading something that tells you that a republic is mutually exclusive from a democracy, even a pure democracy, THAT's propaganda.



Switzerland IS a democracy. It is a confederate representative democracy which has a council that makes laws by consensus, but also the people have the right to vote on policy. Of major nations, it is the closest to direct democracy.

The reason you don't see direct democracies is that they will fall apart. To the extent Switzerland is a direct democracy, and it hasn't fallen apart, is because they're a homogeneous people. If everyone in your nation generally has the same worldview, it doesn't matter. You'll have high adoption of what almost everyone wants anyway.

Similar to what Paul said in Romans 13:10, love does no wrong to a neighbor, therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. The idea behind using this as an example is that people with like-minded views won't create laws that oppress each other, because that law would oppress them too. It hasn't harmed Switzerland. They're happy with their system.

Pure democracy is especially dangerous when that society has a strong diversity of worldviews. All it takes to oppress the other is to have a 50% + 1 majority, not withstanding Overton windows, of course.

And even a representative democracy, hedged by constitutional limitations on power, is vulnerable to a strong diversity of worldviews destroying it. Immigration, for example, legal and illegal, is bringing in a population of people who don't have the same worldview concerning individual liberty, and having a constitution limit the power of government.

When I saw Romans 13:10 cited, I had to scroll back up to make sure I had read the poster's name right......then I felt like I was an idiot because the very fact I had to scroll up to read the poster's name was conclusive enough.

 

[HKFaninCarmel]

It isn't necessarily a "cult." It is a matter of looking at the other side and going, "How can you be that f*cked up and still expect people to vote for you?"

So I should have zero expectations for my side and just be ok with crap like amnesty for college grads?

 

[DadSmith]

That’s absolutely silly. The US is a republic.

What a second you just got through arguing that it was a democracy. Make up your mind.

 

[Magyars]

 

[Magyars]

 

[Ziggidy]

I'm choosing the orange man. I've dealt with it. I don't have to join the cult though.

Personally I feel like this. If one is going to support one person over another in a presidential election, they need to be careful when they speak publicly. They can add to the support of a candidate or add to the support of the opposition just by their words, regardless of whom they vote for.

Instead of bashing the man you state you are voting for, find ways to support him, even if you use anti-Biden rhetoric. By bashing Trump you give the opposition a stronger reason to vote for Biden and you actually add to their war chest.

WHY are you voting for Trump? Is it just because Biden has destroyed this country? If so then instead of bashing Trump, say I'm voting for Trump because Biden has failed here, here and here. People love to hear Trump supporters bash their own. It gives them power and reason to continue. They may actually like you because you are, in a sense, helping their cause; and in doing so, making yourself look like a fool.

 

[Ziggidy]

So I should have zero expectations for my side and just be ok with crap like amnesty for college grads?

My momma used to say, there's one born every minute.

 

[Leadeye]

Republicans need to be organizing the ground game in those critical states to watch the voting. The machine has also learned from last time as well, they will be more stealthy. Being complacent about this will cost another election. Tip used to say all politics is local so local people should watch the local parts of the machine.

 

[Brad69]

I actually see President Trump‘s point why do we educate some of the best individuals in the world. Then send them home ?

Let them stay here and apply their knowledge in our economy ?

I am still standing by my no illegals allowed border policy that I crafted in my mind.

 

[dudley0]

I actually see President Trump‘s point why do we educate some of the best individuals in the world. Then send them home ?

Let them stay here and apply their knowledge in our economy ?

I am still standing by my no illegals allowed border policy that I crafted in my mind.

Was he talking about anybody that is here and then gets a degree or was it more about the people that come here legally to learn and then they get the degree?

Giving them the option to become citizens seems good, as long as they go thru the same vetting process.

But it also makes it seem that the more affluent you are the more chance you have of gaining citizenship which should not be the case.

 

[jamil]

What a second you just got through arguing that it was a democracy. Make up your mind.

Two things can be true at the same time. Like this. The US is a democracy, because its representatives are democratically elected. And it's a republic because the sovereignty is derived from the people and the constitution, rather than a king or dictator.

Most democracies are also Republics, though many, like the UK and Canada, are parliamentary democracies, but are not republics because they derive their sovereignty from a monarchy.

 

[DadSmith]

Two things can be true at the same time. Like this. The US is a democracy, because its representatives are democratically elected. And it's a republic because the sovereignty is derived from the people and the constitution, rather than a king or dictator.

Most democracies are also Republics, though many, like the UK and Canada, are parliamentary democracies, but are not republics because they derive their sovereignty from a monarchy.

I'm trying to point out to people who say we have a Democracy that itself is false. When we get to the bottom of it. It is a constitutional republic.
Electoral College, and the Supreme Court are just more proof of republican form of government.
Yes we vote in representatives, but that is as far as we the people have power in a republican form of government. Especially a constitutional republic.

 

[Route 45]

 

[Route 45]

 

[jamil]

I'm trying to point out to people who say we have a Democracy that itself is false. When we get to the bottom of it. It is a constitutional republic.
Electoral College, and the Supreme Court are just more proof of republican form of government.
Yes we vote in representatives, but that is as far as we the people have power in a republican form of government. Especially a constitutional republic.

This discussion is all about meaning, and I'm not sure you're getting the meaning of a republic, because you keep associating it with our form of government, exclusively. Do you think that "Republic" was invented by the United States? A republic does not require a constitution. It does not require an electoral college. It does not require a supreme court. All of those things can be a part of a monarchy. A it's a republic if its sovereignty is not vested in a person (monarchy, dictatorship, etcetera). For example, The Crown owns the territory of the UK. It's not the personal property of the king. It's just his during his reign. He is the sovereign.

In the US, sovereignty is granted by the states (it took the states to ratify the constitution), and in each state, sovereignty comes from the people. State representatives are directly elected by popular vote. Governors are directly elected by popular vote. States elect the president through slates of electors chosen by parties. General elections are held in each state to choose, by popular vote, which slates of electors get to vote directly for the president. That is representative democracy. But that's not what makes us a republic.

 

[DadSmith]

This discussion is all about meaning, and I'm not sure you're getting the meaning of a republic, because you keep associating it with our form of government, exclusively. Do you think that "Republic" was invented by the United States? A republic does not require a constitution. It does not require an electoral college. It does not require a supreme court. All of those things can be a part of a monarchy. A it's a republic if its sovereignty is not vested in a person (monarchy, dictatorship, etcetera). For example, The Crown owns the territory of the UK. It's not the personal property of the king. It's just his during his reign. He is the sovereign.

In the US, sovereignty is granted by the states (it took the states to ratify the constitution), and in each state, sovereignty comes from the people. State representatives are directly elected by popular vote. Governors are directly elected by popular vote. States elect the president through slates of electors chosen by parties. General elections are held in each state to choose, by popular vote, which slates of electors get to vote directly for the president. That is representative democracy. But that's not what makes us a republic.

No there was a Roman republic long before us.

Our form of government is the only one like it in the history of the earth. Once it's gone there will never be one like it again.

The founders called it a republic. That's what it is. Not a democracy. Doesn't matter what anyone else said it's what the founders called it. If you have a problem with it being a republic take it up with the founders.

Edit:

Using the word democracy over and over again give people the illusion that they have the final say In matters.
Since there are no true democracies using the term democracy is for propaganda purposes.

How about calling it an Illusional Democracy?