Its more than time enough to take Trump seriously as a canidate, and in particular how idiotic the stuff he says is. Huge amounts of what he has said and done while running in office will have very negative implications in the world if he wins, even if he acts on the opposite as president for a great deal of them.
Ranked on a semi-arbitrary seriousness level. A lot of these are hard to rank, and its all opinionated, of course.
I guess a 3 for me would have me not support someone unless otherwise they are close to a political ideal. A 5 is "How is anyone stupid enough to support the guy?" A 1 is a serious negative, that I don't think as serious as the others but enough to register as an official complaint. I guess if you count a 0 in this scale as a negative a 1 actually makes more sense.
Post split into semi-related complaints.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Seriousness: 2. Pretty terrible animal rights statements
Trump tweet of 3/5/15: "Ringling Brothers is phasing out their elephants. I, for one, will never go again. They probably used the animal rights stuff to reduce costs."
Seriousness: 3-4. " Global warming as a chinese conspiracy"
It simply can't be said by a political leader, unless its on SNL and hes doing a Colbert'ish act. Its great ammunation to every nutjob in the world. Im more or less awestruck by the stupidity of it. The timescale of destruction is debatable, the damage is not.
Seriousness: 4
"Q: Would you cut departments?TRUMP: Environmental Protection, what they do is a disgrace.Every week they come out with new regulations."
Places like the EPA are why we currently are not all dying of cancer, or why we can walk a mile. Look at the lovely land of Beijing and drawings of 1800's poluted cities to see if the EPA occasionally has a good idea of what to do. Some regulations do get in the way of some corporations making money for some millionare to screw over a town and eventually go retire in some wealthy european country that isn't short sighted enough to value business that way.
"When Wallace asked, "Who's going to protect the environment?", Trump answered "we'll be fine with the environment. We can leave a little bit, but you can't destroy businesses."[293]"
Seriousness: 4.5 Vaccines and Autism. Support that vaccines cause autism.
This is a statement that regardless of what he believes or acts upon as president will do significant damage. Its like the chinese conspiracy tweet where its so stupid and can do such a good deal of damage I am drawing a blank putting any feelings I have on the statement into words.
It dosen't matter if the guy contradicts such a statement. People around the globe will listen to that.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Seriousness:1.3 The "worry" that china is outgrowing us in the rate of economic improvement, and we should somehow beat it. I personally believe we should actually make enough enviromental regulations to start reducing the GDP(if you buy 10 cars and three new IPADS every year, the GDP goes up, but who benefits besides your ego?), but people think that's hippy crap so I won't go into it. What makes it on the list is the blatant stupidity of it. Somewhat functional developing countires will progress faster then we do and that's a basic fact.
China currently has a GDP per capita that's 13% of ours. Hundreds of millions of people there are very very poor by US standards, and plenty of rural there are still living in abject crippling poverty, with city-folk perhaps not better off due to pollution. When we complain about china getting richer and more powerful, we are basically bitching that a country with a billion more people than us (1.3 billion, vs 0.3 billion) isn't eating grass and scouring for bugs for dinner.
Most people who are supportive of reducing global poverty believe its a good thing that poor countries have fast growth rates, and plenty of people who worry about the enviroment are skeptical of growth in countries that are already really rich.
But its a mindless GO USA GO statement so its below a 2 and closer to a 1.
Seriousness: 1-2, can't rank. From other countries point of view, probably higher. From stating that the US military will be greatly expanded and made more powerful, to saying that other countries should start paying for their own defense. That makes no sense. I literally have no idea how people view these as compatable, but the people who cheer and applaud both the statements must just like mindless platitudes.
Seriousness: 2-3. Protectionism that defies basic economics thought since before the early 1800's.
Tariffs to balance a trade deficit make no sense. As far as I can tell, the controversy mostly exists to it it being worded poorly, or perhaps a throwback to the days when internation excange was based on gold coin. Now, its like the problem in math of "imiginary numbers" and how that confuses people. It just sucks that history named it a deficit, when it just means we import more then we export. It strikes me as intuitive that we have a trade deficit with china and mexico. We are rich, so we can buy their stuff, and they are poor, so they can buy little of ours. (And ours or theirs also has stopped making a great deal of sense with taxed internation corporations that transcend any national economy). Adam Smith himself believed being worried about the trade balance was a waste of worry, and trade regardless of the "balance" increased both nations overall wealth.“Nothing can be more absurd than this whole doctrine of the balance of trade,” That was over 200 years ago.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Seriousness: 0.5. Issue of the amount of his inheritance. He will never give a straight answer as to how much of his fathers wealth he recieved and how it effected his future success. His success is utterly dependent on his Fathers previous business. But everyone likes to claim as much accomplishment as possible.
Seriousness: 1-3. Really can't decide this one. Opening as a campaign starter attacking John Mccains POW status. This is a guy who for over a year refused to be evacuated until the rest of his co-patriots were evacuated. And he was literally physically tortured during that time period to the point where for the rest of his life he can't raise up his arms.
McCain's military record barring that was not without fault, and the Daily Show did a good piece on why his military record should not be used to show capability in a leadership setting.
But that's not what trump did, and he did it 8 years too late. How so many Republicans applauded that statement(its not a homogenous group, I know, like any political party). How can anyone applaud that? Who knows.
Seriousness: 1.5 The guy keeps going on about how he went to a good school and is a super genius. Trump's father was super wealthy and powerful, and the children of royalty get a much easier time getting into the top schools then anyone else. Why dosen't he release his transcripts in any difficult courses? What about test scores? Hilary was a National merit finalist. Can Trump say anything similar? I do believe the nation really really undervalues brains when it comes to leadership.
Seriousness: 2-3. The "Mexicans are rapists and terrorists". The very large majortiy of people who came here from Mexico illegally did not commit any violent crime. Its a great statement to incite violence and hate-crimes.
There are plenty of issues of crime with undocumented immigrants and the progeny of, that some aspects of the left will never admit to.
But as the president, words matter, and the large majority of immigrants have not commited any violent crimes.
Seriousness: 2-3. "That Face" , "Schlonged", "Blood coming out of her whatever", blatantly mocking a reporter with a disability for asking very basic statement. Kindof a collection of some of his personal behaviors.
I only "expect" that behavior in "Yet another shitty National Lampoon college movie". Not from someone running for the *actual* presidency.
Seriousness:3-4. Trump University.
It was a very blatant fraud. Its in the same tier of universities as those crappy online ones that target poor youth who could not get into any college and convince them to take out 40,000 loans, with the same expected payout. He's a verified fraudster.
Seriousness: 4-5. A collection of bad and aggressive behaviors that shoud remind someone of dictatorships and strong-man leadership(not a compliment).
Oh, saying he would pay the legal fees of people who beat those who protest at his rally. Very very clearly threatening people who donate to people running against him. Threatening the political future of politicans in the republican house who don't or didn't support him.
I can't understand how people support him for all those statements
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Seriousness: 5. The collection of negative statements against muslims. Now, just keep the muslims out was a 2, it could have even been a 0, or even a -2(positive on this list) to me, if phrased intelligently.
The saying we should legalize medieval style-torture, and kill the innocent extended families of suspected terrorists along with the pigs blood story moved it to a absolute 5.
This 5 also means that he could be my political perfect match in every way, but by having this he is on the permanent shit-list.
The pigs blood story.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/19/politics/donald-trump-south-carolina-john-pershing/
This is a paradigm shift in terms of how to deal with possible terrorists of islamic origin. The nation always has refrained from making it fundamentally religious, and justifiably self-defense based. With those statements, people in the middle east who otherwise would have tried staying out of the conflict will have a good reason to pick a side(whatever that means), and probably against the united states. The pigs blood is there to deliberatly antagonize muslims.
His statements more or less legitimize Abu Gharib. As a way to torture the families of innocents to pressure the (possibly) guilty.
http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=8560
What if people across the world didn't belive the guy was just saying crazy shit to get elected like we do, and actually believed that the US would kidnap, torture, and humiliate random innocent people?....not by vague conspiracy theories, but by turning on youtube and watching the leader of the free worlds campagn for the presidency?
I don't think that could sway just borderline slightly vengeful extremists to terrorism. I think that could sway moderates to terrorism.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Seriousness: 2-3 The guy flip flops on major issues IN THE SAME DAY. Its a show to watch. Which is really crappy. The election really does seem like a reality TV joke.
I have a hard time even imagining a parody. I literally can't understand how any person believes anything the guys says as a campaign promise. Normal politicians are bad enough.
Is it just because he is running on a certain political team, and stupid group-team think is supporting him? This is a guy who argues about his personal toughness after he avoided the draft then mocked a guy for getting kidnapped and tortured. Hell, George W. Bush easily could have died in fighter pilot training. How can Trump argue about his personal toughness and military knowledge?
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Trump and his supporters brings up a few good points. The typical american is a bit wary of the crime of mexico, and a bit scared of the stories there, cartels ruling the government and what. Its ridiculous for liberals to shout they will move to canada if Trump is elected, while saying when questioned "Not mexico because of too much crime", while saying that borders to uncontrolled illegal immigration is racist. What? I believe that a 1st world nation has every "right" to be selective in who it admits, up to and including borders. Every country/region in the world people want to go to and live has some control over who enters and who stays(prison counts as leaving).
Its totally insane for people to say "ya move to canada or europe and denmark" when...a major reason why Canada is such a good place to live is because its very restrictive on who can enter. Presidents of European countries now say as campaign slogans "We can not be like sweden and let in everyone as an experiment"
http://www.workpermit.com/canada/individual/skilled.htm
The major news stories of terrorism feature islamists. Ted Cruz did bring up a good point with "We Don't Need Another Lecture on Islamophobia". And I mean the "fear of islam" definition. Islam is one of the least compatable ideologies with known western civilization there is vs other ideologies (citation Dawkins, Meyer, Harris,Hitchens). Its also not racist to say that it might not be the best idea to allow large numbers of people with that ideology into the US. Finding the best quotations from Hitchens and Dawkins on the topic as to why islam is so particularly bad isn't very hard, and I also believe there are very good reasons to be very anti-immigration and perhaps anti-refugee in this country.
And if you don't believe that, read the penal code's of countries that base their punishment on islamic and sharia law. Its incompatable with western ideals.
http://mehr.org/Islamic_Penal_Code_of_Iran.pdf
These are important points to bring up, that I believe some major figures on what is considered the right-wing spectrum are more prescient on.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
But theres ways to solve the valid issues without resorting to a guy who takes every page out of the "Fascist running for office" playbook. He blatantly threatens retribution to people who donate money to political opponents, mocks violations to animal rights(this isn't an SNL Colbert blowhard parody). Thinks its OK to say that the reason a female reporter dosen't bow down to him is because shes on her period. People will believe that innocents muslims will be captured and tortured with their religion spat upon by watching Trump speak. His morality was shown by knowingly scamming poor people with Trump University. The idiot Jenny Mccarthy people love the guy for spouting nonsense that vaccines cause autism. Which is great if one wants to bring back scourges of disease.
All the crazy shit he said will do damage regardless if he acts on them or not.
Ranked on a semi-arbitrary seriousness level. A lot of these are hard to rank, and its all opinionated, of course.
I guess a 3 for me would have me not support someone unless otherwise they are close to a political ideal. A 5 is "How is anyone stupid enough to support the guy?" A 1 is a serious negative, that I don't think as serious as the others but enough to register as an official complaint. I guess if you count a 0 in this scale as a negative a 1 actually makes more sense.
Post split into semi-related complaints.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Seriousness: 2. Pretty terrible animal rights statements
Trump tweet of 3/5/15: "Ringling Brothers is phasing out their elephants. I, for one, will never go again. They probably used the animal rights stuff to reduce costs."
Seriousness: 3-4. " Global warming as a chinese conspiracy"
It simply can't be said by a political leader, unless its on SNL and hes doing a Colbert'ish act. Its great ammunation to every nutjob in the world. Im more or less awestruck by the stupidity of it. The timescale of destruction is debatable, the damage is not.
Seriousness: 4
"Q: Would you cut departments?TRUMP: Environmental Protection, what they do is a disgrace.Every week they come out with new regulations."
Places like the EPA are why we currently are not all dying of cancer, or why we can walk a mile. Look at the lovely land of Beijing and drawings of 1800's poluted cities to see if the EPA occasionally has a good idea of what to do. Some regulations do get in the way of some corporations making money for some millionare to screw over a town and eventually go retire in some wealthy european country that isn't short sighted enough to value business that way.
"When Wallace asked, "Who's going to protect the environment?", Trump answered "we'll be fine with the environment. We can leave a little bit, but you can't destroy businesses."[293]"
Seriousness: 4.5 Vaccines and Autism. Support that vaccines cause autism.
This is a statement that regardless of what he believes or acts upon as president will do significant damage. Its like the chinese conspiracy tweet where its so stupid and can do such a good deal of damage I am drawing a blank putting any feelings I have on the statement into words.
It dosen't matter if the guy contradicts such a statement. People around the globe will listen to that.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Seriousness:1.3 The "worry" that china is outgrowing us in the rate of economic improvement, and we should somehow beat it. I personally believe we should actually make enough enviromental regulations to start reducing the GDP(if you buy 10 cars and three new IPADS every year, the GDP goes up, but who benefits besides your ego?), but people think that's hippy crap so I won't go into it. What makes it on the list is the blatant stupidity of it. Somewhat functional developing countires will progress faster then we do and that's a basic fact.
China currently has a GDP per capita that's 13% of ours. Hundreds of millions of people there are very very poor by US standards, and plenty of rural there are still living in abject crippling poverty, with city-folk perhaps not better off due to pollution. When we complain about china getting richer and more powerful, we are basically bitching that a country with a billion more people than us (1.3 billion, vs 0.3 billion) isn't eating grass and scouring for bugs for dinner.
Most people who are supportive of reducing global poverty believe its a good thing that poor countries have fast growth rates, and plenty of people who worry about the enviroment are skeptical of growth in countries that are already really rich.
But its a mindless GO USA GO statement so its below a 2 and closer to a 1.
Seriousness: 1-2, can't rank. From other countries point of view, probably higher. From stating that the US military will be greatly expanded and made more powerful, to saying that other countries should start paying for their own defense. That makes no sense. I literally have no idea how people view these as compatable, but the people who cheer and applaud both the statements must just like mindless platitudes.
Seriousness: 2-3. Protectionism that defies basic economics thought since before the early 1800's.
Tariffs to balance a trade deficit make no sense. As far as I can tell, the controversy mostly exists to it it being worded poorly, or perhaps a throwback to the days when internation excange was based on gold coin. Now, its like the problem in math of "imiginary numbers" and how that confuses people. It just sucks that history named it a deficit, when it just means we import more then we export. It strikes me as intuitive that we have a trade deficit with china and mexico. We are rich, so we can buy their stuff, and they are poor, so they can buy little of ours. (And ours or theirs also has stopped making a great deal of sense with taxed internation corporations that transcend any national economy). Adam Smith himself believed being worried about the trade balance was a waste of worry, and trade regardless of the "balance" increased both nations overall wealth.“Nothing can be more absurd than this whole doctrine of the balance of trade,” That was over 200 years ago.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Seriousness: 0.5. Issue of the amount of his inheritance. He will never give a straight answer as to how much of his fathers wealth he recieved and how it effected his future success. His success is utterly dependent on his Fathers previous business. But everyone likes to claim as much accomplishment as possible.
Seriousness: 1-3. Really can't decide this one. Opening as a campaign starter attacking John Mccains POW status. This is a guy who for over a year refused to be evacuated until the rest of his co-patriots were evacuated. And he was literally physically tortured during that time period to the point where for the rest of his life he can't raise up his arms.
McCain's military record barring that was not without fault, and the Daily Show did a good piece on why his military record should not be used to show capability in a leadership setting.
But that's not what trump did, and he did it 8 years too late. How so many Republicans applauded that statement(its not a homogenous group, I know, like any political party). How can anyone applaud that? Who knows.
Seriousness: 1.5 The guy keeps going on about how he went to a good school and is a super genius. Trump's father was super wealthy and powerful, and the children of royalty get a much easier time getting into the top schools then anyone else. Why dosen't he release his transcripts in any difficult courses? What about test scores? Hilary was a National merit finalist. Can Trump say anything similar? I do believe the nation really really undervalues brains when it comes to leadership.
Seriousness: 2-3. The "Mexicans are rapists and terrorists". The very large majortiy of people who came here from Mexico illegally did not commit any violent crime. Its a great statement to incite violence and hate-crimes.
There are plenty of issues of crime with undocumented immigrants and the progeny of, that some aspects of the left will never admit to.
But as the president, words matter, and the large majority of immigrants have not commited any violent crimes.
Seriousness: 2-3. "That Face" , "Schlonged", "Blood coming out of her whatever", blatantly mocking a reporter with a disability for asking very basic statement. Kindof a collection of some of his personal behaviors.
I only "expect" that behavior in "Yet another shitty National Lampoon college movie". Not from someone running for the *actual* presidency.
Seriousness:3-4. Trump University.
It was a very blatant fraud. Its in the same tier of universities as those crappy online ones that target poor youth who could not get into any college and convince them to take out 40,000 loans, with the same expected payout. He's a verified fraudster.
Seriousness: 4-5. A collection of bad and aggressive behaviors that shoud remind someone of dictatorships and strong-man leadership(not a compliment).
Oh, saying he would pay the legal fees of people who beat those who protest at his rally. Very very clearly threatening people who donate to people running against him. Threatening the political future of politicans in the republican house who don't or didn't support him.
I can't understand how people support him for all those statements
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Seriousness: 5. The collection of negative statements against muslims. Now, just keep the muslims out was a 2, it could have even been a 0, or even a -2(positive on this list) to me, if phrased intelligently.
The saying we should legalize medieval style-torture, and kill the innocent extended families of suspected terrorists along with the pigs blood story moved it to a absolute 5.
This 5 also means that he could be my political perfect match in every way, but by having this he is on the permanent shit-list.
The pigs blood story.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/19/politics/donald-trump-south-carolina-john-pershing/
This is a paradigm shift in terms of how to deal with possible terrorists of islamic origin. The nation always has refrained from making it fundamentally religious, and justifiably self-defense based. With those statements, people in the middle east who otherwise would have tried staying out of the conflict will have a good reason to pick a side(whatever that means), and probably against the united states. The pigs blood is there to deliberatly antagonize muslims.
His statements more or less legitimize Abu Gharib. As a way to torture the families of innocents to pressure the (possibly) guilty.
http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=8560
What if people across the world didn't belive the guy was just saying crazy shit to get elected like we do, and actually believed that the US would kidnap, torture, and humiliate random innocent people?....not by vague conspiracy theories, but by turning on youtube and watching the leader of the free worlds campagn for the presidency?
I don't think that could sway just borderline slightly vengeful extremists to terrorism. I think that could sway moderates to terrorism.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Seriousness: 2-3 The guy flip flops on major issues IN THE SAME DAY. Its a show to watch. Which is really crappy. The election really does seem like a reality TV joke.
I have a hard time even imagining a parody. I literally can't understand how any person believes anything the guys says as a campaign promise. Normal politicians are bad enough.
Is it just because he is running on a certain political team, and stupid group-team think is supporting him? This is a guy who argues about his personal toughness after he avoided the draft then mocked a guy for getting kidnapped and tortured. Hell, George W. Bush easily could have died in fighter pilot training. How can Trump argue about his personal toughness and military knowledge?
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Trump and his supporters brings up a few good points. The typical american is a bit wary of the crime of mexico, and a bit scared of the stories there, cartels ruling the government and what. Its ridiculous for liberals to shout they will move to canada if Trump is elected, while saying when questioned "Not mexico because of too much crime", while saying that borders to uncontrolled illegal immigration is racist. What? I believe that a 1st world nation has every "right" to be selective in who it admits, up to and including borders. Every country/region in the world people want to go to and live has some control over who enters and who stays(prison counts as leaving).
Its totally insane for people to say "ya move to canada or europe and denmark" when...a major reason why Canada is such a good place to live is because its very restrictive on who can enter. Presidents of European countries now say as campaign slogans "We can not be like sweden and let in everyone as an experiment"
http://www.workpermit.com/canada/individual/skilled.htm
The major news stories of terrorism feature islamists. Ted Cruz did bring up a good point with "We Don't Need Another Lecture on Islamophobia". And I mean the "fear of islam" definition. Islam is one of the least compatable ideologies with known western civilization there is vs other ideologies (citation Dawkins, Meyer, Harris,Hitchens). Its also not racist to say that it might not be the best idea to allow large numbers of people with that ideology into the US. Finding the best quotations from Hitchens and Dawkins on the topic as to why islam is so particularly bad isn't very hard, and I also believe there are very good reasons to be very anti-immigration and perhaps anti-refugee in this country.
And if you don't believe that, read the penal code's of countries that base their punishment on islamic and sharia law. Its incompatable with western ideals.
http://mehr.org/Islamic_Penal_Code_of_Iran.pdf
These are important points to bring up, that I believe some major figures on what is considered the right-wing spectrum are more prescient on.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
But theres ways to solve the valid issues without resorting to a guy who takes every page out of the "Fascist running for office" playbook. He blatantly threatens retribution to people who donate money to political opponents, mocks violations to animal rights(this isn't an SNL Colbert blowhard parody). Thinks its OK to say that the reason a female reporter dosen't bow down to him is because shes on her period. People will believe that innocents muslims will be captured and tortured with their religion spat upon by watching Trump speak. His morality was shown by knowingly scamming poor people with Trump University. The idiot Jenny Mccarthy people love the guy for spouting nonsense that vaccines cause autism. Which is great if one wants to bring back scourges of disease.
All the crazy shit he said will do damage regardless if he acts on them or not.