Are Trump supporters Bush supporters?

Shooting at the fort was no more serious than firing cannon balls at trees in the forest.

Defend Abe and his war all you will but you will never prove to 630,000 dead men in combat he did so with just cause.

Trump and i have some disagreements over Iraq. Trump sees in black and white. i see that first it was Bush 41 that invaded Iraq but failed to finish the job. Clinton tried to finish the job only with bombs. This is a cowards way to win a war.

I can't speak for all of Trump's voters. I preferred other republicans to begin with. But my choice was Trump or Hillary here in Ca. I damned sure would never put this country in harms way by electing Hillary Clinton.

 

I was first in the South in 1962. At that time the place still suffered the effects of what Abe Lincoln did to them. They were one of the poorest sections of America at that time. I found most living there quite hospitable. One man I saw managed to show his anger at me. He asked me where are you from you damned yankee. I said back, I am from CA if it is any of your business. And he shut up.

Barry is just as you described. It sickens me the way Democrats tar that man's name and try to ruin his reputation. Barry always explained his controversial votes. He clearly stood tall for states rights.

 

So if a person is against racism, wants to stand up for the rights of all people, African Americans, Hispanics, women, gays, Muslims, etc etc, are you guys saying they are in the wrong party if they are Democrats? They should switch to the Republican party?

 

Better yet, stop waiting on a party to be your saving grace, because it’s not going to happen.

 

What's not going to happen? Equality and fairness for people of color or gender or religion, etc?

The Republicans are going to make that happen?

 

An attack upon a United States installation within the United States by forces hostile to the United States cannot be ignored because it was ineffectual.

That would be the equivalent of ignoring any would-be assassin if his aim is bad.

Your hyper-partisan story line is noted. Pappy Bush tried to educate Junior as to the foolishness of his invasion. He ignored the sage advice, exploited fake pretexts, and suffers the consequences.

 

If you’re under the impression that there’s no equality or fairness for any of these groups, in 2019, why would you be under the impression that a political party is going to bring that about?
Democrats are supposedly the good guys, and have historically controlled the federal government longer than the GOP, why are we not up to our eyeballs in kumbyah feelings, and equality? Is switching to another party, who’ll take advantage of these constituents really going to help?

 

Again, you confuse balls falling off the wall of a fort with a serious event such as the invasion by Abe Lincoln into Va.

Suppose Bush had encountered the case of somebody firing at a USA fort today. I think it happened to Obama yet he did not invade any state.

Abe has plenty of adult options. But he chose to invade.

President Ford was shot at here in CA and he did not invade CA.

Your trying to speak for the father of GW Bush makes no sense at all. Bush the son tells at his talks the his father did not interfere with him at all during his presidency.

As to the Iraq matter.

I can't claim to be pleased when Bush 41 invaded Iraq. I know he invaded due to having studied the great book called Into the Storm told by General Fred Franks to Tom Clancy. This is one of the few non fiction books of Tom Clancy.

Bush 41 spent a good number of months ahead of his invasion. Bush also had limits.

Bush 43 saw the results of that action. Bush 43 also saw the results of what Clinton did. Bush 43 also took the word of intelligence and believed the WMD was really there. Bush 43 believed Saddam played games and kept moving his WMD away from inspection sites ahead of the inspections. As huge as Iraq is, one can believe they were buried in pits to escape detection. Anything was possible.

But what had Clinton done. Clinton waged war on Iraq. As japan waged war on the US at Pearl Harbor, so was Clinton waging war on Saddam. Clinton used high explosives. To the point though, given the USA had been at war with Saddam for over 9 years, And Clinton signed the law that called for Saddam to be removed from Iraq and to install free elections, Bush was in no mood to violate that law. So he invaded. Did not matter what I thought of it, it happened. I was in DC one fine day when a reporter cornered me to ask me what I thought of the Bush invasion. I felt pinned down. I knew the history but at the same time did not want our men killed there. I doubt my interview made it to TV. I essentially told the reporter as his cameraman filmed it, that i do not favor wars but in this case it seemed Bush was cornered into invading Iraq. Cornered by a law, a belief Saddam had truly become a leader of terrorism, and a desire to end the long conflict with Iraq. I do not feel my reply was what the reporter was after.

What makes your comments strangely amusing is you believe that Abe was entitled to wage a 4 years long war due to cannon balls ricocheting off a thick walled fort but do not approve the Bush attack against Saddam for the mentioned reasons. Amusing to say the least.

When Abe invaded, the South was not mounting any war acts against the Feds housed in DC. I believe when Abe invaded, the South had cleared the forts of the presence of his troops.

 

I know what you are saying and I too have said that. Why on earth would there be unequals given the Democrats have had almost a stranglehold on this government since 1933. i mean not just the presidency where at times Republicans took over, or the very few times republicans got congressional power, but the vast majority of time that the Democrats took charge, one might think in those past 80 years they would have cured inequality.

 

I'm just trying to understand why people here think the current Democratic party is the "racist" party, and using the long ago past as proof.

I think a lot of progress has been made. You don't think the government has been a part of that progress?

When I hear someone like Republican Steve King speak, I think his words are the words of someone who wants to set us way back. That doesn't seem like progress to me.

No, I don't think the Republicans are particularly interested in helping in that regard.

 

You don't think a ton of progress has been made? Look at the diversity in the Democratic party.

The idea that an African American could be president? That isn't incredible progress to you?

 

It was his fault, not the Democrats fault. He bought the malarkey that Democrats were better. But a lot of blacks have learned, especially due to Obama that the nonsense simply is not factual.

Democrats are the party who alleges blacks are still inferior. At least treated as if they are.

Blacks should change parties. They have had the wool pulled over their eyes far too long.

 

More than shifting blame to the Democrats, my major mission as to race is to stamp out Democrats lies that we are the racists.

I have heard Congressman King talk a lot. I do not know why you think he is a racist.

 

Trump's fan base are Trump Republicans, which means they are not really Republicans.

The problem in the 2016 election is that the Democrats nominated the worst possible candidate. 90 million Americans could not make up their minds between two extremely poor candidates and they stayed home on election day. Ten million more wasted their vote on candidates who had no chance of winning. They thought they were protesting. Instead, they enabled Trump to win. A vote for a third party candidate was a vote for Trump.

The result of this is that Trump was chosen by angry, disenfranchised voters who blamed the government for their problems. They took to heart Trump's "drain the swamp" rhetoric -- a euphemism for ridding the political structure of its leaders -- and they wanted chaos. That is why they are happy with Trump even though he is an idiot. In a way, they admit it. They rarely defend Trump and the last person they want to talk about is Trump. Look at the threads that interest Trump's fans.

However, Trump is an anomaly. Millions of Americans learned their lesson. Apathy and indecision are poor excuses for throwing your vote away or not voting. The result of apathy and indecision was the Trump government.

 

Who's fault? Who are you talking about?

Should the David Dukes and the Richard Spencers and all those people change parties?

Why are the alt right neo nazi supremacists Trump supporters? The wool being pulled over their eyes, too? They don't know that it's the Dems who are on their side?

 

Your first question can be easily handled by you going back a few posts prior to the post causing you to ask me who I am discussing.

David Duke long spent his life as a loyal democrat. Are democrats worse due to him abandoning them?
You may wish to discuss very fringe players, but they are not those who respond to opinion polls, those running government nor even those teaching how to survive. They live by discussing rather hateful things.
Trump supporters are not happy with how government was being run. So they moved on. Why do you use such special cases as were those the main populations?

 

Why do you think the "main populations" of Democrats are racist? Why do people say modern day Democrats are "the" racist party because of who southern Democrats were a long time ago? How come when I look at the Fox comment section, I see endless racist posts from Trump supporters?

Anyway, this is pointless and off topic...I'm sorry I mentioned Abe Lincoln in my OP. I just thought it funny that Trump would be bragging about Lincoln. But let's get back to the topic, please.

 

Republicans have had an ill-deserved reputation for being constitutional conservatives. In truth only Coolidge and Reagan were such. Trump might be but so far he is a mixed bag and the jury is still out on that. Mainstream Republicans have been that in name only (hence the moniker RINO) and have been as much secret Democrat sycophants as anything, or at least since 1900 in favor of big central governments -- from Taft and Teddy R. through Nixon, Ford, Bush41, and Bush43. (Nobody knew what Harding was....) The Republican base, however, is still predominately constitutionalists and conservative and were the grass roots progenitor of the TEA party -- which after their massive victory in 2010 the RINOs (like Boehner) quickly emasculated. But it was the same people that elected Trump.

 

Bush made mistakes and had sort of a check cheerleader mentally, but he was far superior to Trump who is basically a liar and a cheat.

 

So anyone who isn't in the DNC is a ……?

 

Really? Kicking out Noriega and Saddam from Kuwait? Removing the Taliban from power, decimating AQ and liberating Iraq?

 

I like all Republicans.

Joe Manchin (D-WV) seems to be the only decent Dem.

 

Will change nothing in the ME.

 

Okay, everyone knows there WERE WMDs in Iraq, right?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...t/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25546334/...t-us-mission-hauls-uranium-iraq/#.XGGrYvZ2vIU

 

How exactly?